1. Trang chủ
  2. » Luận Văn - Báo Cáo

Báo cáo khoa học: "A SYSTEM ACTIC APPROACH TO DISCOURSE SEMANTICS " pdf

7 348 0
Tài liệu đã được kiểm tra trùng lặp

Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)

THÔNG TIN TÀI LIỆU

Thông tin cơ bản

Định dạng
Số trang 7
Dung lượng 686 KB

Các công cụ chuyển đổi và chỉnh sửa cho tài liệu này

Nội dung

The topic chain may be defined by a very simple transition network.. / clause: O tcl O ~-- tcn >O topic chain The network has a topic register, which is set by the first clause parsed b

Trang 1

L i v i a P o l a n y i and Remko Scha

E n g l i s h D e p a r t m e n t

U n i v e r s i t y o f A m s t e r d a m

A m s t e r d a m The N e t h e r l a n d s

A B S T R A C T

A correct structural analysis of a d i s c o u r s e

is a p r e r e q u i s i t e for u n d e r s t a n d i n g it This p a p e r

sketches the outline of a discourse g r a m m a r w h i c h

a c k n o w l e d g e s several d i f f e r e n t levels of structure

This gram~nar, the "Dynamic Discourse Model", uses

an A u g m e n t e d T r a n s i t i o n N e t w o r k p a r s i n g m e c h a n i s m

to b u i l d a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f the semantics of a

d i s c o u r s e in a stepwise fashion, f r o m left to right,

o n the b a s i s o f the semantic r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of the

individual clauses w h i c h c o n s t i t u t e the discourse

The i n t e r m e d i a t e states of the p a r s e r m o d e l the in-

t e r m e d i a t e states of the social situation w h i c h ge-

nerates the discourse

The p a p e r a t t e m p t s to d e m o n s t r a t e that a dis-

course m a y indeed be v i e w e d as c o n s t r u c t e d b y m e a n s

of s e q u e n c i n g and recursive n e s t i n g of d i s c o u r s e

constituents It gives rather d e t a i l e d examples

of d i s c o u r s e structures at v a r i o u s levels, a n d

shows h o w these structures are d e s c r i b e d in

the f r a m e w o r k p r o p o s e d here

"I D I S C O U R S E S T R U C T U R E S A T DIFFERE.NT LEVELS

If a d i s c o u r s e u n d e r s t a n d i n g system is to be

able to assemble the m e a n i n g of a complex d i s c o u r s e

fragment (such as a story or an elaborate d e s c r i p -

tion) o u t of the m e a n i n g s of the utterances consti-

tuting the fragment, it needs a correct structural

a n a l y s i s of it Such an analysis is also n e c e s s a r y

to assign a correct semantic i n t e r p r e t a t i o n to

clauses as they o c c u r in the discourse; this is

seen m o s t easily in cases w h e r e this i n t e r p r e t a t i o n

d e p e n d s on p h e n o m e n a such as the d i s c o u r s e scope of

temporal and locative adverbials, the m o v e m e n t o f

the r e f e r e n c e time in a narrative, or the interpre-

tation of d i s c o u r s e anaphora

The Dynamic D i s c o u r s e Model, o u t l i n e d in this

paper, is a d i s c o u r s e g r a m m a r u n d e r d e v e l o p m e n t

w h i c h a n a l y s e s the structure of a d i s c o u r s e in o r -

d e r to be able to deal a d e q u a t e l y w i t h its s e m a n t i c

aspects It should be e m p h a s i z e d at the o u t s e t

that this system is a formal m o d e l of d i s c o u r s e

syntax and semantics, b u t not a computer implemen-

t a t i o n of such a model

For a s y s t e m to be able to u n d e r s t a n d a dis-

course, it m u s t be able to analyse it at several

d i f f e r e n t levels

i A n y p i e c e of talk m u s t be a s s i g n e d to one Inter-

a c t i o n i.e., to a s o c i a l l y c o n s t r u c t e d v e r b a l

e x c h a n g e w h i c h has, at any moment, a w e l l - d e f i n e d

set of participants

2 V i r t u a l l y e v e r y i n t e r a c t i o n is v i e w e d b y its

p a r t i c i p a n t s as b e l o n g i n g to a p a r t i c u l a r pre-

d e f i n e d g e n r e be it a d o c t o r - p a t i e n t interaction,

a r e l i g i o u s ceremony, or a casual chat Depending

on the genre, certain p a r t i c i p a n t s m a y have specif-

ic r o l e s in the verbal exchange, and there m a y be a

p r e d e f i n e d agenda s p e c i f y i n g c o n s e c u t i v e p a r t s of the interaction A n i n t e r a c t i o n w h i c h is s o c i a l l y "in- terpreted" in such a fashion is called a Speech

E v e n t (Hymes,1967,1972)

3 A stretch of talk w i t h i n o n e S p e e c h E v e n t m a y be

c h a r a c t e r i z e d as d e a l i n g w i t h one Topic

4 W i t h i n a Topic, w e m a y find o n e or m o r e Dis- course Units (DU's) s o c i a l l y a c k n o w l e d g e d units of talk w h i c h have a r e c o g n i z a b l e "point"

or purpose, w h i l e at the same time d i s p l a y i n g a specific s y n t a c t i c / s e m a n t i c structure C l e a r

e x a m p l e s are stories, procedures, descriptions,

a n d jokes

5 W h e n c o n s e c u t i v e c l a u s e s are c o m b i n e d into one

syntactic~semantic unit, we call this unit a

d i s c o u r s e c o n s t i t u e n t u n i t (dcu) E x a m p l e s are: lists, n a r r a t i v e structures, and v a r i o u s b i n a r y

s t r u c t u r e s ("A b u t B", "A b e c a u s e B", etc.)

6 A d j a c e n c y S t r u c t u r e s m a y w e l l be v i e w e d as a

k i n d of dcu, b u t they d e s e r v e special mention

T h e y are two or t h r e e p a r t c o n v e r s a t i o n a l rou-

t i n e s i n v o l v i n g speaker change The c l e a r e s t

e x a m p l e s are q u e s t i o n - a n s w e r p a i r s and e x c h a n g e s

of greetings

7 The smallest u n i t s w h i c h we shall deal w i t h at the d i s c o u r s e level are clauses and operators

O p e r a t o r s include "connectors" like "and", "or",

"because", as w e l l as "discourse m a r k e r s " like

"well", "so", "incidentally"

The levels o f d i s c o u r s e structure just d i s -

c u s s e d are h i e r a r c h i c a l l y ordered For instance, any DU m u s t be p a r t of a S p e e c h Event, w h i l e it

m u s t be built up out of dcu's The levels m a y thus

be v i e w e d as an e x p a n s i o n o f the familiar linguis- tic h i e r a r c h y o f phoneme, morpheme, w o r d and clause This d o e s n o t mean, however, that e v e r y

d i s c o u r s e is to be a n a l y s e d in terms of a five level tree structure, w i t h levels c o r r e s p o n d i n g to dcu, DU, Topic, Speech E v e n t and Interaction

To be able to d e s c r i b e d i s c o u r s e as it a c t u a l -

ly occurs, d i s c o u r s e c o n s t i t u e n t s of v a r i o u s types

m u s t be a l l o w e d to b e e m b e d d e d in c o n s t i t u e n t s of the same a n d o t h e r types W e shall see v a r i o u s e x - amples o f this in later sections It is w o r t h e m -

p h a s i z i n g h e r e a l r e a d y that "high level c o n s t i t u - ents" m a y be e m b e d d e d in "low level constituents" For instance, a d c u m a y be i n t e r r u p t e d b y a c l a u s e

w h i c h i n i t i a t e s a n o t h e r Interaction Thus, a struc- tural d e s c r i p t i o n of the u n f o l d i n g d i s c o u r s e w o u l d include an Interaction as e m b e d d e d in the dcu In

Trang 2

t h i r d p a r t i e s " , a n d o t h e r i n t e r r u p t i o n s o f o n e In-

t e r a c t i o n b y another

In the d e s c r i p t i o n o f d i s c o u r s e s e m a n t i c s , the

l e v e l o f t h e d c u ' s ( i n c l u d i n g the a d j a c e n c y s t r u c -

tures) p l a y s the m o s t c e n t r a l role: a t t h i s l e v e l

the s y s t e m d e f i n e s h o w the s e m a n t i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n

o f a c o m p l e x d i s c o u r s e c o n s t i t u e n t is c o n s t r u c t e d

o u t o f the s e m a n t i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s o f its parts

T h e o t h e r l e v e l s o f s t r u c t u r e a r e a l s o o f s o m e re-

levance, h o w e v e r :

- T h e D i s c o u r s e U n i t e s t a b l i s h e s h i g h e r l e v e l se-

m a n t i c c o h e r e n c e F o r i n s t a n c e , the s e m a n t i c s o f

d i f f e r e n t e p i s o d e s o f o n e s t o r y a r e i n t e g r a t e d at

t h i s level

- T h e T o p i c p r o v i d e s a f r a m e w h i c h d e t e r m i n e s the

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f m a n y l e x i c a l i t e m s a n d d e s c r i p -

tions

- T h e S p e e c h E v e n t p r o v i d e s a s c r i p t w h i c h d e s c r i b e s

the c o n v e n t i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e d i s c o u r s e , a n d

j u s t i f i e s a s s u m p t i o n s a b o u t t h e p u r p o s e s o f d i s -

c o u r s e p a r t i c i p a n t s

- T h e I n t e r a c t i o n s p e c i f i e s r e f e r e n t s for i n d e x i c a l s

like "I", "you", "here", "now'~

II T H E D Y N A M I C D I S C O U R S E ~ D E L

D e a l i n q w i t h l i n q u i s t i c s t r u c t u r e s a b o v e t h e

c l a u s e l e v e l is a n e n t e r p r i s e w h i c h d i f f e r s in a n

e s s e n t i a l w a y f r o m t h e m o r e c o m m o n v a r i a n t o f lin-

g u i s t i c a c t i v i t y w h i c h t r i e s to d e s c r i b e t h e i n t e r -

nal s t r u c t u r e o f t h e v e r b a l s y m b o l s p e o p l e e x c h a n g e

D i s c o u r s e l i n g u i s t i c s d o e s n o t s t u d y s t a t i c v e r b a l

o b j e c t s , b u t m u s t be i n v o l v e d w i t h the s o c i a l p r o -

cess w h i c h p r o d u c e s the d i s c o u r s e w i t h t h e w a y s

in w h i c h the d i s c o u r s e p a r t i c i p a n t s m a n i p u l a t e t h e

o b l i g a t i o n s a n d p o s s i b i l i t i e s o f t h e d i s c o u r s e s i t -

u a t i o n , and w i t h t h e w a y s in w h i c h t h e i r t a l k is

c o n s t r a i n e d a n d f r a m e d b y the s t r u c t u r e o f t h i s

d i s c o u r s e s i t u a t i o n w h i c h t h e y t h e m s e l v e s c r e a t e d

T h e s t r u c t u r e o n e m a y a s s i g n t o t h e t e x t o f a d i s -

c o u r s e is b u t a r e f l e c t i o n o f t h e s t r u c t u r e o f the

p r o c e s s w h i c h p r o d u c e d it

B e c a u s e o f this, t h e D y n a m i c D i s c o u r s e M o d e l

t h a t w e a r e d e v e l o p i n g is o n l y i n d i r e c t l y i n v o l v e d

in t r y i n g t o a c c o u n t for t h e a p o s t e r i o r i s t r u c t u r e

o f a f i n i s h e d d i s c o u r s e ; i n s t e a d , it t r i e s t o t r a c e

the r e l e v a n t s t a t e s o f the s o c i a l s p a c e in t e r m s o f

w h i c h t h e d i s c o u r s e is c o n s t r u c t e d T h i s c a p a b i l i t y

is o b v i o u s l y o f c r u c i a l i m p o r t a n c e if the m o d e l is

to b e a p p l i e d in the c o n s t r u c t i o n o f c o m p u t e r sys-

t e m s w h i c h c a n e n t e r into a c t u a l d i a l o g s

T h e D y n a m i c D i s c o u r s e M o d e l , t h e r e f o r e , m u s t

c o n s t r u c t t h e s e m a n t i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f a d i s -

c o u r s e o n a c l a u s e b y c l a u s e b a s i s , f r o m l e f t to

right, y i e l d i n g i n t e r m e d i a t e s e m a n t i c r e p r e s e n t a -

t i o n s o f u n f i n i s h e d c o n s t i t u e n t s , as w e l l as set-

t i n g the s e m a n t i c p a r a m e t e r s w h o s e v a l u e s i n f l u e n c e

the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f s u b s e q u e n t c o n s t i t u e n t s

A s y n t a c t i c / s e m a n t i c s y s t e m of t h i s sort m a y

v e r y w e l l be f r o m u l a t e d as a n A u g m e n t e d T r a n s i t i o n

