The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The construction of units in conversational talk
Abstract
The notion of Turn-Constructional Unit (TCU) in Conversation Analysis has become unclear for many researchers. The underlying problems inherent in the definition of this notion are here identified, and a possible solution is suggested. This amounts to separating more clearly the notions of TCU and Transition Relevance Place (TRP). In this view, the TCU is defined as the smallest interactionally relevant complete linguistic unit, in a given context, that is constructed with syntactic and prosodic resources within their semantic, pragmatic, activity-type-specific, and sequential conversational context. It ends in a TRP unless particular linguistic and interactional resources are used to project and postpone the TRP to the end of a larger multi-unit turn. This suggestion tries to spell out some of the assumptions that the seminal work in CA made in principle, but never formulated explicitly.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974) · Language · doi:10.2307/412243 · Cited by 11,350
Sacks, H. (1995) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781444328301 · Cited by 5,169
Conversational Organization: Interaction Between Speakers and Hearers
Goodwin, C. (1981) · Cited by 2,305
Turn organization: one intersection of grammar and interaction
Schegloff, E. A. (1996) · Interaction and Grammar · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511620874.002 · Cited by 1,615
(1996) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511620874 · Cited by 1,443
JEFFERSON, G. (1978) · Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-623550-0.50016-1 · Cited by 806
The Contextualization of Language
(1992) · Pragmatics & Beyond New Series · doi:10.1075/pbns.22 · Cited by 801
Conversation Analysis: The Study of Talk-in-Interaction
Psathas, G. (1994) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 754
Lerner, G. H. (1996) · Interaction and Grammar · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511620874.005 · Cited by 681
Studies in Interactional Linguistics
(2001) · Studies in Discourse and Grammar · doi:10.1075/sidag.10 · Cited by 574
Cited by
Projection in Interaction and Projection in Grammar
Auer, P. (2005) · Text - Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse · doi:10.1515/text.2005.25.1.7 · Cited by 577
The clause as a locus of grammar and interaction
Thompson, S. A., & Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2005) · Discourse Studies · doi:10.1177/1461445605054403 · Cited by 340
Mondada, L. (2006) · Discourse Studies · doi:10.1177/1461445606059561 · Cited by 317
Contingency and Units in Interaction
Ford, C. E. (2004) · Discourse Studies · doi:10.1177/1461445604039438 · Cited by 289
Listeners use intonational phrase boundaries to project turn ends in spoken interaction
Bögels, S., & Torreira, F. (2015) · Journal of Phonetics · doi:10.1016/j.wocn.2015.04.004 · Cited by 211
Metadata
- Authors
- SELTING, M.
- Venue
- Language in Society
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2000-10
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 477-517
- ISSN
- 0047-4045 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-8013
- OpenAlex
- W2151041760
- Cited by
- 527
- References
- 21
- FWCI
- 14.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The construction of units in conversational talk. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s0047404500004012
- The paper
- SELTING, M. (2000). The construction of units in conversational talk. Language in Society. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0047404500004012
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
