Cover not available
Part of
The Dynamics of Political Discourse: Forms and functions of follow-ups
Edited by Anita Fetzer, Elda Weizman and Lawrence N. Berlin
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 259] 2015
► pp. 17–31

Sequentiality and follow-ups

 | University of Southern Denmark, Denmark
A pragmatic view of text production and consumption involves placing the text in a total world context. This context should not be seen as a static collocation of features or parameters; rather, it is a constantly evolving conglomerate of ever-changing conditions, both human and worldly. In particular, context is never fixed in time; the way we act in a context involves a constant adjustment of our activities, both verbal and non-verbal, and a recalibration of their values in relation to the sequence of acts of which they are parts and to the situations in which they occur. This point of view has consequences for our understanding of both world and text: what has been called ‘sequentiality’ is therefore a main constituent of our pragmatic text activities and a necessary precondition for our understanding and handling of text-in-world, either written, spoken, or acted; in particular this holds when it comes to ‘follow up’ on previous discourse. Moreover, conceptualizing and realizing context as a dynamic process, rather than a static entity is of importance not only theoretically; this line of thought has fruitful effects when applied to human discourse, in particular when we try to understand the mechanisms of conversation, as evinced in the practice of ‘follow-ups’.
Published online: 27 August 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.259.01mey
References (26)
References
Arundale, Robert B. 2005. “Pragmatics, Conversational Implicature, and Conversation”. In Handbook of Language and Social Interaction, ed. by Kristine L. Fitch and Robert E. Sanders, 41–63. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Arundale, Robert B. and David Good. 2002. “Boundaries and Sequences in Studying Conversation”. In Rethinking Sequentiality: Linguistics Meets Conversational Interaction, 121–150. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. (Pragmatics & Beyond New Series Vol. 103) DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauman, Richard and Joel Sherzer (eds.). 1974. Explorations in the Ethnography of Speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail M. 1981. “Discourse in the Novel” (Caryl Emerson & Michael Holquist, trans.). In The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays by Mikhail Bakhtin, ed. by Michael Holquist, 259–422. Austin: University of Texas Press. (Originally published 1975)Google Scholar
Cooren, François and Letizia Caronia. 2013. “Excentering our Analytical Position: The Dialogicity of Things”. Paper presented at the Dialogue in Multilingual, Multimodal, and Multicompetent Communities of Practice Workshop. University of Texas at Austin, March 22–24.
Enfield, Nick J. 2006. “Elements of formulation”. In Roots of Human sociality, ed. by Nick J. Enfield and Stephen C. Levinson, 59–66. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
Gibson, James J. 1979. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghtin-Mifflin.Google Scholar
Gumperz, John and Stephen C. Levinson (eds.). 1996. Rethinking Linguistic Relativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hanks, William F. 1996. “Language form and communicative particles”. In Gumperz & Levinson (eds), 1996, 232–270.Google Scholar
Haugh, Michael. 2007. “The Constitution of Politeness Implicature in Conversation”. Journal of Pragmatics 39: 84–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kecskes, Istvan. 2000. “A Cognitive-Pragmatic Approach to Situation-Bound Utterances”. Journal of Pragmatics 32: 605–625. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 1979. “Activity Types and Language”. Linguistics 17: 365–399. (Reprinted in Paul Drew and John Heritage (eds.). 1992. Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, 66–100. Cambridge University Press). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1995. “Interactional Biases in Human Thinking”. In Social Intelligence in Interaction, ed. by Esther Goody, 221–260. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindtner, Christian. 2000. “King Jagajjyotirmalla’s Ślokasārasam˙grahaḥ” . Asiatische Studien: Zeitschrift der Schweizerischen Asiengesellschaft 54(1): 1–15.Google Scholar
Mayle, Peter. 1997. Chasing Cézanne. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Mey, Inger. 2012. Learning through Interaction and Embodied Practice in a Scientific Laboratory. (Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin).Google Scholar
Mey, Jacob L. 2001. Pragmatics: An Introduction. Oxford & Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers. [1993]Google Scholar
. 2012. “A Brief Sketch of the Historic Development of Pragmatics”. In Oxford Handbook of the History of Linguistics, ed. by Keith Allan, 587–611. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nerlich, Brigitte and David D. Clarke. 1996. Language, Action, Context: The Early History of Pragmatics in Europe and America, 1780–1930. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nevile, Maurice. 2006. “Making sequentiality salient: and-prefacing in the talk of airline pilots”. Discourse Studies 8(2): 309–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robinson, Douglas. 2006. Performative Pragmatics. New York & London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1962 [1916]. Cours de linguistique générale, ed. by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye in collaboration with Albert Riedlinger. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 2007. Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis Part I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Searle, John R. 1975. “Indirect Speech Acts”. In Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3: Speech Acts, ed. by Peter Cole and Jerry Morgan, 59–82. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Wegener, Philipp. 1921. ‘Der Wortsatz’. Indogermanische Forschungen 39: 1–26.Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Weizman, Elda & Zohar Livnat
2022. Dialogic meaning-making in political settings. Pragmatics and Society 13:5 ► pp. 731 ff. DOI logo
Amaral, Renata Martins & Maria das Graças Dias Pereira
2021.  Discussing breast cancer in cyber spaces. In The Pragmatics of Adaptability [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 319], ► pp. 213 ff. DOI logo
Gruber, Helmut
2018. Debating or displaying political positions?. Pragmatics and Society 9:4 ► pp. 571 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 december 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.