Transitional regularities for ‘casual’ “Okay” usages

Beach, Wayne A.

doi:10.1016/0378-2166(93)90092-4

Cited by 483 publications

(193 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

184

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Her sigh, as already indicated, brings her talk to completion after its having not been taken up. Okay does similar work: It is regularly used to accept some prior action and display preparedness for what that acceptance implicates (see examples in the next section) (Beach, 1993). Finally, the postcompletion laughter resembles "troubles-resistant" laughter (Jefferson, 1984, p. 346), which exhibits her ability to take the troubles lightly.…”

Section: Postcompletion Sighsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Such "stand-alone" sighs recurrently function to receipt information or acknowledge some (recently changed) state. In this respect, they resemble receipts like okay, oh, yeah, and mm hm (Beach, 1993;Heritage, 1984;Jefferson, 1985b). One critical difference with sighing, however, is its indexical relationship with emotionspecifically, negative emotion of weak intensity.…”

Section: Stand-alone Sighsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sighing in Interaction: Somatic, Semiotic, and Social

Hoey

2014

Research on Language and Social Interaction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Postcompletion Sighsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Stand-alone Sighsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sighing in Interaction: Somatic, Semiotic, and Social

Hoey

2014

Research on Language and Social Interaction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…[34] on how repeated turn designs close sequences). Her "Okay" (line 16) is backward looking, acknowledging the previous information-giving sequence [35][36]). Her subsequent appreciation in line 16, "thank you for your help," projects the call closing.…”

Section: ----Table One----mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is clear that in response to the nurse's closing implicative summary in lines 4 and 6 that the caller's ironic formulation of the upshot [35] of the nurse's advice, "I musn't do anything n:ow I got to sit here and look pretty have I:" (lines 3 and 5), is less than happy with the nurse's recommendations. When the nurse subsequently moves closer towards closing the call with her enquiring "O:ka::y" (line 13), the caller seems in a hurry to get off the line.…”

Section: ----Table Nine----mentioning

confidence: 99%

Closing calls to a cancer helpline: Expressions of caller satisfaction

Woods

Drew

Leydon

2015

Patient Education and Counseling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A c c e p t e d M a n u s c r i p t  We examine 99 calls to the Macmillan cancer helpline using Conversation Analysis.  We focus on endogenous measures of caller satisfaction expressed during the call.  Callers express differing levels of satisfaction in the closing of the call.  Expressions of dissatisfaction cause difficulties in closing the call.  Patterns of communication may benefit organisations in how to manage calls. A c c e p t e d M a n u s c r i p t 3 AbstractObjective: This study provides an alternative approach to assessing caller satisfaction focussing on how callers express their appreciation of the service provided during the call, as the calls draw to a close.Methods: Conversation analysis is used to analyse 99 calls between callers and cancer specialist nurses on a leading cancer helpline in the UK.Results: Caller satisfaction is expressed through upgraded forms of the appreciations through which callers begin to close the call. Dissatisfaction is conveyed in what are by comparison with expressions of satisfaction, downgraded forms which acknowledge but do not fully or enthusiastically appreciate the information/advice given. With latter calls, nurses begin to 're-open' aspects of information/advice giving, thereby leading to more protracted call closings.Conclusions: Endogenous indicators of caller satisfaction are displayed through callers' upgraded appreciations in the closing moments of helpline calls. Difficulties in terminating calls (protracted by nurses re-opening information-giving etc.) arise when callers do not convey their satisfaction with the service provided.Practice implications: An understanding of endogenous indicators of satisfaction may benefit helpline organisations and further their understanding of effective call-handling, particularly through identifying the features common to those calls in which callers do not display their satisfaction with the call.

show abstract

“…(Scheglo¤ et al 1996: 40) Research by conversation analysts focusing on the verbal modality has shown that lexical selection is shaped by features of the interactional context (e.g., Sacks and Scheglo¤ 1979;Scheglo¤ 1972;Scheglo¤ 2000b) and that particular lexical items are often used as resources for accomplishing particular interactional tasks. For instance, in particular sequential environments, 'okay' is an interactional practice for initiating sequence closure (Beach 1993;Scheglo¤, in press); turn-initial 'well' can foreshadow impending disagreement (Pomerantz 1984); and freestanding 'oh' typically registers a change-of-state in the speaker from not-knowing to knowing (Heritage 1984). 3 Many CA studies have focused not on particular lexical items but on the organization of turns-at-talk and sequences of turns.…”

Section: The Vocal Modalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction: Multimodal interaction

Stivers¹,

Sidnell²

2005

Semiotica

354

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

That human social interaction involves the intertwined cooperation of di¤erent modalities is uncontroversial. Researchers in several allied fields have, however, only recently begun to document the precise ways in which talk, gesture, gaze, and aspects of the material surround are brought together to form coherent courses of action. 1 The papers in this volume are attempts to develop this line of inquiry. Although the authors draw on a range of analytic, theoretical, and methodological traditions (conversation analysis, ethnography, distributed cognition, and workplace studies), all are concerned to explore and illuminate the inherently multimodal character of social interaction. Recent studies, including those collected in this volume, suggest that di¤erent modalities work together not only to elaborate the semantic content of talk but also to constitute coherent courses of action. In this introduction we present evidence for this position. We begin by reviewing some select literature focusing primarily on communicative functions and interactive organizations of specific modalities before turning to consider the integration of distinct modalities in interaction. Semiotic modalitiesAs conversation analysts, we begin by observing that social interaction is most 'at home' in face-to-face interaction. This is as Scheglo¤ (2000a: 1) puts it a 'species-distinctive embodiment of the primordial site of sociality.' Levinson notes along similar lines that . . . conversation is clearly the prototypical kind of language usage, the form in which we are all first exposed to language -the matrix for language acquisition. Various aspects of pragmatic organization can be shown to be centrally organized around usage in conversation. [For instance, the] unmarked usages of grammatical encodings of temporal, spatial, social discourse parameters are organized Face-to-face interaction is, by definition, multimodal interaction in which participants encounter a steady stream of meaningful facial expressions, gestures, body postures, head movements, words, grammatical constructions, and prosodic contours. In this chapter we follow Enfield (2005) in distinguishing between the vocal/aural and visuospatial modalities. The vocal-aural modality encompasses spoken language including prosody. The visuospatial modality includes gesture, gaze, and body postures. As Enfield notes, these di¤er not only in terms of modality but also with respect to which semiotic ground plays a dominant role in their organization. Vocal-aural signs are prototypically symbolic whereas indexicality and iconicity are more important in the visuospatial modality. 2 We want to point out that by looking at interaction from a multimodal perspective we do not mean to privilege one modality over another (e.g., visuospatial over vocal/aural) but rather to suggest that much can be gained from examining a turn-at-talk for where it is situated vocally (e.g., sequentially, prosodically, syntactically) as well as visuospatially (e.g., body orientation, facial expression, accompa...

show abstract

Transitional regularities for ‘casual’ “Okay” usages

Cited by 483 publications

References 24 publications

Sighing in Interaction: Somatic, Semiotic, and Social

Sighing in Interaction: Somatic, Semiotic, and Social

Closing calls to a cancer helpline: Expressions of caller satisfaction

Introduction: Multimodal interaction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About