19 4
Adjacency Pairs
According to Paltridge 2008, adjacency pairs are utterances produced by two successive speakers in a way that the second utterance is identified as related
to the first one as an expected follow-up to that distance. The pairs of utterances normally occur together automatically and help to structure a conversation. There
is a consistent match between format and content found across a number of adjacency pair seconds which is described in the following table:
Table 2.1 Correlation of content and format in adjacency pair sequences First pairs
Second pairs Preferred
Dispreferred Request
Acceptance Refusal
Offerinvite Acceptance Refusal
Assessment Agreement
Disagreement
Question Expected answer Unexpected answer no answer
Blame Denial
Admission Levinson, 1984, p.336
Based on the table, therefore, when a speaker makes a request, as the first part of a whole sequence of conversation, a listener can give two possible response
upon the request. This response is the second part of the sequence in which the listener can give the response either in a preferred structure, which is by accepting
the request or complementing the question with an expected answer. Another responses which in dispreferred structure, which is by refusing the request opt out
maxim, not answering the question, or to answer at inappropriate length, either too short or too excessive length, or to answer the question with another question and
tend to interrupt the smooth flow of a conversation. These pairs can be repeated in
20 the sequence. A pair can also initiated with statements, complaints, greetings,
introductions. The preferred responses for these utterances respectively are: recognition, replies and exchange of greeting. If the rules are ignored, these patterns
are broken by means of flouting which it immediately call forth a response. There
are some ways to provide dispreferred second parts:
Table 2.2 Variety of response tokens Variation
Tokens
Delayhesitate pause; err; em; ah
Preface well; oh
Express doubt I’m not sure; I don’t know
Token acceptance that’s great; I’d love to
Apology I’m sorry; what a pity
Mention obligation I must do X; I’m expected in Y
Appeal for understanding you see; you know Make it non-personal
everybody else; out there Give an account
too much work; no time left Use mitigators
really; mostly; sort of; kind of Hedge the negative
I guess not; not possible
5
Feedback Backchannels
Feedback or backchannels is the way speakers show that they are attending what being said. It indicates that they are understanding, listening, or simply
following the other speakers’ utterances. This can be done by the use of ‘response tokens’ such as ‘mmm’ and ‘yeah’, by paraphrasing what the interlocutor has just
said or through body position and the use of eye contact. Backchannel gestures offer
21 feedback to the speaker that the message is being received, they indicate that the
listener or following and not objecting. 6
Repair Repair is the way the speakers correct things which has been said, and check
what they have understood in a conversation Schegloff, Jefferson, and Sacks, 1977. There are two types of repair:
a Self-repair
5
Charlotte: I saw her with a man yesterday. I mean, I saw her with a middle aged man who looks like her uncle.
b Other-repair
6 Miranda: But you have to introspect yourself
Cintya: Excuse me? Shouldn’t it be you?
b. Grice’s Cooperative Principle
In the field of linguistics, even more specifically in the area of pragmatics, an important concept was introduced: maxims of conversation. It is unwritten rules
that govern people to make an appropriate conversation. The Cooperative Principle were first formulated by Herbert Paul Grice which refers to the assumption of a
basic conversation which is made when the speaker speaks to one another that are trying to cooperate with one another to construct meaningful conversations. As
stated in H.P. Grice’s “Logic and Conversation” 1975: Make your conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage at
which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged p. 45.
In the other words, the speakers try to contribute meaningful, productive utterances to further the conversation. It then follows that, as listeners, interlocutors
22 assume that the conversational partners are doing the same. There will be times
when speakers operate the same conversational norms as the interlocutors deliberately mislead the speakers’ utterances and cause the occurrences of the
mistakes and misunderstandings Thomas, 1995, p. 62. Some reasons why someone might be uncooperative in conversation. Some assume that participants
conceal the interrogated information they do not want to give up. Speakers become uncooperative to person they hate. Another of some cases is the participants are just
being crazy.
1. Types of Maxims
Grice came up with the maxims of conversation. Maxims is kind of a rule of thumb which is general rules the speakers follow in conversation. Those maxims
are: 1.
Maxim of Quality: try to make your contribution one that is true, specifically: 1 do not say what you believe to be false 2 do not say that for which you lack
of adequate evidence. This maxim states that one’s contribution to a conversation should be truthful and that the speaker should have adequate and
sufficient evidence to back up what is being said. For example: Andi’s mom expect a truthful answer from his son, after she noticed Andi’s
bad mark.
7 Mom: Did you study last night?
Andi: I did not study last night.
In linguistic term, the maxim truthfulness refers to the importance of making
only statements we believe to be true. The reason is that if we get caught making false statements we lose our credibility, which is the important social
23 assets a person can hold. In real life, this maxim is often violated in order to
deceive the addressee. In less serious context, it can be violated in obvious manner when the speaker tries to be humorous or teases the addressee. Grice
shows four examples to illustrate how the first maxim of quality is flouted: irony, metaphor, hyperbole Martinich, 1984.
2. Maxim of Quantity: 1 make your contribution as informative as is required for
the current purpose of the exchange 2 do not make your contribution more informative than is required. The meaning of this maxim is that the speaker
should avoid including unnecessary, redundant information in the contribution. For example:
8 Lius: Do you know where Alto is?
Linda: He’s sunbathing in the sandbox.
According to Thomas Ritter, if the speaker rambles on without saying anything new or informative, the addressee will lose interest in the discourse very
quickly and stop paying attention Davies, 2000. In multi-agents conversation process in which the social relationship between participants is, to some extent,
intimate, such as relatives, lovers, good friends, if someone says something other persons do not need and are not interested in, this redundant information
will disturb the path the communication will develop, which is one of the sources of humor production in sitcom.
3. Maxim of Relevance: make your contribution relevant. “In the context of H.P.
Grice’s Cooperative Principle, the demand for relevance simply means that the speaker should only include information in his communication that is relevant
