180 [Temas A Sebeoe Note 1. Sovaral auditor of this lecture have called my attention toa scene swnore E-T: hides from the chldre'a motner in toyed covets Re the opens the door, he blonds so wel withthe dole that se falls to fotice Rim, Tam told that thi sequences Intended to recall «mrs Pause in Chapin "he Circo, which opened sv 1928, tut which 1 ave fever oes Te sence Seely dence by Hut C19) ‘An a the cop dashes pes The plciple Invalved, in both eases in of course that of Poe's the Purloined Lester References Barthes, Roland. 1578, 5/2. Now York Hil and Wang. Clery Jonathan. 9il, The pursuit of signee Semotice, erature, “deconsructon, hace Nis Carnell University Pres Half, Theodore. 1991. Chaite Chaplin. New York Henry Schuman, Bliseaon, nn. in pros) intertertunity. nu Eatyclopedicdtlonsry ‘of semisties. Edited by Thomas A. Sak otal Bertin Mouton ey Palin,” 1982, The pure and the impure. ‘The New Yorker, une is Koti, Willan, 1982, E:T, The etracterenrial, New Yor. Kristevay lla, "1368. Semitiker Recherches pour une semanalyse. Pari Sele Uacgulis Lyn. 1981. Symbiosis in cel evolutions Lite and its environe tient bathe early earths Son Franciocor WH Freemans Nereis, Desmond. {361,” Tae naked aper “A zoologat's sty of the ‘roman animal New Yorks HeGraw Hi Sebealy Thomas A. 1979. ‘The sign and its masters, Rustins University fof Tevas Press, sebeaky Thomas A. 1981. The play of suserent, Bloomington: indiana Unwveesty rea. Stinary B,.F- 1983. Origins of a behaviorist, Paycholony Today Trade, i of (OM THE PRAGMATIC POETRY" OF PROSE: PARALLELISM, REPETITION, AND CONESIVE STRUCTURE [nV THE TIME COURSE OF DYADIC CONVERSATION. MichsetSuversteln ‘The University of Chleago ‘The nar ple Hla of nuit rte i he Inter Sctonal pragmatics. Regulrities in sich communiation at can be formally dveres might Se termed pragmatic structures mary ingults ave bows setlng fo acount for rom widnlngutic, or fo eaplain Why one should net cc even cannot.” My cscusion is almed at deme Trteing ane such kind of stscture by eoampla, a pocti structare af linguistic fos that develops coherence inthe fealtune work of dyadic comversaton, Such poctles of prose has fundamental Importance I Sellove for claiying some ofthe lees emerging in cebates concerning the Integrity of grammatical form the vaeitles of meaning, snd the ‘omtentunlzation’ of language Wc. Perhape this relevance wil be more ‘iv whan cast Jn terms of curtent linguistic controversy over sel ‘Ryle tontionaiet' an owmaliseaporoaehen For linguistics recent years, the sentence hasbeen the hero forthe orthodox whose functional eh formal autonomy ere to be celebrated tr; Lor tbelovers, the vilan whose grammatical riches, only appa try ae fo be feattibuted to othe phenomonay Assumed to bea tat Siydetended as bel tantamount to the autonomy of ngutice as 2 ‘eieoce with pretensions to est explanation init own fms, (Note De chocs of Sutssre and of Sloot) Atumed tobe a teli-costsined {Staley of tweocetically relevnestacture the Lorna integrity of te fentence in consistent strctural terms is seen to mark the most algnte fant dividing line of structural hlerarchy of lnclusvenasy and hence of ‘ypes of slentfic accourabiity for lenguage, Assumed to bea yreae= UE Stuctire of unguely determinate for Jess decidable) propon= sol value, the sentence condenses and interreltes humerous fenction= Al speciatinst onthe modeling ln ogi of some hypotbasaed system of india cognition) on Ie structure mirroring in intorabjective rep Fesentatonal forms (for example, In surtace sya and on te depens= a182 | Michael Siverstein nce ot dstinetly verbal communication and hence of linguistics on tng some unifonctlonalmearingtuness Inn sbataet logical asl The seine, then rice te tone phoneme of yore 0 ‘me-at'a wipe Intersection of epetemological, fart ad fue tioal _Ssumptions, "No wonder the frequently heated debates have been > ‘Concerned to attack or to defend ite specication in partici! Here, the problem of linguistic form is spprsaches ins mani Sine= what diferent trom the "ext grammatical, functons Sr sewurse ‘ammatieapoiesof view, az these have boon represented in mn ‘contemporary work.! My detenseaton ere i based on dstingulhingy feat principles of stance grammatical feng postoy ceuelert 3 the transcendent (secons-oedert ments avtonofous ident svc ces tat the modeltitting siategies of arthodoe syntacticins seo To characterize. Let us agree thet, however parill in specifying publi Surface-ttracture forms, these principles line the sentence a0. Hraruatical antsy. These. pelncipey however atinately mina ‘ould determina something of the eeursive structure of enbouniedly complex, logically flevant ideal forms sald to oierie the oncopact ‘creativity of syntax. Ths level snot much in evidence inthe folowing ‘Second, we should identity sutace forms of what we might call sentenen-tcope, ab these Noid in realtime. dseauee, “By the fest ssumpion, these are atleast party instancing or teclzing the pris ples of sntas, and at most parily something ase. ‘Symes the er- lier sense"eimost cecainy cannot spociy everything abavt such se- fence scopes however, what le syntactic in te. stctly. suteromist fcemnistlglcist sense ust be definable on evence iy ¥ Dounds of sentencescopes. Anything larger ae the date Seer Would ‘heeaten te triplet of atimptlons tat divide abstract, Vanscenent, Iemma sentence syntax from actual realtime, immanenty tinction ‘rutipes dsourse. “olbe sure, syntacticlans have now ‘larifieg' tele psitons to mean that most tiely certain realtime, perhaps copnitive-peychlogial et even ‘etorstrategicMunctional” principles operat. wth respect to Droducton/reception of some aspects of the ultimate shapes of ser {ence-scopes as occuring performance units, (The interactions between these and autonomous syntax ate decidedly vague, however) But srct ‘syntacticans do not countenance formal, sbrrset, and ranscencent Principles of the very sare order as syntactic one determining eta: {izes larger than the sentenceescope in Securing dascourse, The problem bf formal orcaring, an hich my demonstration centers, lusats he pain father nce). Pay he. ple oma discourse unfolds in. thne-bouny “near eequensalitys ever snes Sausture's postulate the mater (D91G) 1960:103), the sequeniaty hua been explicitly ‘iterentiated fram the concatenatona! syatsg- maticity of the transcendent domain of grammar. Syagmatic order ements af course, 8 common syntactic principles se even th our ‘oun Englis language relating to Agent-Ptiont relationship Compare also eflis, asm. Wackernagels Law in Indo-European, ind similar Potlnal restrictions on specific classes of syntactic cont tnt, ‘ut such regularities seem fo be based on qualitative peincipes of relative orders They can alvays be formulated with respect te some (On the pragmatic poetry! of prose / 183 Particular Ievel of syntactic/morphologleal censtituency—and hence, to this degre, ae sways rate Jopendent ate=in terns of which an eran postin rather then cra eh, cali instituney-defined scope) rater than glabl (fined on the entire ope), principle canbe formulated. ‘By coast, as fakabsen (1960.39) 5 brilntly and oraculanly teemulated St "poctc fonction Dt language Dragmatieg projects the principle of eculvalonce fom the as of slee= fon Inco the aes of combination’ Thr means that fra units aunts St a poste order of language structure, coped for tlt very efiniion Sand Special Kind of meaningiuness~edulvaencs' any of te waranty Including. antoyrnys in te lakcbeonlan Nloem—an the: fect of thet fardinal combinatary portions within the sequential order of actualy linear dicouree The fundamental poste pinelpey they sequent esate a ing fer of whch te Une spa ct be ard ‘nthe most highly developed paetey-to be ditingishd, of cours, from poetic principles as these apoly to language 9 general Oskobsot 360379} aestete form. generally const of sully overac, hance both ejclic ane hierarchy generating, measunements (rogue At several clffornt structure planes of propostanal linguistic form nultsneousy, eg, severe! phonologesl mecsurcr concurrent wh inorphasyntactic ad lexical ones Howaver, meter, in the senge of the Basie fact af poetic ganization, sana not rest on epecidicaly ponae logical measure; Father, anytng in ingitie form con serve ae the tis tor poetic pragmatic structre, such form being defined. with Faspect tothe metric prineipes) the data here, for example, trate Sich poetic structure Inthe referential -an-predicatonal’sentenee= ‘ope forms ofa developing dyadic cowersation To foliow the demonstration, ope must understand a few pencipes and concepts frm our heritage’ of semiotic functionals. lst 1 wil So sing sme reasonably uncontroversat propoals about English surface {fammateai constituency within the senkence-ecope, with ho ultimate alm lmpied about thet redulbity/astonomy ae eentence-prammat- eal” Second, T wil be using the concept of parallelism, FWolving & ‘meaaured repetition that serves at the metereé tame for postal {alabllty” Ths very elementary pe of patie srcture (ee Jakcbeon See; Brier 1376; For 1977) canbe developed tn a purely sauental fashion, continued” or not whenever a sighiant wat fowdary is feached, tad hence nicely merges the notions of local nd gebal meas Uemant. eis periect asa form developed through strategie contngen- Thue willmake reference tothe theme/tneme status of ngutc tits Gee’ Fras 1968; Danel 1970). ‘These can be identified © the Inetesframed variable portions of sentence-scape within the poetic Structure.” Hence, these are relative to Engah surface structure Ine Elofing.sceslevel phenomena, within. te sentenes-scpe stretch of Since "ie ine of thse few tools gives ut te ability to understand several tspects of how this conversation Is Integrated abs developmental srue- {ate in ne, an inercalbjective, pbliy negotiates creation in which Fee srealscun las © canal oe both in cosinor ext alviay and Hasan T976l-30) and in what have been termed speach Aes Gearle 1969) and lleutionary/periocutionsry eects (Rustin194 / Michae Sverstein 9601272). the muta ean coccrences of forme ‘of occurrence of any sign—induced by the way forms have positions in Shaded wetted pte ration eas th ot of ‘Spies, denotan tat, once trofuced, can be rmuntained as tre Telerets with provfor or even zero explet ngulstie forms: ‘The Purl anf repetitions of the moterial at teraine in poete Suescecontubute the, determining stoctre, dependent of ay Syntactic pralam of ecoverablity'-or recaattation of grammatical Sha refecential Identiyof empty, absent, of celeted laments of ‘Noundivesentence-soopen, is an arlact of the. grammarleveper- ene onthe wy oti oan ceteris ¢ dco sectie Inthe mmterat at follows in fact, fis iteresting to see that 6 ‘convertationtoves forward nie linea? time frame, cian romenta- Siysnbigucos pro-nite and “elotion' are resolved by implication 3s part of the convergtionl work ich Tater thant the pnt at which They fest occurs But that i a8 we would expect, since the sentence ‘ope fragments dat oocur in paralelistc structures, develop certain {famti tment by ees tat fave lear erring relates Coyversation mover through a specification of fe ungue and topial [Geet Zonen to onong atone se ceil st of pone {fle atthe moment of anbiguty, in dw course the specification being the exploit tematic ave fara thematic form that serves as comment ‘This nest propresion of syntactic poetics played cut in tine achieves the serolance Of what some. would recanstuct as “indirect ‘Speech acts Searle 1979). Rarely in hi conversation, ab inthe rest af {Er pric ote of oral ceases yen: fie an ep fnctapragintic formula of canonical performative” shape, ot even of Fecopasbly conventional sort Wnat we fing eather i that the Poctcalysutaliahed sequence of thematilehemaee elements set Wa Epnamieyenlogleal gens logia of concepts nrealtimes The plying ‘ut of hig qustslogs is deterentaliyconerauted toby the we partic fans snd shows differential cohesen within vs. cross interlocutory From soc api, emergent treme essary am te Pope Siiona interpretations of sentences implies by sentence-scopes ‘awe canans of so-called inplleatore, can any interpretability of speech eEShoves lor any equivalent actor-centered recontuton of intents a { puychologealpilosopy) proceed onan empirical basis ere we i few shrach sentence amar aba inane, te than transcendent, cognitive payenalgical mechanisms ister rental stucture™ay some are unfortnetely wont f a9, ve woul onutitute the problem of tacourse coberence ih farms ofthe testy Setween the hererchical organisation of information, ab revealed it ‘Bret Sucre, andthe apparene ner of reakine band ros ‘Biihelreceptve eacours paforeance, But there i no dect tens ‘ot this sort, For to make this leap isto forget the tiple "Gecontet hllsatioy that sentencteryntax conaute visd-ns public ngusts ‘Sita: For example, te hirorehieal thnking’ of eonenptua) informs {ions whatever Its cognitive reality, Le aot mero reflected In hi Es (nthe pragmatic poetry” of prose / 185 chica forms, such 26 super-subordnate sytactlc structures of sur= Hier sencence'ecopess which are atm completely differnt oder of Dhenomenay regardless 9f the fat that the stperarsinate snd siborsie ate portions of sentence-scopes cur in certasn language poticular ‘cdecing reltionships, Poste pragmatic, I would Imaltay mediates feiierently linear, yet abstract and Soral. Along this poetic aiven= straints may be Sertbeoming. ‘Tet'me lilsirate ths In an example. The data I decuss come from te set of dyadic conversations Induced, vieotaped transcribed, com Duerstored; and in aoverel raapects analvted ty eolengue Stary Dinean apd his essociates at The University of Chicago, as materal fot ules of sonverbal interporspeal tur-takingbehaviee Gee Duncan an Fide 197 Tr ocamentatond, tion” Ihave eeganized the contebtions of the twa sobjecty abled A And, nto two pealel colvn, Ihave laboed the explicit queetions {G) st responer (8) in gaits with @ numerical script inex of he Dosition Within the total carvcsatinal seqince of each respecte ‘Beaker. “Thus Qua labels a sch explicit guration form i the Wat 22nbed conversa. “The tempers Sensi i represented from left fprfight ov every line of teanecript and vectcaly down the tanseript, {oc sequential sterances. Evary fine eopeesets talk no cari han the lie shove it. When thar ls an overlap in the conversation, this & Indicated by putting braces eo Ties hgh around the overlapping ments matecial appearing onthe cesling upper line cto ertine rats [mitancous with that on th lower lie ofthe next occ ing brace Eegording fo te fompurel dineaten Gowention: Thuy in Oy gaan, {kbaged DOdrncd aus spstenby 8 smultnecus with oversidig fpoken by A. give'a section number, nthe lefe-hand hari t0 each Boldt QR schucnce, to euch aioe ponte structure. ¢ bot, Floss susolated material.” Speech iz continous, and silences in the Fange of ca. 20-30 me sr indicated with an em-dsahfong pauses ae Tingistlcateral a indicated n'a cloetto-standard English ortho- Indicating only unsual stess apd inlanatan-heightchorace 2 ferstis, Le. tose cstinctive in degre andfoe placement given surface | syntan. "Since participants refer to each ater ath the pesos Seietics aaiect Bye abject A. Unambiguousyrestorable materia in afew cases, acces sary for ihe wanscript Lh English ertography to make sensey this & B indcated'in squnre Brackets." Alas inceatey by By is material thay relive. to the paralclisic. structure of sentence-scopes, would be Feconstitited ab rising consfuerts) by a sentencesyreactic view of Sentenco-tcope. completeness Finally, according, tthe methoa of EIater ee realtime) fashion, 1 have used outine-stye indentation to ‘aris margins to highlight nits ef equvalane relative status In he footie structures that velop,ey (onthe pragmatic poetry" of prose / 187 Ll. + 196 / Michael Sversten188 Michac Sverstein pee em igi A oy nea eth 1, lah i fy 1am ‘on the pragmatic poetry" of prose /189 The two paticlpants in this excerpt are males in theit 29s rot before sccunnted; they Mave boon aoe to sit facing each other 10 cone ere. Subject Ais graduate student in te Law School 8 in he SShooi ot Social Service “Agmiistraton. Their conversation moves frouph Several phase tom {) mutual introduction to Gi) seller ‘lous motual excuses, through (i) tying to fi tal topes of ae ours. in searching for tops, A and 8 tart with taal peor 2e- ‘Tualtancesy it tune out hat ‘each had previously participated bn a dinar conversational jad with a feale udent sown to the other Geclative participant gender war a variable inthe study Their roarch {nies in questisa (@) and respanse 2) sequences about par c= fenty and future eaperences, We eter during the fest of there when A ab been asking about where’8 came Srom tefoe, ke, before coming {odute schol at The University Chicagon Up to she pot at which ‘reenter, i has bean exclusively A's role nthe interaction tows expl> {question Bs role fo respond t tere ‘At the polnt we enter, it appears tht A had just been trying to find cut at what schol 8 had been, but had gotten instead «respon about ‘here 8 had tved, (Upto this pointy the ambiguity ofthe form Chicage ‘ening both pace and instution hag alow this room for mane ering) Bi invodscing his pris rerience, lows, prompted sever Slences of Trivial Pursuit ebout the tate, its tons and cites geo: [Psphical lel lat retered to by B with the povform tere a indlsted fp the transcrip, A then Baglns anew to clarly Bs origin in to sense of sabhing iSchool i mang he convertion seam ins Sreeaus war, Fin (lA brings the conversations informational strecture back to the pain cank of gestlno-responses instanced ome tra back (Ar Whee | Bpetcome fon bee? 8 ied nova A poses Seah goes the comaranton Cabell), How 3 fou tee Geese compared ©27 whlch ia cowenindled convecaninal {blowin conpite with Srewed hate the inerfocutor had ved belore, Hace, the dletie here nd 35 compared withthe place foway She dettic there dh Tote that As guesion lacks com” pletely ny syntctica cody ta which i= | Ware tly recover om the thane Satur a aye Fresading decourse, Trmediatly, nidwout any pause to ive B the turn to respond, A focises on the tew-lecational reading of Calcago vse Lowa (© thats). __ Fens withthe reed ome tf Acca rae | aston about peor sductton in the secmang guise of Sartying * ‘heme ie Chicos compared¢9 with parcel theme Sf ah alnost | pce tre ie ene id tu) sig 0 tehy faking focal the recoverable tpi state fan anbiguoar-and thie pepe paitelyindvect—yesfo a sthrlorsrcture! Qqy Did eu, | oi heal théce dra? Noe tet the wtterance idexicallySesupposed ‘Gat Bvent io SCAT someuhare at asked. The sateria that ght ‘onplate the dsjuetion Introduced by Soy of egursey etal unite _ Pate te esting he geno i bl tough eving s ‘he pore response tht 8 had ved in owa for some other ewe “fn. Responds now tthe pole Sefocred tae hance, fr ple “190 / Wiehaet Sverstein canverstion mote compulsive) specificity of the peda a tscost sonics emati, confirmatory krny belong he rsand Satan at Uinpan tel Abinctingsytactclly fate steal id go find tat Be iterance ge siete fhe wecie Sache coer Fin ta ego Blanton rece mpc umes, [iiccase Sth snl ete eg eatve tothe peciceer ‘ieee sould aso cbse that the fore, went toate thee {herein poral fo Bearer ronan he sue tor ‘ane! Ip ved ows, formally contaning gto schaal wir ee ad tpecltfng ett” inte stance the arn ase he te pete iRterpresetiey ftom tw longstanding thenatc sah of Lal at iad oA in isa aang tai Pi ‘ce an ealae part of he conversa “te paricgunts have bet tor efinng reference te Lowa with sp Trav th Ini sce oe Unelle m EBs nora of CHa 0 fa) w now ts be eaeuled srs wap plc conrst a remission. Speaker Bcatincs hi epee, Fitrodseing Chage var loa as tus Geograhes! tin Oral arotve orion Sto entrely parle Senne, went tees fife Asa," Goverve that Bs new Information ie inthe tontan 9 cce= Ere dhe be us suo rene In remote orto Item, tnd he vonasctoal wont send of i ayo i eet ows utterance, This followed by some space-filling suse frre ge) during when 'Aeeses ne copatcn of te uence at {Gee a then 8 continues: He gives 3 summary sateen fat ssulbtins& time teqeney so I ate ack Lind Wish roel Stress peak on the thematic agony te Verb came bak terrace anit cater wins meitorg parnihetea aah ini ay, the deduced concen i ighghety ina way tak froze is dime Defy id of woul nt oy excpt wth xtra hey [erat an the prebl vib ett bak Given se porpctval ets ok ‘Be vet one Ean ofcourse co Bk ny hee fn exanshe ‘hicago“ Som proceed an ale tare". araablahe, wae 6 Sexintooat hs coming tack re ec connote tog abou going to schol spite Ieee Ot Aarts rege. ing B's utterances with Oh, uth a then Continuing to prsie fs ne a questoning shut prise Scat, iBT hh qustion-anc-response sequence, A uses a form tae aga paral! to te utterances in yt, snr rd ‘Shing fora, confirmation of = paint Gestion abst the ine sequice of St heve-anc-thereaniere edition tat @ fas stot the The operative prelate, ih parle! wterances, for most Of Be | iterations bee'gg to schol ard continues fo ute Ty Sh to pny i unracat nelo bepare witha tit cation hereof te segue ented by Ray. Toe uterance a 9 wEit to undergraduate here & has form parilel both to Ale previous » ‘Reston an fo Bs respons tenets the repeated noun slo od 7 doe meray is woot rdlerunergragitetns tar teste foes of as guetoning ll slongand ust ial stsed pate he wall ematic ontny Yor having ge 1 undergicate cha Mere, toa ti Chicago, one way of ertadig coting bac 50 tte tat thre sa certain inplcative continlty of tis COMO (On the pragmatic poetry’ of prose / 191 ‘uestio, following asi des ypon the came back rheme But is fem Is Jess in utterances that establish the specific hare and here reference ‘The next uterance, Bs, labeled Raggy i et once a perfect structural reply to the question Sd te continton/conclanon to Bs ary inter= ‘hoted ayntoctc unt in (). In Chicago fe uh Loyola specifies two ‘ings and. at last defintely dsarbigustes thereby. cational nd institutional referents Fist It species with a Chicago that Chicane nee row tee tiely tbe ake In te geogrphica-boxne fence, Keeping with the Sequence of heres ane thers fur developed: Sond it contrs that ging to Cadergraduote) achel hete can Isnger'be taken to'be Coteagsy The University of (hich Would Be at hicsze). Third, it specities the lng sough after information, stoke ‘he contrative cw! dlsambiguating sess~uh~note the pregnant bests: ‘Heo Loyolae (Ae we shall ea shrouprout tho rest of thle porion of the Interaction ar indosdeyend’it to the conclusion the wdeotape, 8 demonstrates considerable tension about ths datum.) So this phase Is properly a syntactic conclusion either to the recoverable i,went 19 ‘Guergraduate school. or to the eave, interrupted 1, wat. Glen te tight parslelsms determining the sequancas of syntactic forma tie Inveleven for ls to try to deci termine fone ore other may ave ben Seondesy the seeming structural ambiguity of ohesion=or the Indeed, ater 8 Teqsters the response to this with the awenting Oth 96y yeah of192 / Michoet Suiverstein secon, A. beyins to formulate another conmety and heats Perecre ine emer uel ern ‘ont tee be wail iB pase ost hag Se SEs Ine cs Ni) elle hah eas Se Ser ln at Sea fl tly Si to Etta an clear wih Sj a corgox od a SILA having fasion 8 offers his rext question, Og Bia sinh 3 wher he syne coplten nth Cera kh es at SARERE tpl i eal econ toy ot Sr ot wars bak uy fines sceelinderraiate shalt Geotey bow ahs Hie Geshe heen Wadlgionaceloe A anse tre pea enrol conpinuae ly ih ternng “eid iemati ecb of he pica smurf er a ner ae i'Witrekvn 9 the starts Gece wl aaeRiee nae thiga ste determin ‘eace a, tees ‘core’ cancisin tos qestin Qua se nypretel fear top Dogue Hat or hee ee SE Sloe tn pr Sree: an WS a Sorin anwar fs anton A apcsn Rar alleaely we tavng ua Se gas ett Nees a aE tran hr hegan St ntraod I We cal as WEN 8 Sed rea er fe ania” hs imrsies in mouth eat feet ep na btein dre yn a yb She amano he Utes of Chica ane ere “wee quinn Usa a yeas teh ane. UE Sa novel os at in eibmatc atecsnoe ie pres oe pated Pasa x's wm cre utn Gy et nie ou sal Trruips rae fe fae pe 8h "No eer coe ‘ee gma i aS ny ore el se Sigg TO shhh 8 ceptrs tihng th lst syle a8 continue. ‘cde 8 rt spot i te ope fs Sages ener what he sem werwecT sae ten sain wibead "Lets ere seu Ridetuts uit comeciver yh of” Ale on noel fine coma wit urs weg ata anos Intnl iran’ no season beth pital sleet ed tn ac ln, "ae enya lent “hen coves parental The sactu ofthis preheal inert nee fg rate ns ied pry indy someting of te cone yee motel wre SERS spe Acro ee Caled pena ea re ‘rpc prt Ser ni terse ol na ave pect srs yt Say oa ey pus sy A bei tie Sacre osc tlh ony When 9p od hich fern ath ths tell tore ena patter of ahura Sntece ee ters nis ‘Attr BY inercalated cegistration of (nthe pragmatic pct! of pose / 193 dss 4 tr, Vy A reps the seus contour by redlng te Micha padi uty Lee ne A ne sence TINT Reblhogehc, de’ chet me teed gent personkl experience, 1, dan't know, fy sorta enjoyed It, Ij must say. The Teen ee cleat ates wea goa DES AS ee ong Be ese i ig tat iicags. "ORES han ou of coment the se Ieesop Cul pos ice te al form Pato ee EL See ee PS, Oy coetttoncs cel hin on te Wale ie nt ay fiw ake he abject af nelson Ww be lee ho Sp ay Tiss Se wal a he overall strctre ofthe soginnce of pout ans, ngs te crete Unis ane aves ea th fat h? Geatvcesy Sy wih ps ene shn andy ch eet Seikaptotbany bece salciny Bonini poten wtp geek SDDS reba we dlc tame heeriauby valie Bas afte cals lcs is tb ot snl tay diferent n Siikohs tha diteres eb sith tn ne reer Sie foe ten age seme mt coy ae ince een ay aT teal the Re aa ee cide Se R coats es development with a contrasive 8, com atthe aot ato aga tak Se nee es Sees tug cay iat bear Danone shad | gare ‘know, he continues, using a unit we can term ap to emphasize its poetic Bake Sma coral he eden ee tte pale Bee reed ha is eet wage nc tnt we cannae np potion SL Recothcoale tense es on shea eloater we Sang (i ras ata, ere nie te oe Su Fealy sibs Conthods hr uita wit recon ubebp. Ts unt fas the barge earner ehh he elton af the Sve IOUT Gor poms Soe ES aT he eae sec EESut the past shore an op about he presee erg, dy having he ig oval ally GS Crukcee mje hoes ole Seay BinG Si Gatti af ty. he Sen keer ois Ses hn escnes th sane ultinatel) dy Contrasts wid dy thee pets of Ful ia Mac wer. od aay fal deen we taroversintty-witice dilator SG) cnteante pone og pl Fe eeDAgttEe' the crigns resage of extra h Be aN MEP erty of Chega a shat lines Gatgedon Cine t nts ep cute Sistas at" have yee or posts wa tne poe tar at Ets ead bog semen (6) allow coon te it af segs A lene it tt TOL by-cy-dy-e, Iisa foned clause beginning190 / Michaet Sverstein phere al ow © puts dig the trance of strvheiny Seater a fo SBE RING Wl seni uc of te frm ocr hee Be cena meget tocar te fm sy sh Me SReE nea Tete uate He Tithe pore @ cee fue a net a Gee a echt eogureeeh as, a Seine hada Sis Das cies ek od aces Se, atacand Semi eee pel MEET waht eee See ny, azarlegs ett aso cht IIT oe car tate a aos ihe akc tena ee seme te 71, ep a comnemary en he portion of Aun (9) a a are et oe ye en ta Me Mt nr ae la ne oe Se cata a, cee ta cam SESS Sr aes et eae gee ee, Sie nd Soe aR oy teh me Saree a Ale ee oe Bicbalte tel Soca wie? etmoeg ad Se ae ea peg ane a ayo So eee Sara deem we en a Racine a oP ties AE OS cate ace pec on a Ac ret Se Sige Rae Ranh ta a yn snes ae TCTRA 9 bei, oveiapng wth As st sexes amore cde tet, ean th met a cree Seana Aco a ale ad rae es Eee pt tee eo Re neaee pat SEE re cece tone ener a pees rt onl cr Nal agate hs Sees Ree Ny Se” agra en cee eet Sr A cua fe te, {Sate rel, SAN, Wei acta aval fe lds cr tae ih el te Eeaclen na aha angie sh mee hey irae hess nellare ot eae” n See ee era acto | vale Hone; tom nbs Sin me NEEL ae i Seating math mana Net eee Soo Tyree dem cterennt enn Ste Sah Ms gaara cme : ar tine Perit naka a th wn nd oud Sta coat ety oer a Be a aa a tend imes conbecemes crn oe teed ee Iam edit eres be mee AES aE eee ’ (On the pragmatic poetry of prose /195 A ths peo 8 derponrtates an intresting any, gl it ah Wek the clritving frame Iya cy strucirally equivalent here © Ihink of 2B contnone ts Clarify Te time lnerval separating Sen a fat with chother persenl statement constituting Hs hen experience of Fiving caught the sail end of te od sal He says Cause fia ndergraeate were ly fnahed that ha four vara aby “chro ‘wih we Se tat tls al short of te ticval at B hac hist et up tnare forthe proces of ‘change’, and thore e's long pera Computational pawse--aga fg vonreg5-the numbers now Gelng pers “gO euace i then followed by Rl iy prll othe send Se ta ae, Se ik rae SMe cat Tyne Tatra be auhere wenens nee Pec a gS ae ee ee ae ee GTS MSs he ede Bons ase eats Ik tinea Dt beste arene BG mac era Se TS ce ore rect hs fat Sa geet bana a ne Sea Merman ete. Nie Sebel Lee ater, war out he men, with a Nett Bt sic or ea Soule 'os fi Rota cemms wrxBdtet gieeycree Bete Chinato Book aera See” pete {Bhan the." Afver a long paden Wadd® s parentietcal to inuece Fee Sic eke Cara gs aon memacaed a Sa ices ance peta wits Bee naeemeye Pa re edged Freee ota SS es nee Tinian 8 coca wipe pall seed cone tion seat nuns er dase eer ec Se ae one ee gee aaa apa EL RUS at hd eas tao aici ete Saas ae, oh Settee een af ha Seren Steet tut emanias mateo te ot Soe peenircatin cae thea ee Bima aapeci ating is eat koe BE Ss SES ar in ee seiko deci birt foe dante te eo {Bererandtpe,m plntd contrast to the lajic meray of As Cooge- te ele Fee pe ale dna, ty tre ius eg at ot Sew Cade sk (eae I te’ fae rom inca acu SE In introducllg furthee discourse, it Is receny equivalent o the varius Ene whan, ohn sapien 2a te 4 Suet petty ie rans ah oe tte an at OS eee Te