Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-kw2vx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T01:57:03.488Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Studies in dialogue and discourse; an exponential law of successive questioning1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2008

Elliot G. Mishler
Elliot G. Mishler
Affiliation:
Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts Mental Health Center
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The structure of natural conversations in first-grade classrooms is the focus of this inquiry. Analyses of a particular type of discourse, namely, connected conversations initiated and sustained by questioning, suggest that the probability that a conversation will be continued may be expressed as a simple exponential function. The formula, pi = ari−1, generates a curve of theoretically-expected rates of successive questions in a series that closely matches observed rates. The formula is based on the application of a constant ratio, that is, the ratio of rates within each pair of adjacent questions is the same throughout the series: p2:p1=p3:p2 = p4:p3. … Thus, it appears that the probability of a ‘next’ question following an exchange that contains a previous question remains constant through the length of the discourse series. In other words, the probability of a question is independent of the temporal location of an utterance in this type of connected conversation. The analyses suggest further that the model of a finite Markov chain, that is, of a particular type of stochastic process, may be applicable to certain features of a discourse. (Conversational analysis, sequencing in exchanges, U.S. English in first-grade classrooms.)

Type
Articles: Conversational devices and structures
Information
Language in Society , Volume 4 , Issue 1 , April 1975 , pp. 31 - 51
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1975

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

Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bartos, O. J. (1967). Simple models of group behavior. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Coleman, J. S. (1960). The mathematical study of small groups. In Solomon, H. (ed.), Mathematical thinking in the measurement of behavior. Glencoe: Free Press. Part I.Google Scholar
Crystal, D. (1971). Linguistics. Middlesex, England: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Gumperz, J. J. & Hymes, D. (eds) (1972). Directions in sociolinguistics. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1961). Categories of the theory of grammar. Word 27, 241–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, E. G. (1970). Language structure and language function. In Lyons, J. (ed), New horizons in linguistics. Middlesex, England: Penguin. Chapter 7.Google Scholar
Miller, G. (1951). Language and communication. New York: McGraw Hill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mishler, E. G. (1975). Studies in dialogue and discourse, II. Types of discourse initiated by and sustained through questioning. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 4, 99–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, W. P. (1972). Language and social behavior. Middlesex, England: Penguin.Google Scholar
Robinson, W. P. & Rackstraw, S. J. (1972). A question of answers, 2 volumes. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Sherzer, J. (1973). On linguistic semantics and linguistic subdisciplines: a review article. LinS 2. 269–289.Google Scholar
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephan, F. F. & Mishler, E.G. (1952). The distribution of participation in small groups: an exponential approximation. American Sociological Review 27. 598–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sudnow, D. (ed.) (1972). Studies in social interaction. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Zipf, G. K. (1949). Human behavior and the principle of least effort. Cambridge, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar