Chapter published in:
The ‘Noun Phrase’ across Languages: An emergent unit in interaction
Edited by Tsuyoshi Ono and Sandra A. Thompson
[Typological Studies in Language 128] 2020
► pp. 44–70

Emergent complex noun phrases

On-line trajectories of ‘relativized’ NPs in French talk-in-interaction

| University of Neuchâtel
| University of Neuchâtel
| University of Neuchâtel
In this paper, we document the temporal and contingent nature of noun phrases (NPs). Focusing on relativized NPs, we show that they are produced as an interactional accomplishment, emerging from how participants adapt to each other’s verbal and non-verbal conduct. Based on 20 hours of French conversation, we identify two types of emergent complex NPs, and document their interactional working: Those resulting from a current speaker’s adding on a relative clause increment to his/her preceding turn; and those resulting from a next speaker’s production of such an increment, yielding jointly constructed NPs. We discuss implications for our understanding of the NP as an emergent unit, of the subordinate (or not) status of relative clauses, and of the notion of increment.
Published online: 15 July 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.128.03sto
References

References

Auer, Peter
1996 On the prosody and syntax of turn-continuations. In Prosody in Conversation: Interactional Studies, Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen & Margret Selting (eds), 57–100. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005 Syntax als Prozess. InLiSt – Interaction and Linguistic Structures 41. http://​www​.inlist​.uni​-bayreuth​.de​/issues​/41​/InLiSt41​.pdf
2009 On-line syntax: Thoughts on the temporality of spoken language. Language Sciences 31: 1–13. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Auer, Peter & Pfänder, Stefan
(eds) 2011 Constructions: Emerging and Emergent. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Beeching, Kate
2002 Gender, Politeness and Pragmatic Particles in French [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 104]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clift, Rebecca
2007 Grammar in time: The non-restrictive ‘which’-clause as an interactional resource. Essex Research Reports in Linguistics 55: 51–82.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Ono, Tsuyoshi
(eds) 2007 Turn Continuation in Cross-linguistic Perspective. Special issue of Pragmatics 17.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, E.
2012 Some truths and untruths about final intonation in conversational questions. In J. P. de Ruiter (ed.), Questions: Formal, functional and interactional perspectives. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf & Günthner, Susanne
(eds) 2015 Temporality in Interaction [Studies in Language and Social Interaction 27]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul
1987 Po-faced receipts of teases. Linguistics 25: 219–253. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ford, Cecilia E. & Thompson, Sandra A.
1996 Interactional units in conversation: Syntactic, intonational, and pragmatic resources for the management of turns. In Interaction and Grammar, Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff & Sandra A. Thompson (eds), 134–185. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ford, Cecilia E., Fox, Barbara A. & Thompson, Sandra A.
2002 Constituency and the grammar of turn increments. In The Language of Turn and Sequence, Cecilia E. Ford, Barbara A. Fox & Sandra A. Thompson (eds), 14–38. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Fox, Barbara A. & Thompson, Sandra A.
1990 A discourse explanation of the grammar of relative clauses in English conversation. Language 66: 297–316. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007 Relative clauses in English conversation. Relativizers, frequency, and the notion of construction. Studies in Language 31: 293–326. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Givón, T.
1984 Syntax. A Functional-typological Introduction, Vol. I. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles
1987 Forgetfulness as an interactive resource. Social Psychology Quarterly 50: 115–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Groupe de Fribourg
2012 Grammaire de la période. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Helasvuo, Marja-Liisa
2001 Syntax in the Making: The Emergence of Syntactic Units in Finnish Conversational Discourse [Studies in Discourse and Grammar 9]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2019 Free NPs as units. Studies in Languag 43: 301–328.Google Scholar
Heritage, John
1984 A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, J. Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (eds), 299–345. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul
1987 Emergent grammar. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. General Session and Parasession on Grammar and Cognition, John Aske, Natasha Beery, Laura Michaelis & Hana Filip (eds), 139–157. Berkeley CA: BLS.Google Scholar
2011 Emergent grammar and temporality in interactional linguistics. In Constructions: Emerging and Emergent, Peter Auer & Stefan Pfänder (eds), 22–45. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Thompson, Sandra A.
2008 Projectability and clause combining in interaction. In Crosslinguistic Studies of Clause Combining. The Multifunctionality of Conjunctions [Typological Studies in Language 80], Ritva Laury (ed.), 99–124. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Horlacher, Anne-Sylvie
2015 La dislocation à droite revisitée. Une approche interactionniste. Louvain-la-Neuve: De Boeck. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Horlacher, Anne-Sylvie & Pekarek Doehler, Simona
2014 ‘Pivotage’ in French talk-in-interaction: On the emergent nature of [clause-NP-clause] pivots. Pragmatics 24: 593–622. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail
2004 Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In Gene H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 125], 13–31. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Keenan, Edward L. & Comrie, Bernard
1977 Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 8: 63–99.Google Scholar
Laury, Ritva & Helasvuo, Marja-Liisa
2015 Detached NPs with relative clauses in Finnish conversations. In Information Structuring of Spoken Language from a Crosslinguistic Perspective, M. M. Jocelyne Fernandez-Vest & Robert D. Van Valin Jr. (eds), 149–166. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Luke, Kang Kwong, Thompson, Sandra A. & Ono, Tsuyoshi
2012 Turns and increments: A comparative perspective. Discourse Processes 49(3–4): 155–162. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Maschler, Yael
2011 On the emergence of adverbial connectives from Hebrew relative clause constructions. In Constructions: Emerging and Emergent, Peter Auer & Stefan Pfänder (eds), 293–331. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mertens, Piet
2004 The prosogram: Semi-automatic transcription of prosody based on a tonal perception model. In Proceedings of Speech Prosody, Bernard Bel & Isabelle Marlien (eds), 443–446, Nara, Japan 23–26 March.Google Scholar
Ono, Tsuyoshi & Thompson, Sandra A.
1994 Unattached NPs in English conversation. Berkeley Linguistics Society 20: 402–419. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pekarek Doehler, Simona
2011a Emergent grammar for all practical purposes: The on-line formatting of dislocated constructions in French conversation. In Constructions: Emerging and Emergent, Peter Auer & Stefan Pfänder (eds), 45–88. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011b Clause-combining and the sequencing of actions: projector constructions in French conversation. In Subordination in Conversation: A Crosslinguistic Perspective [Studies in Language and Social Interaction 24], Ritva Laury & Ryoko Suzuki (eds), 103–148. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pekarek Doehler, Simona, De Stefani, Elwys & Horlacher, Anne-Sylvie
2015 Time and Emergence in Grammar. Dislocation, Topicalization and Hanging Topic in French Talk-in-interaction [Studies in Language and Social Interaction 28]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Persson, Rasmus
2015 Registering and repair-initiating repeats in French talk-in-interaction. Discourse Studies 17: 583–608. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1996 Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In Interaction and Grammar, Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff & Sandra A. Thompson (eds), 52–134. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2001 Conversation analysis: A project in progress – ‘increments’. Forum lecture delivered at the LSA Linguistic Institute, University of California, Santa Barbara.
2016 Increments. In Accountability in Social Interaction, Jeffrey D. Robinson (ed.), 239–263. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, Enfield, Nicholas J. & Levinson, Stephen C.
2007 Person reference in interaction. In Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural, and Social Perspectives, Nicholas J. Enfield & Tanya Stivers (eds), 1–20. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya & Rossano, Federico
2010 Mobilizing response. Research on Language and Social Interaction 43: 3–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, Mondada, Lorenza & Steensig, Jakob
2011 Knowledge, morality and affiliation in social interaction. In The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation, Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada & Jakob Steensig (eds), 1–31. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stoenica, Ioana-Maria
2014 Répétition et différenciation dans les reprises structurelles intégrant des relatives. In La parole reprise: Formes, processus et fonctions. Actes du 12e colloque de logopédie – 16–17 novembre 2012, Stefano Rezzonico (ed.). TRANEL 60: 209–220.Google Scholar
2016 Grammaire-en-interaction: Le potentiel praxéologique des relatives dans les conversations en français. Bulletin Suisse de Linguistique Appliquée 104: 87–103.Google Scholar
2020 Actions et conduites mimo-gestuelles dans l’usage conversationnel des relatives en français [Sciences pour la communication 128]. Berne: Peter Lang.https://​www​.peterlang​.com​/view​/title​/72249
Stoenica, Ioana-Maria & Pekarek Doehler, Simona
2020. Relative-clause increments and the management of reference. A multimodal analysis of French talk-in-interaction. A multimodal analysis. In Emergent Syntax for Conversation: Clausal Patterns and the Organization of Action. [Studies in Language and Social Interaction 32], Yael Maschler, Simona Pekarek Doehler, Jan Lindström & Leelo Keevallik eds 303 329 Amsterdam John Benjamins
Tanaka, Hiroko
1999 Turn-Taking in Japanese Conversation: A Study in Grammar and Interaction [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 56]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Tao, Hongyin
1996 Units in Mandarin Conversation: Prosody, Discourse, and Grammar [Studies in Discourse and Grammar 5]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tao, Hongyin & McCarthy, Michael J.
2001 Understanding non-restrictive which-clauses in spoken English, which is not an easy thing. Language Sciences 23: 651–677. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A., Fox, Barbara A. & Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth
2015 Grammar in Everyday Talk: Building Responsive Actions. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Walker, Gareth
2004 On some interactional and phonetic properties of increments to turns in talk-in-interaction. In Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen & Cecilia E. Ford (eds), Sound Patterns in Interaction. Cross-Linguistic Studies from Conversation [Typological Studies in Language 62], 147–169. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar