Chapter 1

LOCAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

Introduction

Chapter 1, entitled “Local Management System”, offers a brief view over some of

the most important features belonging to the system of turn taking in conversation, which

is vital in such encounters. There is a model proposed for the turn taking organization

and several examples are given in order to support the theoretical findings. The results of

this short examination show that a model for turn-taking in conversation can be

characterized as locally managed, partly-administered, interactionally controlled and

sensitive to recipient design.

The chapter begins with presentation of conversation in general and theoretical

terms, continues with an introduction to turn-taking system and with several short

examples, excerpts taken from different types of conversation. A next step is presenting

the rules that govern the allocation of turns with specific examples for each of them. Turn

allocational techniques and features of repair mechanism are discussed in the second part

of the chapter.

The aim of this chapter is to consider a simplest systematics for the

organization of turn-taking in conversation in which certain rules (discussed later in

the chapter) are applied. Also, the section will show how this organization deals with

obvious and less obvious facts, regarding the structure and importance. In these types of

conversations (meetings, interviews or debates), the size of turns and the ordering of

turns are very well established. This feature clearly specifies that there are used different

types of turn taking and that conversation occupies a central position. Another particular

feature is that turns are valued or avoided and that the distribution of turn taking is made

among parties and regarded as economy. This aspect of economy will influence the

distribution of turns.

Small group conversations have raised questions among investigators of the turn

taking system and have been closely examined. Anthropologists have also shown a

certain interest for this system but they analyzed it so they can observe the stratification

or the legal system and they didn’t see in turn taking a central phenomenon in its own

rights. The reason why turn taking system has been studied is due to sociological

reasons. The concern for the organization of turn taking has the following base: turn

taking has become vital for conversation and it is very clear that, most of the time, one

party talks at a time. Although speakers change, transitions are not previously determined

and the size of the turns is not pre-established; for a conversation to be clear there is one

speaker at a time. These facts are common to most of the conversations, without taking

into consideration the special features which characterize particular contexts. Another

element, important in forming the base of turn taking organization is that the

characterization of turn-taking could be developed and could lead to a context free and

context sensitivity. A conversation is always submitted to several sets of circumstances,

according to the participants but this doesn’t necessarily define that conversation as

particular.

1.1 Turn taking in conversation

Conversation can contain a vast range of situations, interactions, persons or

identities through which operates and is sensitive to and it can also deal with change of

situation within a situation (Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson, 1974:699). In order to do so,

the organization of conversation must have a “formal apparatus” which is context free

and is sensitive and able to show it to various parameters of social reality in a local

context. Conversation must contain a type of organization that is context free and context

sensitive and has been decided that turn-taking has all these requirements, which apply

both to common conversation and particular contexts as well.

Turn taking is generally considered to be a basic form of the organization of

conversation in the way that, regardless of the variations in number of parties or topic, it

maintains its importance and is invariant to all the external changes.

A model of organization should fit facts of variability in order to be context

sensitive and also to accommodate several facts, which are present in most of the

conversation. Common features are that speaker change always occurs, that mainly one

person speaks at a time and, although there might be more than one speaker, these

occurrences are brief. Transition is another characteristic of conversation and can be

made without gaps or overlaps but most of the transitions occur with slight gap or

overlap. The turns are not fixed and neither is the turn size or the length of the

conversation. The subject of the conversation, the distribution of turns or the number of

parties is not pre-established. Talk can be continuous or discontinuous and there are turn-

allocational techniques that are used- the current speaker selects the next speaker or the

next speaker self selects in order to join the conversation. Various turn constructional

unites are used, such as when turns are either one word long or sentential. There are also

repair mechanism used to deal with errors and violations of certain rules, such as turn

taking or gaps. There are empirical features of a conversation and are the most important.

(Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson, 1974:696)

1.2 A Simplest Systematics

The turn taking system for conversation can be described in terms of two

components and several rules. The two components are: the turn constructional

component and the turn allocational one. The first one deals with various unit-types

with which a speaker can construct a turn. Such unit types include sentential, phrasal or

lexical constructions. The second component deals with turn allocational techniques,

which can be grouped in those in which turns are allocated by current speaker and those

in which a next turn is allocated by self selection.

Excerpt 1

1 Sara: Ben, you want som ( ) ?

2. Ben: Well allright I’ll have a,

(( pause))

3 Sara: Bill you want some?

4 Bill: No,

[Schenkein:II:49]

In excerpt 1, the next turn is allocated by the current speaker (the turn is allocated

by Sara who self selects).

Excerpt 2

1 Sy: See Death ‘v’a Salesman las’ night?

2 Jim: No

(( pause))

3 Sy: Never see(h)n it?

4 Jim: No

5 Sy: Ever seen it?

6 Jay: Yes

[Adato:2:9]

In Excerpt 2, Sy, the speaker, selects Ben and Jay as next speakers and his turn

which is self selected. The first turn involves a glance selected recipient while the second

and third one are lexically accomplished due to the use of “never” and “ever”.

Excerpt 3 is a typical example of self selection:

Excerpt 3

1 Jim: Any a’you guys read that story about Walter Mitty?

2 Ken: I did,

3 Roger: Mm hmm

[GTS:5:25]

1.3 Rules governing the allocation of turns

There is also a set of rules which constitutes the basics for turn construction,

dealing with allocations of turn and transfer in order to avoid, as much as possible gap

and overlap. (Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson, 1974: 704)

Rule 1 a is that, in the case of a current speaker selects next speaker situation,

the next speaker is obliged to take the next turn to speak- a privilege that no other party

has this right and obligation. An example of this rule is:

Excerpt 4

1 Ava: He, he’s n Jo were like on the outs, yih know?

(0.7)

2 → Ava: So uh,

3 →Bee: They always are(hh)hhh

[TG:JFr:20]

Rule 1 b is when no current speaker selects next , so that self-selection or the

next speaker may continue its turn until another self selects.

Excerpt 5

1 Claire: So then we were worse o-‘n she an’ she went down four,

(0.5)

2 → Claire: But uhm

(1.5)

3 → Claire: Uh

4 → Chloe: Well then it was her fault Claire,

5 Claire: Yeah she said one no trump, and I said

Two, an’ then she went back t’ two…

[Ladies:2:2:3:14]

Situation b occurs when situation a fails to do so. The second option applies if the

first option hasn’t been implied. Therefore, situation a) exists in accordance to situation

b) but independent of it.

Rule 1 c occurs when the turn-so-far is constructed as not to involve the use of a

current speaker selects next technique, then current speaker may but need not continue,

unless another self-selects. Such an example is excerpt 6.

Excerpt 6

1 Roger: That’s a joke that police force. They gotta hundred cops around the guy

En so(h)me guy walks in and says I’m gonna shoot you and shoots him.

2→ Roger: :hhmhhh heh

3→ Roger: En it’s the president’s assasion y’ know,

(0.9)

4→ Roger: They’re wonder ful

5→ Louise: Hm- Now they’re not even sure

[GTS:1:2:86]

Rule 2 happens when, if at the initial transition-relevance place of an initial turn-

constructional unit, neither 1a nor 1b has operated and following the provision of 1c,

current speaker has continued, then the rule-set a-c re-applies at the next transition-

relevance place and recursively, at each next transition-relevance place, until transfer is

effected. (Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson, 1974: 704)

These rules provide an ordering in a group. If these techniques weren’t ordered

and if there were two rules used at the same time, it will lead to more than one party

speaking at a time. By these means, minimization of gap and overlap is realized in two

ways: one localizes the problem while the other addresses it in its localized forms. These

rules eliminate gap and overlap in almost all the situations. Although the first rule may

occurs and should occur at the beginning of a conversation, the second rule, the

allocational technique, cannot appear until the first possible transition.