oaratee teat coe Pee Ma tact bake hs tect aa eee oe apes Hn be toy netteletie toe era og Palette ular estas seat ti Henin ane of thw fa once ies ps Pr a 3 ae i, sro smms {utes ee196 / Miche Sverstein terms of atitection, contri fr us the undering tendon sur ‘Sang SeSigrioh topes ve Cegeown ened Tn Oy ten, A oon a very tht strstr of y-y-c-4 ageptety in Oy 8 rapanie thon thal ape aabeber ots Baap plactreisarcreetlty tm atone Yalta Sntgley where i Lavi ot dls he Bans art Shitden?conpuratee Seats Gee Te af Ae du {Sb and the © rie are theyre, 42 fan potialy ang ‘vous in metric structure. wil ten go on to emphasize the contrasts {oA cy gn infant eaten ° Held rp oc aan he sinriveres oe organizatin Sceversaton we have dacoveredo pectic crgnisiton at as Seemingly edrecuonat, stars etcura apect“once we erie ‘Kcand! aio ts seeming rection tenga "acon? ‘Which we as well asthe interlocutor scem fo understané, The atempor feral or unctora ols tasforutivs accamplhing the srniolc fet tavey lula about It frie sane flan a we Se fore {Stern the freon bout wich ve have nay intlonsy ach Lae errr sles evel! I se ean abel ture, in which we ere participants, but to which we sre not really par~ “Sat er and al uastely iver po Notes [Lam grateful to Jerod Sadock and James MeCawley for comments space Preset of an eae Sat of hippy ta Arty "rs These cecent debates with syntactic formalism have besn uncon incingy hi ot lest partly because they have ot ben paying aeen= tion aimultanesunly to al theo arese of assptions surounding te Invilablity of the sentence-scope beundaty for tue grammar. Fot ample, one of the concerns of work profersing a text grammatical fd similarly global cextcorlanatian to larger-tan-sentence sopes of Fangoage (ts van Dif 1977; Gin 1979) has been to exten the analyse characteristic of sentonce-scape syntax ta stretches higher, a ewe, In's constrocted hierarchy of forms (et. sao earlier taginemic wort. At ‘rthodox syntacticiane have been quick to point out the coherence of putative well-lormednesy ‘of stiches of language ebove’ the sentence fay well sot be formulale in sticty compatable sutonomows, ant Shetract terms.” Rather, such entities asthe topleal perios, the par rash andthe whale text seem to be content unit--from the perspec {lve of relevertalsnd:prediational analysis of language -conlsting of {ats or temporal event sequences macrative scenes sod plots, et. The (n the pragmatic pocty' of prose / 197 ‘elationshlp of these content units to farina sbatract sentence strue- Se ‘chunks of language, is quite problematic (see Morgan and Seliner ‘Similarly incomplete have been attempts at various types of pocho- lial er anmaneatonal resi nesoalgndemarsreig “andlor hearerorlented. human’ information processing, strategies, se nbiguaton requirements, eter The long, nota ligament of teme/rhere, old/new Informationcodingy and topicfemment of the Surface sontonce-sopey a Sunt of disease, with the Subject Predicate ‘suinction ‘of abstract santence structure, i= an inerigung nmarked Station in any languages, To be sure. But, a erthoabe grammarians fave ptnted ou (coe Morgan 19825 Newneye 1989), tleooglenty atare Centered, ene-factor explanations ot these and other language paticlor {rma tet oriveralsatnleal tendencies do 90 fosne woul age ‘anmotin principle) constitute reduction of syntactic categories end Fegulaitles In the normal sense,” We might note, then, corvependence Stgrammor-detecrined portions of surface sentence scopes Wi fae: Hopdetven distinctions, Sothlocalizable, as were, the sume Seg. Irenty But suey Sart need something mare ike mutvaratestaitical Imodels of competing functional reqivementy given structure nthe formal sexy thn alterratives 10 ty the argument goes, Paying por the resicl‘arbirarinesd of much of santence-syntax ae all tuner tMancindependent ee enmatvated rein of structural replaity in ley ‘ages. ‘Sse the house of autonomous formal sentence propostanal grammar ‘the tors of thede debates the recent history of orthocow syntax. On the one hand, portion of sentence-scope facts have beet ceded to [etionalsts and torttheoeticlans, while on the other, ever mere Siptact autonomous prineipls are being formulated thet redetiney In ‘feet, whet is oll caneained in recor inthe orthodox sone. Never= ‘eles ro real theory has been forthcoming f fast how the mapey ef newerecognzed factors ineracy Making ‘his, rutate mutants, a ‘pty 4 Nodarized’sructurat-funcronaiom Ge opposed toa reduc. five one) a one might lage: doubt tae real clarity wil erorge unt ll sides of the discunsion recognize the tl set of mensions of the problem of lslting sentence ‘tan, and becorne move honesty semiotic (Coe Siversteln 1988 fot Bie tropa 3 The computer-generated transcript available to me includes, In dalton to segmental linguistic forms, for ach pariipant, tarsctip™ fion‘of head and hand Kinesis, and paralingustie features sich ao tillsccondsy for synchronization. The data are used with the permission (of Starkey Duncan, to whom am grateful for enesuragement. AT say tht fll sentences arey o con potently be, understond from what then emerge av sentence iragmenty slp 1 fy that so sttuctible off lin’, as It were, by # kind of secondary refletion upan {he oozutring taterlal (wth contextual ces), plus varius dealt198 / Michael Suverstein prescriptions based on hypotheses about the way santence-scopes code fropeitionality: Tis teconetractie procedure gives the usion shat Eetextuaizetion is equivalent to abstraction Gn the syntacican’s ‘noni sent), From this confusion, stances can then be viewed 08 prey corplote forme of ideal theryy while what fom tis Perspective Sppear an sentence-scope fragments are merely contextualized redue~ ihaeDecontentualzatons abstraction ad Iselsaton are not Simple ‘ulvlonty this is aot what ip intended in sentone-aatat, not ey {Hough sistakenlyidentiying them has generated much confsion Inthe Hteratore abou ea speaer/aearers and he ke ae've may add that there seume to be something of an asymmetric and manipulative quality to Ar earsctional syle culminating a thls Fonts Were we iferpreting the interaction, ather than giving & fecal Eialis bevel olly dpon spntacie form in acouraecontty we Would fe this ass gene of One Upmanship. Ay the Law Schoo! student, Mas By ihe lowerstatue Social Services stant, to Teveal hs background sone etl Hs ay well be resporting ian nggresaive mane to the noticeable hesitancy with which bythe mudent 2 the academically Sa rotesslonallylowerraied division of The University of Cheagoy fas Tat avolded as long as patible taking the 'hare-ald-you-come> {Remvbaare! Une of gesting ss dreced 9 schooling, Ata having ‘graduate school was not indeed The University of Chicago (one contin- [rg powebity tor the reference of bare), but Loyola University of Chic Cagee ‘Dat A events first of ony Tat he too, hee gone to a est Sisutution (as an tdergracuntey presumably, else te femal paalelisn xtabished In the Inetuction i & stir, ls mac mor bere has ly sere cometatin sets 8 upfo ahim whh Jesl ‘ren ners hen he reveals hs wader graduate ination. S."Eshpare vine (1970) dleceaon of Wolat (Senega claloglc seeztngs which th ols of Inter respondent av sat Sellen, One of te strategic moves of greeters Ist sift thelr dalogle tole fom the ona to the ather by certain imeresting formulaic repeti= Sony hesitation, and eadjstments. Astin, 2. 1, 96D 1973. How to do things with words, Zed edition “Carrie, Masus, Harvard University Pree ricer, Vitra Re 197h, The ettnogrehic context of some tradition ‘ayn apeech genres. nr Eaplvatana inthe ethnography of spetk- Ing, Gates by Ricard Bauman and Joel Sheree Cambridge: Cam rage University ress. 36888 DaneeFranttak 1970, One Instance of Prague Schoo! methodology TFurcticnal anayse of utterance snd text Ins Method and theory Tingusties. Edlted by Paul bs Garvin nua inglrum,Seeies mater, Uo The Hague-Paret Moutos. 132-5. (nthe pragmatic poetry’ of pose 199 Diy Teun A an. 1977, Text and contents. Explorations the seman ‘es on pragmatics of discourse. Longmans tinguses Library 2 snd Longmans uncin, Suref and Donald Fiske. 1977, Face-to-face Interaction, FFirbas, Jan. 1364, “On defining the theme in functional sentence anal GFanjoudhal- Prague: Eltiona de PAeadémie Tenécoslovague eat Foe, Stes 1817. Roman Zahobion and the comparative stay of ovals: te Romer Sekobomy Ecce of his scholar Ee Si Dena maar and GH: Von Schone Lie Peer ae én Talngs 86. 1979. Discourse and apne Sytax and vomanticn 12" New Yorr Academie ret Haidyy ant A Ry a Roma Hasan, 1976, Cohesion in Ege tnt Engin Language Series, Se Londons Langan levine, Jah Ts TSP Stateie of sean atplaton inthe Wolot ‘rctng. in” Eeporatens tne cinograpty of senna, Edd oy ‘chard euran rd doe Sherer. Canlage Consege University iar Sie i lnguage Naess bt Bese 3 selabren, Romy” 136. Morgan Jefty L,1982, Discourse thery and the independence of ‘ites Garimars ins Gemgstorn Unvorsiy Reuse Tabs oo iinguoges ond Lingitcs 1981 Eales by Desc Tannen: Was: Ing, Ceaegtown Universty Frese, 196m. org Sey rane Manred 8. Sener 1980, Discourse end. oe Ganlc they” int Thereticl eed in reing Somprcheen Exes ty Rand 3 Spi, Bertam Gr Bese, Sod Wibiam Z. Brews, Hilly NS Lawrence riaum Asia 163-20) Newmeyer Frederick "1583." Grammatical gary Iii and ts oben, Cheng Unversity 0 Chicago Prev fie, Ferdinand de. 910) 18, Core de Hngustigu génesle, Sesriem Ry 1962. Speech act, An esay Inthe philosophy of lan ‘guage. Cambcidge: Cambridge University Press. ama Seif Solo Re 1973, Indeect speech cts nv Spench act. ited by eter Cole and Sey Le Morgan Stat and semantic Sr New Suerte, Mahl. 158, Tre foncional satiation of language “ed omogenein tnt Culture, communication ae ogntons Wye fetsanperepecives, “Edited by Sumes Worked” New Yor Gainbrdge University Pres 20737. ‘losing statements Lingustics and poetics, "Baited by Thomas A. Sebeoke Cambria, ‘Grammatical paraielism and ies Russian