Functions of Interruptions: UNCATEGORIZED

Male to Female.
“I would admit my wrongs, but you’re wrong. Rumors, [So you don’t party?]
what about the rumors? Of course, I go party”

Male to Judge.
“And you know I will say this, ‘cause I came down on you [but you know what?
Women--] very hard in this courtroom because I wanted you to take this
seriously.”

“You come home and the only thing on your mind is unlocking her phone and
looking to see who she’s been talking to… [Uh…] she tries to get away by
going downstairs to the bedroom”

Female to Male.
“She says they do that when I’ve been, you know, empty the bank. And then
when if I don’t empty the bank, they’d be blowed up. So, I--[Your honor, if you
could make some--] They always look the same to me.”
“probably three weeks later, or maybe two weeks later, I found an open
condom wrapper in her bathroom-- [Well, just... just because--] But she had
already said that I was the only person she was having sex with…”
Female to Judge.
“Okay, uh give me some examples of him--[So, like uhm…] -- getting away
with a lot. Does that mean getting the extra cookie at night after everybody
else is finished with this snack?”

Speech interruptions are a prevalent feature of conversation, serving

various functions such as signaling disagreement or taking the floor. However,
some interruptions remain unclassified or ambiguous, presenting challenges
for analysis. One primary reason for unclassification is context dependency;
the meaning of an interruption often relies on the relationship between
speakers and the situational dynamics. For example, an interruption may be
humorous in one context but perceived as dismissive in another (Fitzgerald,
2020). Additionally, emotional undertones can obscure classification, as
sarcasm or irony can transform an interruption into something ambiguous,
complicating traditional categorizations (Rosenberg & Tannen, 2018).
Unfinished speech acts, like "Uh, I mean, it's just that—," indicate hesitation or
an unclear intent, making it difficult to assign them a specific function (Muntigl
& Turnbull, 2019).
Rhetorical questions often exemplify unclassified interruptions. These
questions, posed for effect rather than genuine inquiry, can disrupt
conversation flow and convey disbelief or critique without fitting neatly into
established categories. For instance, the sarcastic question, "Oh, you think
that’s a good idea?" illustrates this complexity. Similarly, hesitations or pauses,
such as "Um, well, I just think—," serve to manage conversational turns and
imply that the speaker is processing information (Kendrick & Dore, 2020).
Emotional expressions like "Seriously?" may interrupt without fitting neatly into
agreement or disagreement categories, reflecting frustration or disbelief and
further complicating function analysis.
The existence of unclassified interruptions highlights the need for
adaptable frameworks in conversation analysis. Traditional categories may fall
short in capturing the nuanced dynamics of conversation, especially when
interruptions carry multiple meanings or emotional undertones (Fitzgerald,
2020). Recognizing the multifaceted nature of interruptions can enhance
understanding of interpersonal dynamics and communication subtleties. By
adopting a more flexible analytical approach, researchers can better
understand how interruptions function across various contexts, contributing to
the overall flow of conversation and enriching our appreciation of human
interaction.