Self selection technique is conditioned by the non-use of current selects next.

Therefore, self selection may not be exercised until the first transition relevance place.

Current speaker may continue if self selection is not done. The turn taking rules provide

the localization of gap and overlap and the rest of the turns have a systematic base.

There are some accounts that occur in most of the conversations: speaker change

occurs or recurs- turn taking system makes it possible but not automatic. The possibility

of speaker change system is possible within any single turn construction and for each new

turn. Speaker change is not automatic because at any transition relevance place, the first

two options mentioned above may not appear while the third rule may. As long as this

combination is applied at every transition relevance place, there will be a sequence

without a speaker change.

Another fact is that most of the time, there is only one party speaking. This is

possible due to two features: the system allocates single turns to single speakers and all

turn-transfer evolves around transition-relevance places.

Occurrences of more than one speaker may occur but are brief. One reason why

these occurrences are brief is the fact that the self selector that starts first encourages

other possible self-selectors. This action offers space for overlap, leading to competing

self-selectors who can start simultaneous. (Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson, 1974: 706)

Such an example is:

Excerpt 7

1 Parky: Oo what they call them dogs that pull the sleighs.

(0.5)

2 Parky: S-sledge dogs.

(0.7)

3 Old Man: Oh uh : : uh

4→ Tourist: Uh- Huskies.=

5→ Old Man: Huskies, Mm,

=

6→ Parky: Huskies. Yeh Huskies.

[Labovs: Battersea:A:7]

Another fact that provides a basis for overlap is the possible completion or transition-

relevance places. Variation in the articulation of the projected last part will eventually

produce overlap between the current and the next speaker; such is the case in Excerpt 8:

Excerpt 8

1 A: Well if you knew my argument why did you bother to

2 A: sk.

3 B: Because I’d like to defend my argument.

[Crandall:2-15-68:93]

Transitions are common- either they are made with no gap or overlap or with

slight interruption. The latter forms the majority of transitions. Turns are not fixed and

vary. This is possible due to a combination of another two features in the system: single

turns are allocated at a time and the second feature is the fact that for each such

allocation, there are a series of options provided each of it able to provide for different

next speakers. In this way, the turn taking is locally controlled. The variation of turn is

not, however, random. One condition must be that the current speaker must have

selected, in some way, as next speaker.

In excerpt 9 Roger, Jim and Al are having a conversation. Al’s first entry is not an

effective turn but his second entry is shaped as an addition to other’s turn.

Excerpt 9

1 →Roger: (( To Jim)) Are you just agreeing because you feel you wanna uh

2 →Jim: Hm?

3 →Roger: You just agreeing?

4 →Jim: What the hell’s that.

5 All: It’s- Agree ing?

6 →Roger: Agreeing.

7 →Jim: Agree::n

8 →Roger: Yeah.

9 Al: With us. Just going along with us.

10 →Jim: No.

11 →Roger: Saying ‘yes, yes’ hehheh hh hehhh hh hehheh hh

12 →Jim: Well, i-i-it’s-it’s true. Everything he sai(h)d

[GTS:2:2:70]

The variability of turns depends on two features of the system: the first one is the

availability of different unit-types and the possibility of a current speaker, freely selected.

The second feature accounts for the possibility that any current speaker is able to produce

more than a single instance of a unit-type. This feature proves that the system doesn’t

define a minimal turn size.

Another fact of the turn taking system is that the length of a conversation is not

pre-defined; in the case of closing a conversation, there are other facts, different from the

ones of the turn taking system. One such example would be the fact that the closing of a

conversation is the result of internal developing

Another unfixed feature is the conversation itself: what is being said hasn’t been

pre-established. We don’t include here debates or a ceremony where what is said is

specified in advance or the turns are clearly defined. The turn-taking organization for

conversation doesn’t constrain what is to be said. The rules that exist in the system refer

to turns and not to the content of the conversation. For example, “first turns” takes

greetings; “next turns” might be constrained by “prior turns.” The “current speaker

selects next “technique cannot, however, be used in any utterance. There are several

utterances-types that must be used in order to accomplish a selection. No party is

constrained to use the “current speaker selects next” technique. (Sacks, Schegloff and

Jefferson, 1974: 709-710). Relative distribution of turns is another feature that is not

specified in advance. Rule one allows current speaker to select any other party as next

speaker while rule two allows any party, other than the current speaker to self select as

next speaker. This means that any current non-speaker is potential next speaker.

The number of parties can also vary, in the same way the length of a conversation

varies. The turn-taking system is build to have two turns at a time, current and next,

without restrictions on the number of participating parties. Because it doesn’t provide for

a number of participants, the system is compatible with varying numbers of participants

within a single conversation. Although there are no restrictions regarding the number of

participants, the system works better with smaller numbers. An explanation would be that

the rule set refers to only two speakers-the current one and the next one. The turn order

bias selects “just prior to current” to be next. In two-party conversation, all the parties are

comprised to the conversation. With three parties, one might be left out while with four

parties, two may be left out.

The numbers of parties and turn order have differential relevancies. The partial

ordering may be illustrated by reference to the “number of parties” parameter. For two

parties, the relevant variability is not differential distribution of turns but differential turn

size. The distribution of turns becomes relevant with three parties when next turn is no

longer guaranteed or obliged for any current non-speaker. In two party conversations, a

current non speaker is sure of being next speaker at some point while with three or more

parties, this is no longer the case- if a current non-speaker, interested in speaking next

doesn’t self selects, there will be another current non-speaker which might self-select and

in his turn select someone else. In three or more parties conversation, a current non

speaker will be under the constraint to self select at first possible transition point and at

each successive such point. The same pressure is on the current next speaker- if he

chooses a certain next speaker, he must do so before the first possible transition.

With four parties appears variability in the number of turn-taking systems in

operation- mechanism that divide one conversation in several ones. For this mechanism

to work there must be at least 4 parties. In this manner, there are enough parties for 2

distinct conversations. (Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson, 1974: 712-713)

Such an example would be the below conversation among 4 friends, Ethel and

Ben who are visiting Bill and Lori. Ethel, Ben and Max are visiting Bill and Lori.

They’ve brought a lot of food, including a salami Max took out of his refrigerator. Ben is

wearing his new combination eyeglasses/hearing-aid. At this point, Lori is offering

drinks.

Excerpt 10

1 Ethel: I'll take scotch, if you have it,2 → Ben: You're gonna have to quit yelling, you see,3 Ethel: 0h lookit his ear!4 → Lori: Oh that's right. You got- I know I noticed when he came in.5 → Ben: Did you notice it?6 → Ethel: Yeah how do you like it.7 → Ben: It's fantastic.8 Ethel: Except the thing presses into his head.9 → Ben: It- it hurts me terrible I have to go down and get it adjusted.10 → Lori: Yeah.11 → Ben: It kills me right here.12 → Lori: It's,13 → Ben: The glasses are tight I feel it.

Max: Is the salami dry?14 Lori: What happens if somebody else

puts it on ,15 Max: Bill,16 Ben: Nothin,17 Lori: Will I hear it? Max: Did it get dry?18 Lori: Will I hear it?19 Bill: A little bit,20 Ben: You gotta put this inside the ear. Bill: But it's good that way.

