7
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
This chapter provides literature review on relevant theories usedin analysing the problem of interruption found in 12 Angry Men. This chapter also includes the
description of the movie entitled 12 Angry Men, as well as explanation of previous studies which have similar topic. This section also provides conceptual framework
and analytical construct of the research.
A. Literature Review
This section presents several relevant theories to guide the researcher in answering and explaining the formulation of this research. This section also
presents Conversation Analysis and several related fields in a brief description.This chapter particularly discusses interruption in detail.
1. Conversation Analysis
The study of Conversation Analysis CA was first developed by Harvey Sacks and his co-workers, Emanuel Schegloff and Gail Jefferson. Harvey
Sack’s ideas on conversation analysis are mostly recorded at his lectures in the University
of California, Berkeley in the 1960s. One who persistently transcribed almost all of Sack’s ideas is Gail Jefferson during lectures on Fall 1964 – Spring 1965Schegloff,
1992a: ix. Harvey Sack begins to develop Conversation Analysis during his interest on telephone conversation in Suicide Prevention Centre. He studies the
structures of the interaction, the real-time sequential ordering of actions such as the
rules, patterns, and structures in the relations between actions Schegloff, 1992a:
xviii.
The study of Conversation analysis CA is focused on the interaction that people do in everyday life Goodwin, 1990: 289. Itconcerns moreabout human
spoken interaction typically in institutional environment. According to Wooffitt, CA
examines how speakers’ conduct displays a sensitivity to the normative expectations associated with sequential organisations, such as paired action
sequences Wooffitt, 2005:35.CA has the aspects of spoken communication such as Adjacency Pairs, Preference Organization, Backchannels, Repairs, Context and
Turn Taking.
a. Adjacency Pairs
Generally, people could notice that there are pairs of utterance in every conversation. Schegloff and Sacks 1973:73 calls these kinds of paired utterances
as adjacency pairs which is the basic unit to build a sequence in a conversation. Yule 1998: 127 gives much more detail explanation that adjacency pair is a
sequence of conversation between two people where the first speaker gives an initiation to the second speaker to respond.
Liddicoat 2007: 106 says that “some types of talk are designed to initiate
next actions, while other types of talk are designed to complete the action initiated ”.
One type of talk which initiates next actions is called First Pair Part FPP, and another type of talk that follows from such initiation is called Second Pair Part
SPP.For example, a question is basically followed by an answer from the listener, a greeting is followed by another greeting, and a congratulation followed by thanks.
Several types and examples of adjacency pairs are shownbelow. 1 Greeting-greeting
Amy : Hello
Jean : Hi
Liddicoat, 2007: 107 Amy greets Jean by saying “Hello” and Jean answers with a greeting by
saying “Hi”. The second utterance by Jean regards as a respond to the first utterance by Amy. Jean gives an answer as what Amy expected to cooperate in conversation.
An example of question-answer sequence is demonstrated in the following dialogue.
2 Question-answer John
: What time is it? Betty
: Three uh clock. Liddicoat, 2007: 107
In dialogue above, John asks Betty about the current time. Betty gives an answer immediately b
y saying “three uh clock” as a respond to John’s question “what time is it?”. It is to show that Betty gives an exact answer without silence.
The following dialogue exhibit the last example of the last type of adjacency pair. 3 Telling-accept
John : I’ve jus’ finish my las’ exam.
Betty : That’s great.
Liddicoat, 2007: 107 In the example above, the first turn of the pair initiates some actions which
can be seen at the utterance “ I’vejus’ finish my las’ exam” and make the next action
relevant as seen on the utterance “That’s great”. Both utterancesare relevant to each
other.