Abstract
Rejecting Talbot's (1992) account of my work, I also reject the structuralist ‘text reveals structure’ pragmatism Talbot and other ‘conversation analysts’ advocate. Recognition of interruption or of other native categories does not require complaints or palliatives to have been uttered by interlocutors at the time of their occurrence. Post hoc interpretations by participants are not transparent and need to be evaluated critically, but are a valuable resource that analysts should not eschew out of methodological asceticism.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
