Abstract
AbstractThe term “pivot” usually refers to two overlapping syntactic units such that the completion of the first unit simultaneously launches the second. In addition, pivots are generally said to be characterized by the smooth prosodic integration of their syntactic parts. This prosodic integration is typically achieved by prosodic-phonetic matching of the pivot components. As research on such turns in a range of languages has illustrated, speakers routinely deploy pivots so as to be able to continue past a point of possible turn completion, in the service of implementing some additional or revised action. This article seeks to build on, and complement, earlier research by exploring two issues in more detail as follows: (1) what exactly do pivotal turn extensions accomplish on the action dimension, and (2) what role does prosodic-phonetic packaging play in this? We will show that pivot constructions not only exhibit various degrees of prosodic-phonetic (non-)integration, i.e., differently strong cesuras, but that they can be ordered on a continuum, and that this cline maps onto the relationship of the actions accomplished by the components of the pivot construction. While tighter prosodic-phonetic integration, i.e., weak(er) cesuring, co-occurs with post-pivot actions whose relationship to that of the pre-pivot tends to be rather retrospective in character, looser prosodic-phonetic integration, i.e., strong(er) cesuring, is associated with a more prospective orientation of the post-pivot’s action. These observations also raise more general questions with regard to the analysis of action.
Highlights
Introduction and backgroundExamination of language use in naturally occurring spoken interaction inspires a range of inquiries
(1) how varied pivot construction candidates in English talk-in-interaction are with respect to prosodicphonetic packaging, i.e., their cesuring strength; (2) that this variability seems to map in an orderly fashion onto the action dimension in the relationship between the components of the pivot construction, with tighter prosodic-phonetic integration, i.e., weak(er) cesuras, being associated with post-pivot actions that are more retrospective or “backward-looking” vis-à-vis the action of the pre-pivot, and weaker prosodic-phonetic integration, i.e., strong(er) cesuras, being associated with more prospective or “forward-looking” postpivot actions; and
In contrast to the cases discussed in the previous section, in which there were only weaker cesuras in the target utterance, the cases we present exhibit a range of prominent prosodic-phonetic parameter changes at specific syntactic junctures of the pivot construction candidate – i.e., they contain strong(er) cesuras
Summary
Examination of language use in naturally occurring spoken interaction inspires a range of inquiries. “hybrid turns” in Walker 2007, 2235; “perspective shifts” in Norén 2013) This diversity of observations in terms of what such turns are used to accomplish in talk calls for further work on aspects of the action(s) delivered by pivot construction candidates, in addition to, and in conjunction with, close examination of the prosodic-phonetic and syntactic delivery of such utterances. This radical shift in perspective allows us to consider different kinds of “boundaries” of smaller or larger units, but all sorts of “breaks” in the flow of talk, regardless of whether they are created by smaller or larger (clusters of) changes in prosodic-phonetic parameters In this way we can systematically include weak(er) boundaries – or rather “cesuras” to use the terminology of this special issue (see Barth-Weingarten and Ogden this volume) – into our investigation. Incorporating this concept into our examination of pivots will allow us to show:
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