N e t w o r k g r a m m a r (Woods, 1970), a n o n - d e t e r m i n i s t i c

p a r s i n g s y s t e m s p e c i f i e d b y a set o f t r a n s i t i o n

n e t w o r k s w h i c h m a y c a l l e a c h o t h e r r e c u r s i v e l y

E v e r y S p e e c h E v e n t type, D U t y p e a n d d c u t y p e is

a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a t r a n s i t i o n n e t w o r k s p e c i f y i n g its

i n t e r n a l s t r u c t u r e A s a t r a n s i t i o n n e t w o r k p r o -

s e g m e n t , it b u i l d s up, s t e p b y step, a r e p r e s e n t a -

t i o n o f t h e m e a n i n g o f the s e g m e n t T h i s r e p r e s e n -

t a t i o n is s t o r e d in a r e g i s t e r a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e

n e t w o r k A t a n y s t a g e o f t h e p r o c e s s , t h i s r e g i s t e r

c o n t a i n s a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e m e a n i n g o f t h e d i s -

c o u r s e s e g m e n t so far

A n A T N p a r s e r o f t h i s s o r t m o d e l s i m p o r t a n t

a s p e c t s o f t h e d i s c o u r s e p r o c e s s A f t e r e a c h c l a u s e ,

t h e s y s t e m is i n a w e l l - d e f i n e d state, c h a r a c t e r i z e d

b y t h e s t a c k o f a c t i v e t r a n s i t i o n n e t w o r k s and, for

e a c h o f them, t h e v a l u e s in its r e g i s t e r s a n d t h e

p l a c e w h e r e it w a s i n t e r r u p t e d W h e n w e s a y t h a t

d i s c o u r s e p a r t i c i p a n t s k n o w " w h e r e t h e y a r e " i n a

c o m p l i c a t e d d i s c o u r s e , w e m e a n t h a t t h e y k n o w w h i c h

d i s c o u r s e c o n s t i t u e n t is b e i n g i n i t i a t e d o r c o n t i n - ued, a s w e l l a s w h i c h d i s c o u r s e c o n s t i t u e n t s h a v e

b e e n i n t e r r u p t e d w h e r e a n d in w h a t o r d e r in o t h e r

w o r d s , t h e y a r e a w a r e o f t h e e m b e d d i n g s t r u c t u r e a n d

o t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n c a p t u r e d b y t h e A T N c o n f i g u r a t i o n

T h e m e a n i n g o f m o s t c l a u s e u t t e r a n c e s c a n n o t

b e d e t e r m i n e d o n t h e b a s i s o f t h e c l a u s e a l o n e , b u t

i n v o l v e s r e g i s t e r v a l u e s o f t h e e m b e d d i n g d c u a s

w h e n a q u e s t i o n sets u p a f r a m e in t e r m s o f w h i c h its

a n s w e r is i n t e r p r e t e d (cf Scha, 1983) o r w h e n , t o

d e t e r m i n e t h e t e m p o r a l r e f e r e n c e o f a c l a u s e in a

n a r r a t i v e , o n e n e e d s a " r e f e r e n c e t i m e " w h i c h is

e s t a b l i s h e d b y t h e f o r e g o i n g p a r t o f t h e n a r r a t i v e ( s e c t i o n III B 2) F r o m s u c h e x a m p l e s , w e s e e t h a t the d i s c o u r s e c o n s t i t u e n t u n i t s e r v e s as a f r a m e w o r k

f o r the s e m a n t i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e c l a u s e s w h i c h

c o n s t i t u t e t h e text B y t h e same t o k e n , w e see t h a t the s e m a n t i c s o f a n u t t e r a n c e is n o t e x h a u s t i v e l y

d e s c r i b e d b y i n d i c a t i n g its i l l o c u t i o n a r y f o r c e a n d its p r o p o s i t i o n a l c o n t e n t A n u t t e r a n c e m a y a l s o

c a u s e a n u p d a t e i n o n e o r m o r e s e m a n t i c r e g i s t e r s

o f t h e dcu, a n d t h e r e b y i n f l u e n c e t h e s e m a n t i c in-

t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e f o l l o w i n g u t t e r a n c e s

T h i s p h e n o m e n o n a l s o g i v e s u s a u s e f u l p e r t

s p e c t i v e o n t h e n o t i o n o f i n t e r r u p t i o n w h i c h w a s

m e n t i o n e d b e f o r e F o r i n s t a n c e , w e c a n n o w see t h e

d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e c a s e o f a s t o r y b e i n g i n t e r -

r u p t e d b y a d i s c u s s i o n , a n d t h e s u p e r f i c i a l l y s i m i -

l a r c a s e o f a s t o r y f o l l o w e d b y a d i s c u s s i o n w h i c h

is, in its turn, f o l l o w e d b y a n o t h e r story In the

f i r s t case, t h e s a m e d c u is r e s u m e d a n d a l l its

r e g i s t e r v a l u e s a r e s t i l l a v a i l a b l e ; in t h e s e c o n d case, t h e f i r s t s t o r y h a s b e e n f i n i s h e d b e f o r e the

d i s c u s s i o n a n d t h e r e - e n t r y i n t o a s t o r y w o r l d is

v i a a d i f f e r e n t story T h e f i r s t s t o r y h a s b e e n

c l o s e d o f f a n d its r e g i s t e r v a l u e s a r e n o l o n g e r

a v i l a b l e for r e - a c t i v a t i o n ; t h e t e l l e r o f t h e s e c -

o n d s t o r y m u s t r e - i n i t i a l i z e the v a r i a b l e s o f time,

p l a c e a n d c h a r a c t e r , e v e n if t h e e v e n t s o f t h e s e c -

o n d s t o r y c o n c e r n e x a c t l y t h e s a m e c h a r a c t e r s a n d

s i t u a t i o n s as t h e first

Thus, the n o t i o n s o f i n t e r r u p t i o n a n d r e s u m p -

t i o n h a v e n o t o n l y a s o c i a l r e a l i t y w h i c h is e x p e -

r i e n c e d b y the i n t e r a c t a n t s i n v o l v e d T h e y a l s o

h a v e s e m a n t i c c o n s e q u e n c e s for the b u i l d i n g a n d

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f texts

I n t e r r u p t i o n a n d r e s u m p t i o n a r e o f t e n e x p l i -

c i t l y s i g n a l l e d b y the o c c u r r e n c e o f " d i s c o u r s e

m a r k e r s " I n t e r r u p t i o n is s i g n a l l e d b y a P U S H -

m a r k e r s u c h as " i n c i d e n t a l l y " , "by t h e w a y " , " y o u

k n o w " o r "like" R e s u m p t i o n is s i g n a l l e d b y a P O P -

Trang 3

(For longer lists of d i s c o u r s e m a r k i n g devices, a n d

s o m e w h a t more d i s c u s s i o n of their functioning, see

R e i c h m a n (1981) and Polanyi and Scha(1983b).)

In terms of our A T N d e s c r i p t i o n of d i s c o u r s e

structure, the PUSH- and P O P - m a r k e r s do almost ex-

a c t l y w h a t t h e i r names suggest A P U S H - m a r k e r sig-

nals the c r e a t i o n of a n e w e m b e d d e d d i s c o u r s e con-

stituent, w h i l e a P O P - m a r k e r signals a r e t u r n to an

e m b e d d i n g c o n s t i t u e n t (though n o t n e c e s s a r i l y the

i m m e d i a t e l y e m b e d d i n g one), c l o s i n g off the cur-

rent c o n s t i t u e n t and all the intermediate ones The

fact that one P O P - m a r k e r m a y thus create a w h o l e

cascade of d i s c o u r s e - P O P s w a s one of Reichman's

(1981) a r g u m e n t s for r e j e c t i n g the A T ~ m o d e l of dis-

course structure We have indicated before, however,

that a c c o m m o d a t i n g this p h e n o m e n o n is at w o r s t a

m a t t e r of m i n o r technical e x t e n s i o n s of the A."~Ifor-

m a l i s m (Polanyi and Scha, 1983b); in the p r e s e n t

paper, we shall from n o w on ignore it

III D I S C O U R S E CONSTITD-ENT UNITS

A Introduction

This section reviews some i m p o r t a n t w a y s in

w h i c h clauses (being our e l e m e n t a r y d i s c o u r s e con-

stituent units) can be c o m b i n e d to form c o m p l e x

d i s c o u r s e constituent units (which, in m o s t cases,

m a y be further c o m b i n e d to form larger dcu's, by

r e c u r s i v e a p p l i c a t i o n of the same mechanisms) F o r

the moment, we are thus focussing on the b a s i c dis-

course syntactic p a t t e r n s w h i c h m a k e it p o s s i b l e to

c o n s t r u c t complex discourses, a n d on the s e m a n t i c

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of these patterns Sections IV a n d V

will then discuss the higher level structures, w h e r e

the interactional p e r s p e c t i v e on d i s c o u r s e comes

m o t e to the fore

To be able to focus on discourse level p h e -

nomena, we will assume that the m a t e r i a l to be d e a l t

w i t h by the d i s c o u r s e granmu~r is a sequence con-

sisting of clauses and o p e r a t o r s (connectors and

d i s c o u r s e markers) It is a s s u m e d that every clause

carries the value it has for features such as speak-

er, clause topic, p r o p o s i t i o n a l content (represented

b y a f o r m u l a of a suitable logic), p r e p o s e d consti-

tuents (with t h e m a t i c role and semantics), tense,

mood, modality (The syntactic features we m u s t

include here have semantic c o n s e q u e n c e s w h i c h can

n o t always be d e a l t w i t h w i t h i n the m e a n i n g o f the

clause, since they m a y involve d i s c o u r s e issues.)

The semantics of a d c u is b u i l t up in p a r -

allel w i t h its syntactic analysis, b y the~same re-

cursive mechanism ~4hen clauses or d c u ' s are com-

b i n e d to form a larger dcu, t h e i r m e a n i n g s are com-

b i n e d to form the m e a n i n g of this dcu A l o n g w i t h

r e g i s t e r s for storing syntactic f e a t u r e s and seman-

tic parameters, each d c u has a r e g i s t e r w h i c h is

used to b u i l d u p the logical r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of its

meaning

Since the syntactic and semantic r u l e s o p -

e r a t e in parallel, the syntactic r u l e s h a v e the

p o s s i b i l i t y of r e f e r r i n g to the semantics of the

c o n s t i t u e n t s t h e y w o r k on This p o s s i b i l i t y is in

fact used in c e r t a i n cases We shall see an example

in section III C i

C o m p l e x d i s c o u r s e c o n s t i t u e n t u n i t s c a n be

d i v i d e d into four s t r u c t u r a l l y d i f f e r e n t types:

ily m a n y c o n s t i t u e n t s (e.g.: lists, narratives)

- expansions, c o n s i s t i n g of a clause and a subordi-

n a t e d unit w h i c h "expands" on it

- s t r u c t u r e s formed b y a b i n a r y operator, such as

"A b e c a u s e B", "If A t h e n B"

- a d j a c e n c y structures, involving speaker change, such as q u e s t i o n / a n s w e r p a i r s and e x c h a n g e s of greetings

In the next subsections, III B and III C,

we shall d i s c u s s sequences and e x p a n s i o n s in m o r e detail One g e n e r a l p o i n t w e should like to m a k e here already: s e q u e n c e s as w e l l as e x p a n s i o n s cor- respond to e x t e n s i o n a l semantic operations The

p r o p o s i t i o n s e x p r e s s i n g the m e a n i n g s o f their con- stituents are e v a l u a t e d w i t h r e s p e c t to the same

p o s s i b l e w o r l d the successive c o n s t i t u e n t s sim-

p l y add up to one description (We m a y note that some of the b i n a r y s t r u c t u r e s w h i c h we shall n o t

c o n s i d e r further now, c e r t a i n l y c o r r e s p o n d to in-

t e n s i o n a l operations "If A t h e n B" is a clear ex- ample.)

S i n c e w e will not d i s c u s s a d j a c e n c y struc- tures in a n y d e t a i l in this paper, the p r o b l e m of

a c c o m m o d a t i n g speaker change and d i f f e r e n t illocu-

t i o n a r y forces in the d i s c o u r s e semantics will be left for a n o t h e r occasion

B S e q u e n t i a l Structures

W e shall d i s c u s s three k i n d s o f sequential structures: lists, narratives, and topic chaining

i Lists

P e r h a p s t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c sequential structure is the list: a series of clauses CI, ,

Ck, w h i c h have a s-~mm~tic s t r u c t u r e o f the form F(al) = v I F ( a k) = v k,

i.e., the c l a u s e s e x p r e s s p r o p o s i t i o n s w h i c h con-

v e y the v a l u e s w h i c h o n e f u n c t i o n has for a series

of a l t e r n a t i v e arguments F o r instance, w h e n asked

to d e s c r i b e the i n t e r i o r of a room, someone m a y give an answer s t r u c t u r e d like this:

"When I come into the door, then I see,

to the left o f m e o n the wall, a large win-

d o w ( )

Eh, t h e w a l l across f r o m me, there is a eh

b a s k e t c h a i r ( )

On the r i g h t wall is a m m chair ( )

In the m i d d l e o f the r o o m there is, from left

to right, an o b l o n g table, next to that a

r o u n d table, and next to that a tall cabinet

N o w I t h i n k I got everything."

(Transcript b y E h r i c h and K o s t e r (1983), t r a n s l a t e d from Dutch; the c o n s t i t u e n t s w e left out, indicated

b y p a r e n t h e s i z e d dots, are subordinated c o n s t i - tuents a p p e n d e d to the ~ they follow.)

The list here o c c u r s e m b e d d e d u n d e r the p h r a s e "I see", and is c l o s e d o f f b y the p h r a s e "Now I t h i n k

I g o t everything"

Often, t h e s u c c e s s i v e a r g u m e n t s in a list a r e m e n t i o n e d in a n o n - r a n d o m o r d e r in the above case, for instance, w e first get the loca- tions s u c c e s s i v e l y e n c o u n t e r e d in a "glance tour" from left to r i g h t a l o n g the walls; then the rest

Trang 4

~ ciause: next clause: ~ ~ clause:

O first ~ O next ) O

list

B o t h the first and the next arc parse clauses w h i c h

must have the semantic structure F(a) = v (Whether

a clause can be analysed in this fashion, d e p e n d s

on surface p r o p e r t i e s such as stress p a t t e r n and

p r e p o s i n g of constituents.) Various registers are

set by the first clause and checked w h e n next

clauses are parsed, in order to enforce a g r e e m e n t

in features such as tense, mood, modality The se-

m a n t i c s of a n e w clause b e i n g p a r s e d is simply

conjoined w i t h the semantics of the list so far

2 Narratives

N a r r a t i v e s m a y be seen as a special case

of lists successive event clauses specify w h a t

happens at successive t i m e p o i n t s in the w o r l d de-

scribed by the narrative N a r r a t i v e s are s u b d i v i d e d

into d i f f e r e n t genres, m a r k e d by d i f f e r e n t tense

and/or p e r s o n o r i e n t a t i o n of t h e i r m a i n line

clauses: specific p a s t time n a r r a t i v e s (marked b y

clauses in the simple past, though clauses in the

"historical present" m a y also occur), generic p a s t

time n a r r a t i v e s ( m a r k e d by the use of "would" and

"used to"), p r o c e d u r a l n a r r a t i v e s (present tense),

simultaneous r e p o r t i n g (present tense), p l a n s (use

of "will" and "shall"; p r e s e n t tense also occurs)

We shall from n o w on focus on specific past narra-

tives The p r o p e r t i e s of other narratives turn out

to be largely analogous (Cf L o n g a c r e (1979) w h o

suggests treating the internal structure of a dis-

course c o n s t i t u e n t and its "genre specification" as

two independent dimensions.)

clause:

/ ~ e v e n t

clause: \ ~ / c i r c u m s t a n c e

O eventl~_~

flashback specific past n a r r a t i v e

All c l a u s e - p r o c e s s i n g arcs in this n e t w o r k

for "specific past narratives" require that the

tense of the clause be p r e s e n t or simple past The

event arc and the event arc process clauses w i t h a

- - ~ i

n o n - d u r a t i v e aspect The circumstance arc p r o c e s s e s

clauses w i t h a d u r a t i v e aspect (The a s p e c t u a l ca-

tegory of a clause is d e t e r m i n e d by the semantic

categories of its constituents Cf Verkuyl, 1972.)

The event arc is d i s t i n g u i s h e d because it initial-

1

izes the register settings

* Notation: All d i a g r a m s in this p a p e r have one ini-

tial state (the leftmost one) and one final state

(the rightmost one) The name of the d i a g r a m indi-

cates the category of the c o n s t i t u e n t it parses

Arcs have labels of the form "A:B" (or sometimes

just "A"), where A indicates the category of the

constituent w h i c h m u s t be p a r s e d to t r a v e r s e the

arc, and B is a label identifying a d d i t i o n a l con-

ditions and/or actions

time r e g i s t e r c o n t a i n i n g a formula r e p r e s e n t i n g the current reference time in the p r o g r e s s i o n o f the narrative ~,~en the time r e g i s t e r has a v a l u e

t, an incoming c i r c u m s t a n c e clause is e v a l u a t e d at

t, and it does not change the v a l u e of the time re- gister An event clause, however, is e v a l u a t e d w i t h

r e s p e c t to a later b u t a d j a c e n t interval t', and resets the time r e g i s t e r to an interval t", later than but a d j a c e n t to t' (Cf P o l a n y i a n d Scha, 1981)

To show that this g i v e s us the d e s i r e d semantic consequences, we c o n s i d e r an a b b r e v i a t e d

v e r s i o n of a d e t e c t i v e story fragment, q u o t e d b y

H i n r i c h s (1981):

(El) He w e n t to the w i n d o w (E2) and p u l l e d aside the soft drapes

(Cl) It w a s a c a s e m e n t w i n d o w (C2) and b o t h p a n e l s w e r e c r a n k e d d o w n to let in the n i g h t air

(E3) "You should k e e p this w i n d o w locked," he said (E4) "It's d a n g e r o u s this way."

The E c l a u s e s a r e events, the C c l a u s e s are c i r c u m - stances The events are e v a l u a t e d at disjoint, suc-

s e s s i v e l y later intervals The c i r c u m s t a n c e s are

e v a l u a t e d at the same interval, b e t w e e n E2 and E3

To a p p r e c i a t e that the s i m u l t a n e i t y of

s u b s e q u e n t c i r c u m s t a n c e clauses in fact is a con- sequence of a s p e c t u a l class r a t h e r than a m a t t e r of

"world knowledge", o n e m a y c o m p a r e the s e q u e n c e

"He w e n t to the w i n d o w and p u l l e d a s i d e the soft drapes" to the c o r r e s p o n d i n g sequence of c i r c u m - stance clauses: "He w a s g o i n g to the w i n d o w and

w a s p u l l i n g aside the soft drapes" W o r l d k n o w l e d g e does come in, however, w h e n one has to d e c i d e how

m u c h the v a l i d i t y of a c i r c u m s t a n c e clause extends beyond the interval in the n a r r a t i v e sequence w h e r e

it is e x p l i c i t l y asserted

S p e c i f i c p a s t n a r r a t i v e s m a y also con- tain other c o n s t i t u e n t s t h a n clauses An i m p o r t a n t case in p o i n t is the "flashback" an e m b e d d e d nar- rative w h i c h r e l a t e s events taking p l a c e in a p e r i -

o d b e f o r e the r e f e r e n c e time of the m a i n narrative

A f l a s h b a c k is introduced b y a clause in the plu- perfect; the c l a u s e s w h i c h c o n t i n u e it m a y be in the p l u p e r f e c t or the simple past

clause: f-event clause: ~0 @

O f-init , pop> O

f - c i r c u m s t a n c e

flashback The first clause in a f l a s h b a c k (f-init)

is an event clause; it i n i t i a l i z e s r e g i s t e r set- tings The r e f e r e n c e time w i t h i n a flashback m o v e s

a c c o r d i n g to the same m e a c h a n i s m sketched above for the m a i n n a r r a t i v e line