21 Lori: And then will it be real loud? Bill: (Because) all the fat evaporates. [Schenkein:II:13]

Talk can be continuous (for a sequence of transition-relevance places (TRP),

with minimal gap and overlapping) or discontinuous (occurs when at some transition-

relevance place, the current speaker stops and no speaker start or continues, thus leading

to a space in conversation, called lapse. Such an example would be:

Excerpt 11

1 J: Oh I could drive if you want me to.

2 C: Well no I’ll drive ( I don’ m//in’)

3 J: hhh

(1.0)

4 J: I meant to offah.

(…)

[C-J:2]

The rules that make talk continuous provide a procedure where a next speaker can

be located at any transition-relevance place. The fact that these rules provide an option

and not an obligation lead , sometimes, to the possibility of discontinuity- at any

transition- place, if none of the options to speak has been employed, lapse and

discontinuous talk can occur. For example, if rule 1a has been employed in a current

turn’s talk, the possibility of a lapse immediately following it is excluded. A lapse occurs

when rule 1a hasn’t been employed and options of rule 1b and 1 c occur. That is when

next turn is available to a self selecting next speaker; if no one self selects, then the

current speaker can self select to continue. If the current speaker doesn’t do so, then there

is another open space for next turn and so on.

Turn-allocationall techniques are being used and the way in which they operate

in conversation can be made from obvious cases (such as the fact that an addressed

question selects its addressee to speak next or if starting to speak when not selected, a

party selects himself to speak). The allocation techniques, thus divide mainly in current

selects next and self selection.

The obvious case of an addressed question is a rare and special case such as

greeting-greeting, invitation-acceptance/decline, complain/denial, compliment/rejection,

challenge/rejection, etc

The following 3 excerpts offer such examples:

Excerpt 12 –Complain/denial

1 Ken: Hey yuh took my chair by the way an’ I don’t think that was very nice

2 Al: I didn’ take yer chair, it’s my chair.

[GTS:1]

Excerpt 13- Compliment/rejection

1 A: I’m glad I have you for a friend.

2 B; That’s because you don’t have any others.

[FN]

Excerpt 14- Challenge/rejection

1 A: It’s not break time yet.

2 B: I finished my box, so shut up.

[SU:1]

(Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson, 1974: 714-716]

Another way of selecting next speaker without addressing is a variant of the

question, a type of first pair part, namely repetitions of parts of a prior utterance with

question intonation.

Excerpt 15

1 Ben: They gotta- a garage sale.

2 Lori: Where.

3 Ben: On Third Avenue.

[Schenkein:II:38]

This question-type may be used without any affiliated technique for selecting a

particular other and thereby selects the just prior speaker as next speaker. These repair

technique is a central device that introduces the turn order bias.

Various turn constructional units are employed for the production of the talk that

occupies a turn. The turn taking system described is one for conversation, for talk in

interaction. The turn constructional component of the turn-taking system identifies the

types of turn-constructional units as sentential, clausal, phrasal and lexical-syntactically.

The discussion of appositional and tag questions and the way in which the prospect of

turn-transfer place conditions as between left embedded and conjoined sentence

structures should indicate the deep ways in which syntax matters to turn-taking.

1.4 Features of Repair Mechanism

A repair mechanism has been devised to deal with turn-taking errors and

violations. The various organizations operative in conversation are susceptible to errors,

violations and troubles and repair devices are available. There are three most important

features of repair mechanism. The first one concerns the turn taking problems-

questions such as ‘who me?”, the practices of etiquette concerning interruption and

complaints about it, the use of interruption markers, repeats or recycles of parts of a turn

overlapped by others or premature stopping by parties talking simultaneous are repair

devices directed to troubles on the organization and distribution of turns to talk. An

example would be:

Excerpt 16 (Mother, daughter and a dor, previously referred to)

M: Whad are you doin’.

L: Me?

M: Yeh, you goina go ta sleep like that?

L: Nothing

L: No, hh heh hh hh

M: With your rear end sticking up in the air, how you gonna sleep like that.

L: heh heh I’m n(h)oth(h)

[L&M:7]

The second feature deals with some of the mechanisms for turn-taking which are

intrinsic to the very system whose troubles they repair. The basic device for repairing

more than one at a time involves a procedure which is itself violative in turn taking terms,

that is stopping a term before its possible completion point. This feature involves a

transformation of a central feature of the turn-taking system and not some device

external to it.

