Relevance theory and verbal interruptions: Assessing discourse status

Abstract

The Calvin and Hobbes comic strip illustrates that conversations are not contests, although participants may gain and lose discourse status. This paper first examines the nature of interventions, concluding that most of them are not perceived to be interruptive by participants in real-life conversations. In other words, since conversations generally function in cooperative ways, interventions are usually seen to contribute to the interaction. However, the less relevant the intervention is assessed to be in terms of Sperber and Wilson's relevance theory, the more likely the participants will evaluate it as interruptive. According to the discourse status model outlined in the article, the intervener will increase status if the contribution is high on a scale of relevance and will lose discourse status if the intervention is judged to be not so relevant and is therefore perceived to to be interruptive.