Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T07:49:41.804Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Second summonings in Korean telephone conversation openings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 March 2006

SEUNG-HEE LEE
SEUNG-HEE LEE
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Linguistics, University of California, Los Angeles, 3300 Rolfe Hall, Los Angeles, CA 90095, [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article is triggered by an analytic puzzle. In about half of a corpus of Korean telephone openings, callers produce a second summons, yeposeyyo, in the second turn of the opening sequence. The analysis unravels the interactional and organizational contingencies involved in the construction of the caller's second summons. It shows that the second summons operates as a vehicle for inviting recognition, and that the answerers overlay their work of recognition onto their talk in the third turn. In this way, the parties confront, work through, and display their underlying orientation to the organizational problem of establishing each other's identity in dealing with the second summons/answer sequence.An earlier version of this article was presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Applied Linguistics in 2004. I would like to thank John Heritage, Manny Schegloff, and Sung-Ock Sohn for valuable comments on earlier drafts. Barbara Johnstone and two anonymous readers for this journal also gave helpful advice.

Keywords

conversation analysisKoreansummonstelephone conversationopenings
Type
Research Article
Information
Language in Society , Volume 35 , Issue 2 , April 2006 , pp. 261 - 283
Copyright
© 2006 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Drew, Paul (1997). ‘Open’ class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of troubles in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 28:69–101.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving (1963). Behavior in public places. New York: Free Press.
Heritage, John (1984a). A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J. Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis, 299–345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heritage, John (1984b). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hopper, Robert, & Chen, Chia-Hui (1996). Languages, cultures, relationships: Telephone openings in Taiwan. Research on Language and Social Interaction 29:291–313.Google Scholar
Hopper, Robert; Doany, Nada; Johnson, Michael; & Drummond, Kent (1991). Universals and particulars in telephone openings. Research on Language and Social Interaction 24:369–87.Google Scholar
Hopper, Robert, & Koleilat-Doany, Nada (1989). Telephone openings and conversational universals: A study in three languages. In Stella Ting-Toomey & Felipe Korzenny (eds.), Language, communication and culture, 157–79. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Houtkoop-Steenstra, Hanneke (1991). Opening sequences in Dutch telephone conversations. In Deirdre Boden & Don Zimmerman (eds.), Talk and social structure, 232–50. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Jefferson, Gail (1980). On ‘trouble-premonitory’ response to inquiry. Sociological Inquiry 50:153–85.Google Scholar
Lee, Hyo Sang (1991). Tense, aspect, and modality: A discourse-pragmatic analysis of verbal suffix in Korean from a typological perspective. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.
Lindström, Anna (1994). Identification and recognition in Swedish telephone conversation openings. Language in Society 23:231–52.Google Scholar
Luke, Kang Kwong, & Pavlidou, Theodossia-Soula (2002) (eds.). Telephone calls: Unity and diversity in conversational structures across languages and cultures. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Park, Yong-Yae (1997). A cross-linguistic study on the use of contrastive connectives in English, Korean, and Japanese conversation. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.
Park, Yong-Yae (2002). Recognition and identification in Japanese and Korean telephone conversation openings. In Luke &Pavlidou (eds.), 25–47.
Sacks, Harvey (1975). Everyone has to lie. In B. Blount & M. Sanches (eds.), Sociocultural dimensions of language use, 57–79. New York: Academic Press.
Sacks, Harvey; Schegloff, Emanuel A.; & Jefferson, Gail (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50:696–735.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. (1967). The first five seconds: The order of conversational openings. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
Schegloff, Emanuel A. (1968). Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist 70:1075–95.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. (1979). Identification and recognition in telephone conversation openings. In George Psathas (ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology, 23–78. New York: Irvington.
Schegloff, Emanuel A. (1986). The routine as achievement. Human Studies 9:111–51.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. (2002). Reflections on research on telephone conversation: Issues of cross-cultural scope and scholarly exchange, interactional import and consequences. In Luke &Pavlidou (eds.), 249–81.CrossRef
Schegloff, Emanuel A. (forthcoming). Sequence organization: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schegloff, Emanuel A.; Jefferson, Gail; & Sacks, Harvey (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language 53:361–82.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, Don H. (1984). Talk and its occasion: The case of calling the police. In Deborah Schiffrin (ed.), Meaning, form, and use in context: Linguistic applications, 210–28. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.