Give me a full thought, please.
Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2
Give me a full thought, please.
What do those who comment on sentence construction really mean by "not a full thought"?
What on earth is a "a full thought"?
What on earth is a "a full thought"?
-
- Posts: 162
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:12 pm
In the field of conversation analysis we often talk about the syntactic, prosodic, and pragmatic (possible) completion of a turn-at-talk. Here "pragmatically complete" (which is vaguely similar to a "complete thought") describes a bit of talk that accomplished an action.
In the following invented example (a definitely NO-NO in CA but what the heck it's just an illustration), B's turn might be syntactically and prosodically complete but it hasn't yet performed the sequentially relevant action of "answering a question" and it this sense it is pragmatically incomplete.
A: What time is the party?
B: My friend and I were going to go.
In the following invented example (a definitely NO-NO in CA but what the heck it's just an illustration), B's turn might be syntactically and prosodically complete but it hasn't yet performed the sequentially relevant action of "answering a question" and it this sense it is pragmatically incomplete.
A: What time is the party?
B: My friend and I were going to go.
"A full thought" might be taken to mean the (purported) sentence lacks either a subject or a verb.
For example, "Beach very fun place to go in the summer" to me is a full thought, but if a student wrote it I'd mark it as "needs a verb". In terms of communication, it's understandable, but in terms of grammar it lacks an essential sentence part.
For example, "Beach very fun place to go in the summer" to me is a full thought, but if a student wrote it I'd mark it as "needs a verb". In terms of communication, it's understandable, but in terms of grammar it lacks an essential sentence part.
-
- Posts: 162
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:12 pm
So because it hasn't answered the question it's not a full thought, right?abufletcher wrote:In the field of conversation analysis we often talk about the syntactic, prosodic, and pragmatic (possible) completion of a turn-at-talk. Here "pragmatically complete" (which is vaguely similar to a "complete thought") describes a bit of talk that accomplished an action.
In the following invented example (a definitely NO-NO in CA but what the heck it's just an illustration), B's turn might be syntactically and prosodically complete but it hasn't yet performed the sequentially relevant action of "answering a question" and it this sense it is pragmatically incomplete.
A: What time is the party?
B: My friend and I were going to go.
BTW, where did you study CA?
But is has a got verb.sbourque wrote:"A full thought" might be taken to mean the (purported) sentence lacks either a subject or a verb.
For example, "Beach very fun place to go in the summer" to me is a full thought, but if a student wrote it I'd mark it as "needs a verb". In terms of communication, it's understandable, but in terms of grammar it lacks an essential sentence part.
-
- Posts: 162
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:12 pm
-
- Posts: 162
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:12 pm
Officially my Ph.D. was at the University of York with Paul Drew, Tony Wootton, and John Local. But I also spent my sabbatical at UCLA taking courses with Schegloff and (C.) Goodwin. I was also lucky enough to get into a 6-week CA practicum taught be Schegloff, Lerner, Heritage, and Zimmerman.metal56 wrote:BTW, where did you study CA?
-
- Posts: 162
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:12 pm
That's right. The pragmatic incompletion would likely signal to possible next speakers that the current speaker isn't yet finished with some multiple unit ("TCU") rhetorical project and thus these possible next speakers would likely withhold participation (by not taking a turn) at a point in talk that might otherwise seem to be "transition relevant."metal56 wrote: So because it hasn't answered the question it's not a full thought, right?
Lucky you.abufletcher wrote:Officially my Ph.D. was at the University of York with Paul Drew, Tony Wootton, and John Local. But I also spent my sabbatical at UCLA taking courses with Schegloff and (C.) Goodwin. I was also lucky enough to get into a 6-week CA practicum taught be Schegloff, Lerner, Heritage, and Zimmerman.metal56 wrote:BTW, where did you study CA?
-
- Posts: 162
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:12 pm