A f t e r the c o m p l e t i o n of a flashback, the

m a i n n a r r a t i v e line c o n t i n u e s w h e r e it left off i.e., it p r o c e e d s from the reference time of the

m a i n narrative A simple example:

Peter and Mary left the p a r t y in a hurry

Mary had r a n into J o h n

a n d she h a d insulted him

So they got into the car and d r o v e d o w n A v e n u e C

Trang 5

Another sequential structure is the

topic chaining structure, where a series of dis-

tinct predications about the same argument are

listed A topic chain consists of a series of

clauses C., ., C k, with a semantic structure of

the f o r m ~ ( a ) , , Pk(a), where "a" translates the

topic NP'slof the clauses In the first clause of

the chain, the topic is expressed by a phrase

(either a full NP or a pronoun) w h i c h occurs in

subject position or as a p r e p o s e d constituent In

the other clauses, it is usually a pronoun, often

in subject position An example:

Wilbur's book I really liked

It was on relativity theory

and talks m o s t l y about quarks

I got it while I was working on the initial part

of my research

(Based on Sidner (1983), example D26.)

The topic chain may be defined by a very

simple transition network

clause: \ / clause:

O tcl ) O ~ tcn >O

topic chain The network has a topic register, which is set by

the first clause (parsed by the tcl arc), which al-

so sets various other registers The tcn arc tests

agreement in the usual way As for the topic regis-

ter, we require that the clause being parsed

has a constituent w h i c h is interpreted as co-

referential with the value of this register The

semantics of a topic chain is created by simple

conjunction of the semantics of subsequent constit-

ueHts, as in the case of the list

Lists, narratives and topic chains dif-

fer as to their internal structure, but are distri-

butionally indistinguishable they m a y occur in

identical slots within larger discourse constitu-

ents For an elegant formulation of the grammar, it

is therefore advantageous to bring them under a

common denominator: we define the notion sequence

to be the union of list, narrative and topic chain

C Expansions

Under the heading "expansions" we describe

two constructions in w h i c h a clause is followed by

a unit w h i c h expands on it, either by elaborating

its content ("elaborations") or by describing prop-

erties of a referent introduced by the clause

("topic-dominant chaining")

i Elaborations

A clause m a y be followed by a dcu (a

clause or clause sequence) w h i c h expands on its

content, i.e redescribes it in more detail For

instance, an event clause m a y be expanded by a

m i n i - n a r r a t i v e w h i c h recounts the details of the

event An example:

Pedro dined at Madame Gilbert's

First there was an hors d'oeuvre

Then the fish

After that the butler brought a glazed chicken

The repast ended w i t h a flaming dessert

a case like this, the whole little narrative must

be viewed as subordinated to the clause w h i c h pre- cedes it We therefore construct one dcu w h i c h con- sists of the first clause plus the following se-

An illustration of the semantic necessi-

ty of such structural analyses is provided by the

m o v e m e n t of the reference time in narratives The above example (by H Kamp) appeared in the context

of the discussion about that phenomenon (Cf Dow-

ty, 1982) A l o n g with other, similar ones, it was brought up as complicating the idea that every event clause in a narrative moves the reference time to a later interval We would like to suggest that it is

no coincidence that such "problematic" cases involve clause sequences belonging to known p a r a g r a p h types, and standing in an elaboration relation to the pre- ceding clause The reason why they interrupt the flow of narrative time is simple enough: their clauses are not direct constituents of the narrative

at all, but constitute their own embedded dcu

To describe elaborations, w e ~redefine t h e notion of a clause to be either an elementary one

or an elaborated one (where the elaboration can be constituted by a sequence or by a single clause)

sequence

O e-claus~

0 ~ " ± ~ 0

e-clause

clause

If a clause C is followed b y a dcu D, D may be parsed as an elaboration of C, if C and D m a y be

p l a u s i b l y viewed as describing the same situation (Note that this is a relation not between the surface forms of C and D, but between their m e a n - ings C' and D'.) When constructing the semantics for the complex clause, this semantic coherence m u s t al-

so be made explicit

2 Topic-Dominant Chaining

Another phenomenon which gives rise to a similar structure is "topic-dominant chaining" Within a clause w i t h a given topic, certain other constituents m a y be identified as p o s s i b l y dominant*

A dominant constituent m a y become the topic of the next clause or sequence of clauses We suggest that such a continuation with a new topic be seen as ex- panding on the clause before the topic-switch, and

as syntactically subordinated to this.clause This subordinated constituent may either be a single clause or another topic chain sequence

Similarly, a clause m a y be followed by a relative clause, the relative pronoun referring to

a dominant constituent of the embedding clause Also

in this case, the relative clause may be the first clause of an embedded topic chain

0 e-claus~o topic chain

~ O

clause

* The notion of dominance links discourse phenomena

w i t h extraction p h e n o m e n a w i t h i n the sentence See, e.g., Erteschik-Shir and Lappin (1979)

Trang 6

into the grammar, in addition to the one given be-

fore )

The d o m i n a n t constituents of the e-clause

are stored in a register; the topic of the topic

chain, as well as the relative p r o n o u n of the tel

clause m u s t be interpreted as coreferential w i t h one

of those constituents The topic of topic tail

(a "headless" topic chain) must in its turn corefer

w i t h the relative pronoun

The semantics consists of simple conjunction

Both v a r i a n t s of t o p i c - d o m i n a n t c h a i n i n g

a l l o w e d b y the above n e t w o r k are e x e m p l i f i e d in

the following text (Sidner, 1983; example D26):

(I) W i l b u r is a fine scientist and a t h o u g h t f u l

guy

(2) He gave me a b o o k a while back

( 2 ' ) w h i c h I really liked

(3) It w a s on r e l a t i v i t y theory

(4) and talks m o s t l y about quarks

(5) T h e y are h a r d to imagine

e l e m e n t a r y field theories of a c o m

plex nature

(7) These theories are a b s o l u t e l y es-

sential to all r e l a t i v i t y research

(8') I got it

(8") w h i l e I w a s w o r k i n g on the initial p a r t

of m y research

(9) He's a really helpful c o l l e a g u e to have thought

of g i v i n g it to me

(Indentation indicates subordination w i t h respect to

the m o s t recent less indented clause.) This embed-

ding of c o n s t i t u e n t s by means of t o p i c - d o m i n a n t

c h a i n i n g w o u l d e x p l a i n the "focus-stack" w h i c h

Sidner (1983) p o s t u l a t e s to d e s c r i b e the p r o n o m i n a l

r e f e r e n c e p h e n o m e n a in examples like this

IV D I S C O U R S E UNITS

We n o w leave the d i s c u s s i o n of the b a s i c syn-

t a c t i c / s e m a n t i c m e c h a n i s m s for b u i l d i n g d i s c o u r s e

out of clauses, and turn to the higher levels of

analysis, w h e r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s involving the goals

of the interaction start to come in First of all,

we shall d i s c u s s the entities w h i c h W a l d (1978)

calls Discourse Units*, c o r r e s p o n d i n g closely to

the e n t i t i e s w h i c h L o n g a c r e (1983) simply calls

"Discourses" D i s c o u r s e Units (DU's) are socially

a c k n o w l e d g e d units of talk, w h i c h have a r e c o g n i z a -

ble p o i n t or purpose, and w h i c h are built around

one of the sequential d c u ' s d i s c u s s e d in section

III B

Discourse Unit types w h i c h have been inves-

tigated include stories (Labov, 1972; PTald, 1978;