The third feature refers to constrains of turn taking system regarding the repairs

of other than a turn taking sort. Repairs by other than current speaker are not done until a

turn’s completion. Most repair-correction of a word-is done within the turn in which the

repairable occurs. When repair spills over the boundaries of a turn, such as when other

than speaker initiates a repair in the turn following the one in which the repairable

occurred, the sequence so initiated is organized by the same turn-taking system.

The compatibility of the model of turn-taking with the facts of repair is a dual

character: the turn taking system lends itself to repairs of its troubles and the turn-taking

system is a basic organizational device for the repair of any other troubles in

conversation.

The above mentioned features refer to the model of turn taking organization.

There are a set of observable features in conversation with which a model of turn-taking

should come to terms. It may be regarded as a model or, at least, as some major

components of such a model. The model is not by any means perfect- it may be incorrect

and insufficient but it is at least an appropriate model for turn-taking in conversation.

(Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson, 1974: 723-724)

The features presented above show the Local Management System.The system

deals with several kinds of problems: The first one would be the single transition at a

time-it allocates a single turn at a time. The system deals also with several transitions:

comprehensively- it deals with any of the transition possibilities whose use it organizes;

exclusively- no other system can organize transitions independent of the turn-taking

system and serially- in the order they come up.

The model has also some major consequences, of general interest. The turn-taking

system for conversation, in its turn-allocational techniques, builds in an intrinsic

motivation for listening to all utterances in a conversation. In the variety of techniques

for arriving at a next speaker it obliges any willing or potentially intending speaker to

listen to and analyze each utterance across its delivery. This means that a willing next

speaker, if selected to do so, must listen to each utterance and analyze it at least to find

whether or not it selects him as a next speaker or any potentially intending speaker will

have to listen to any utterance after which he might want to speak to find that no other

has been selected as next speaker. Under either of these circumstances, a willing or

potentially next speaker must listen through the end of the current utterance in order to

effect turn-transfer properly and in order to secure the turn.

Another consequence of the model is that turn-taking organization controls the

understanding of utterances. For example, a participant, potentially willing to speak if

selected to do so, will need to listen to any utterance to find if he is being selected to

speak next. A “current-selects-next’ technique is constituted by utterances such as

“greetings”, “questions”, “insult”, “complains” which the potentially next-speaker must

analyze to find out if any of these select him as next speaker.

Conclusion

The purpose of this chapter was to present the features and the particularities of

turn taking organization to show that the system is a local one, dealing with a local

management system, which means that it operates local and is directed to “next turn” and

“next transition” on a turn-by-turn basis. The system is local with respect to turn-order

but also to turn-size. The turn taking system is a local management system in the sense

that it operates in such a way as to allow turn-size and turn-order to vary and be under

local management while still achieving both the aim of all turn-taking systems: the

organization of “n” at a time and the aim of all turn-taking organizations for speech-

exchange systems.

Turn-taking system is not used only in conversation but is also used in

ceremonies, debates, meetings, press conferences, seminars, therapy sessions, interviews

or trials. All these interactions are different from conversation and from each other.

Generally, the allocational techniques for conversation provide for one turn-allocation at

a time, for example, in debates, the ordering of turns is pre-allocated. In these types of

interactions, the turns are allocated linearly. The linear array is one in which one polar

type (conversations) involves “one-turn-at-a-time” allocation- the use of local

allocational means. The other pole, (in debates) involves pre-allocation of all turns. The

medial types (used in meetings) involve various mixes of pre-allocational and local-

allocational means. One pole, in local allocation of turns, permits maximization of the

size of the set of potential speakers to each next turn but it doesn’t permit the methodical

achievement of an equalization of turns among potential speakers. The other pole (in pre-

allocation of all turns) is designed to permit the equalization of turns, minimizing the

sieze of the set of potential next speakers.

Along turn-taking, a model of organization has been presented and also the two

components of the turn-taking system- the turn constructional component and the turn

alocational one. The rules of governing the allocation of turns and the features of Repair

Mechanism also had an important role in the introductory chapter.