Polanyi, 1978b), d e s c r i p t i o n s of various sorts

(Linde, 1979; Ehrich and Koster, 1983), p r o c e d u r a l

d i s c o u r s e and h o r t a t o r y d i s c o u r s e (see various re-

ferences in L o n g a c r e (1983))

* W a l d restricts his notion to m o n o l o g i c d i s c o u r s e

fragments It seems reasonable to generalize it to

cases w h e r e m o r e than one speaker m a y be involved

course Unit and the s u r r o u n d i n g talk (specifical-

ly, the need to appear " l o c a l l y occasioned" (Jef- ferson, 1979) and to make a "point" (Polanyi, 1978b), the c e n t r a l part of the D i s c o u r s e Unit

u s u a l l y is not a piece of talk s t a n d i n g c o m p l e t e l y

on its o ~ feet, b u t is s u p p o r t e d b y one or more stages of p r e p a r a t o r y and i n t r o d u c t o r y talk on one end, and by an e x p l i c i t c l o s u r e a n d / o r c o n c l u s i o n

at the other This m a y be i l l u s t r a t e d by t a k i n g a closer look at c o n v e r s a t i o n a l l y e m b e d d e d stories the paradigmatic, and m o s t w i d e l y studied, DU

~ a n c e settinu n a r r a t i v e d c u : e x i t

stor~

A typical story is initiated w i t h e n t r a n c e talk w h i c h sets the topic and e s t a b l i s h e s the rela- tion w i t h the p r e c e d i n g talk O f t e n we find an ab- stract, a n d some kind of n e g o t i a t i o n a b o u t the a c - tual t e l l i n g of the story

Then follows the "setting" w h i c h g i v e s the

n e c e s s a r y b a c k g r o u n d m a t e r i a l for the story* T h e n follows the "core": a specific p a s t narrative, re- lating a s e q u e n c e of events The story is c o n c l u d e d

w i t h "exit talk" w h i c h m a y formulate the p o i n t of the story q u i t e explicitly, c o n n e c t i n g the story-

w o r l d w i t h m o r e g e n e r a l d i s c o u r s e topics

For instance, one story in L a b o v ' s (1972)

c o l l e c t i o n has as its e n t r a n c e talk an e x p l i c i t

e l i c i t a t i o n a n d its r e s p o n s e to it:

O: W h a t w a s the m o s t important fight that you remember, one that sticks in your mind A: Well, one (I think) was w i t h a girl

There is an e x t e n s i v e section d e s c r i b i n g the set- ting: "Like I w a s a kid you know A n d she w a s the

b a d d e s t girl, the b a d d e s t girl in the n e i g h - borhood If y o u d i d n ' t b r i n g h e r candy to school, she w o u l d p u n c h y o u in the mouth;"

a n d y o u h a d to kiss h e r w h e n s h e ' d tell you This girl w a s o n l y twelve years old, man,

b u t she was a killer She d i d n ' t take no junk; she w h u p p e d all her b r o t h e r s "

Then, the event c h a i n starts, and finally ends:

"And I came to school o n e d a y a n d I d i d n ' t have any money ( ) A n d I hit the girl: powwww! and I p u t something on it I w i n the fight."

The story is e x p l i c i t l y closed off:

"That w a s one of the m o s t important."

N o t e v e r y specific p a s t n a r r a t i v e m a y be the core of a story B e c a u s e of the interactional status of the story (its r e q u i r e m e n t to be "point- ful") there are other p r o p e r t i e s w h i c h are n o t i c e - able in the linguistic surface structure n o t a b l y the o c c u r r e n c e of "evaluation" (Polanyi, 1978b) and

of a "peak" in the n a r r a t i v e line (Longacre,l~83)

* T h a t the n e c e s s a r y b a c k g r o u n d m a t e r i a l m u s t be

g i v e n before the actual event sequence, is a t t e s t e d

by a s l i g h t l y c o m p l i c a t e d s t o r y t e l l i n g strategy,

d e s c r i b e d in Polanyi (1978a) as the "True Start" repair: the storyteller first p l u n g e s r i g h t into the event sequence, then b r e a k s off the n a r r a t i v e line and r e s t a r t s the t e l l i n g of the story, n o w

w i t h the insertion of the p r o p e r b a c k g r o u n d data

Trang 7

g i v e n above, should p r o b a b l y be further e l a b o r a t e d

to a c c o u n t for the p h e n o m e n o n of episodes: a story

m a y be b u i l t b y consecutive p i e c e s of talk w h i c h

c o n s t i t u t e separate n a r r a t i v e dcu's At the level

of the story DU, the m e a n i n g s of these n a r r a t i v e s

m u s t be i n t e g r a t e d to form a d e s c r i p t i o n of one

s t o r y w o r l d r a t h e r than many

In E n g l i s h and other W e s t e r n E u r o p e a n lan-

guages, the D i s c o u r s e Unit seems to be a largely

interactional notion Its c o n s t i t u e n t s are p i e c e s

of talk d e f i n e d b y the i n d e p e n d e n t l y m o t i v a t e d dcu-

grammar T h e DU grarmnar o n l y imposes c o n s t r a i n t s on

the c o n t e n t - r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n its c o n s t i t u e n t

dcu's; it does not define structures w h i c h an ade-

quate dcu grammar w o u l d not define already

In other languages of the world, the situation

seems to be somewhat different: there are syntac-

t i c a l l y d e f i n e d w a y s for b u i l d i n g DU's o u t of dcu's,

w h i c h w e r e not a l r e a d y p a r t of the d c u grammar

For details, one should investigate, for instance,

the v a r i o u s w o r k s r e f e r r e d to in L o n g a c r e

(1983) A l s o in this b o d y of work, however, one can

find n u m e r o u s cases w h e r e the structural d i f f e r e n c e

b e t w e e n a DU ("Discourse", in L o n g a c r e ' s terms) and

the c o r r e s p o n d i n g sequential d c u ("paragraph", in

his terms) is n o t v e r y clear

V I ~ E R A C T I O N S A N D S P E E C H EVENTS

The system we p r e s e n t here is i n t e n d e d to

analyze the v e r b a l m a t e r i a l o c c u r r i n g in o n e

Interaction B y an I n t e r a c t i o n we m e a n a social

situation in w h i c h a set of p a r t i c i p a n t s is in-

v o l v e d in an exchange of talk E a c h of the p a r t i c i -

p a n t s k n o w s to be taking p a r t in this situation,

a~d a s s i g n s to the others the same awareness By

f o c u s s i n g on o n e interaction, we single out, f r o m

all the talk that m a y be g o i n g on at one p l a c e at

the same time, the talk w h i c h b e l o n g s t o g e t h e r b e -

cause it is intended to be part of the same social

situation (Cf Goffman, 1979)

The set of p a r t i c i p a n t s of an I n t e r a c t i o n

d e t e r m i n e s the p o s s i b l e speakers and a d d r e s s e e s of

the talk o c c u r r i n g in it Similarly, the p h y s i c a l

time and p l a c e of an interaction p r o v i d e the ref-

erents for indexicals like "now" and "here"

A simple two p e r s o n I n t e r a c t i o n w o u l d be

d e s c r i b e d as an e x c h a n g e of greetings, f o l l o w e d

by a p i e c e of talk as d e f i n e d by a lower level of

the grammar, followed b y an exchange of farewells

G r e e t i n g s and farewells are the o n l y kinds of talk

w h i c h d i r e c t l y engage the I n t e r a c t i o n level of

d e s c r i p t i o n they c o r r e s p o n d to signing o n and

signing off to the list of participants

An "unframed" i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n "unin-

t e r p r e t e d " p e o p l e is a rare event People use a

r e f i n e d system of s u b c a t e g o r i z a t i o n to c l a s s i f y

the social situations they e n g a g e in T h e s e sub-

categories, w h i c h we shall call S p e e c h E v e n t t y p e s

(cf Hymes, 1967, 1972), o f t e n assign a specific

p u r p o s e to the interaction, specify roles for the

participants, c o n s t r a i n d i s c o u r s e topics a n d

c o n v e r s a t i o n a l registers, and, in m a n y cases,

specify a c o n v e n t i o n a l sequence of c o m p o n e n t a c t i -

vities

Speech Events are formal rituals S p e e c h E v e n t types

c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y gran~nars w h i c h are less e x p l i c i t and less d e t a i l e d include service e n c o u n t e r s (Mer- ritt, 1978), d o c t o r - p a t i e n t i n t e r a c t i o n s (Byrne and Long, 1976), and casual conversations

T h e s t r u c t u r e of talk w h i c h is e x c h a n g e d

in o r d e r to p e r f o r m a t a s k w i l l f o l l o w the structure

of some g o a l / s u b g o a l a n a l y s i s of this task (Grosz, 1977) In S p e e c h E v e n t types w h i c h involve a m o r e

or less fixed goal, this o f t e n leads to a fixed

g r a m m a r of s u b s e q u e n t steps t a k e n to attain it For instance, students looking at t r a n s c r i p t s of the on-

g o i n g s in a D u t c h butchershop, c o n s i s t e n t l y found the following sequential structure in the interac- tion b e t w e e n the b u t c h e r and a customer:

i e s t a b l i s h i n g that it is this c u s t o m e r ' s turn

2 the first d e s i r e d i t e m is ordered, and the order

is d e a l t with, , the n - t h d e s i r e d item is

o r d e r e d and the o r d e r is d e a l t with

3 it is e s t a b l i s h e d that the s e q u e n c e of orders

is finished

4 the bill is d e a l t with

5 the i n t e r a c t i o n is c l o s e d off

O d c u : 2

0 d c u : l 3 0 d c u ' 2 ~ O U ' ~ c n ' ~ O ~ C n ~ 4 " " ~ " 9 0 dcu:5 ~ O

b u t c h e r s h o p interaction

E a c h of these steps is filled in in a large v a r i e -

ty of w a y s e i t h e r of the p a r t i e s m a y take the

i n i t i a t i v e at each step, q u e s t i o n / a n s w e r sequences about the a v a i l a b l e meat, the r i g h t w a y to p r e p a r e

it, or the exact w i s h e s of the c u s t o m e r m a y all be

e m b e d d e d in the stage 2 steps, and c l a r i f i c a t i o n

d i a l o g s of v a r i o u s sorts m a y occur In other words,

we find the w h o l e r e p e r t o i r e of p o s s i b i l i t i e s ad-

m i t t e d b y the d c u gralmnar ( p a r t i c u l a r l y , the p a r t

d e a l i n g w i t h the p o s s i b l e e m b e d d i n g s of a d j a c e n c y

s t r u c t u r e s w i t h i n e a c h other)

Thus, we note t h a t the arcs in a S p e e c h

E v e n t d i a g r a m such as the a b o v e do not impose syn- tactic c o n s t r a i n t s on the talk they will p a r s e T h e labels on the arcs stand for c o n d i t i o n s on the con- tent of the talk i.e., on the g o a l s and t o p i c s that it m a y be o v e r t l y c o n c e r n e d with

A n i m p o r t a n t S p e e c h E v e n t type w i t h

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t from the types

m e n t i o n e d so far, is the "casual conversation"

In a casual conversation, all p a r t i c i p a n t s have the same role: to be "equals"; no p u r p o s e s are p r e - established; and the range of p o s s i b l e t o p i c s is open-ended, a l t h o u g h c o n v e n t i o n a l l y constrained

VI I ~ E R R U P T I O N R E V I S I T E D One S p e e c h E v e n t type m a y o c c u r e m b e d d e d

in a n o t h e r one It m a y o c c u p y a fixed Slot in it,

as w h e n an o f f i c i a l g a t h e r i n g includes an informal

p r e l u d e or postlude, w h e r e p e o p l e d o n ' t act in their o f f i c i a l roles b u t engage in casual conver- sation (Goffman, 1979) Or, the e m b e d d i n g m a y o c c u r

at s t r u c t u r a l l y a r b i t r a r y points, as w h e n a Service

E n c o u n t e r in a n e i g h b o r h o o d shop is i n t e r r u p t e d for smalltalk

The latter case m a y be d e s c r i b e d b y tacit-

ly a d d i n g to e a c h state in the S e r v i c e E n c o u n t e r

n e t w o r k a l o o p i n g arc w h i c h PUSIIes to the Casual

Ngày đăng: 31/03/2014, 17:20

TỪ KHÓA LIÊN QUAN

TÀI LIỆU CÙNG NGƯỜI DÙNG

TÀI LIỆU LIÊN QUAN