Neal R. Norrick

Retelling stories in spontaneous conversation

Retold conversational stories provide a natural testing site for analyzing narrative. Distillation of a kernel story from separate narrative performances facilitates comparison between them and highlights their similarities and differences. This article investigates (a) immediate retelling for a newly arrived listener, (b) relating the same story for different audiences, and (c) group reconstruction of a story already familiar to those present. I propose methods for analyzing retold stories in conversation and suggest several directions for future research.

On the organization of corrective exchanges in conversation

Abstract This essay investigates how conversationalists accomplish corrections on one anothers talk. It shows that they negotiate such corrective sequences from one context to the next based on their respective abilities to complete the correction, rather than adhering to the so-called ‘preference for self-correction’ proposed by Schegloff et al. (1977). Investigation of settings favoring corrections by a second speaker reveals a shared perception that he or she is better able to complete the exchange, either because of greater familiarity with the topic, the language in use, or simply the intended contribution. Interactions between parents and children, teachers and students, and native and nonnative speakers provide appropriate examples. Approximately equal background information and language facility together leave only knowledge of the turn in progress as a differentiating factor, so the current speaker naturally assumes responsibility for any corrections in it, resulting in the predominance of self-correction in conversation between adult native speakers. Thus the analysis proposed here includes the earlier account as a sub-case.

Discourse Markers in Oral Narrative

Abstract This article seeks to demonstrate that well and but function as a special sort of discourse marker (DM) in oral narratives, and that their functions within the oral narrative context follow neither from their usual meanings nor from their usual DM functions in other contexts. Instead, both well and but are keyed on participant expectations about narrative structures and storytelling procedures. Excerpts from conversational narratives will illustrate how well and but initiate and conclude narrative action, how they guide listeners back to the main sequence of narrative elements following interruptions and digressions, and how listeners can invoke well and but to re-orient the primary teller to the expected order of narrative presentation. If, as Fraser (1990) says, discourse markers signal a sequential discourse relationship, then specifically narrative DMs provide particularly clear evidence of an independent DM function not related to any lexical meaning. The analysis of well and but in oral narrative shows that DMs enjoy specialized functions in this particular type of discourse due to its highly coded sequentiality and storytelling conventions.

Expressive illocutionary acts

Abstract The illocutionary acts classified as expressives in Searle (1976) are further analysed. The members of the class are determined and parameters which differentiate them are sought. The notion of the social function of an illocutionary act is introduced. Three conditions on expressive illocutionary acts are discussed: the factive, value judgment and role identification conditions. In terms of the latter two conditions various expressive illocutionary acts are differentiated and related. This provides the basis for an analysis which is extended to a discussion of the social functions of these acts.

Humor in Interaction

1. Introduction: Humor and interaction (by Norrick, Neal R.) 2. Part I: Conversation among friends and family 3. The occasioning of self-disclosure humor (by Ervin-Tripp, Susan M.) 4. Direct address as a resource for humor (by Norrick, Neal R.) 5. An interactional approach to irony development (by Kotthoff, Helga) 6. Multimodal and intertextual humor in the media reception situation: The case of watching football on TV (by Gerhardt, Cornelia) 7. Part II: Doing gender with humor in talk at work 8. Using humor to do masculinity at work (by Schnurr, Stephanie) 9. Boundary-marking humor: Institutional, gender and ethnic demarcation in the workplace (by Vine, Bernadette) 10. Part III: Failed humor and its interactional effects 11. Impolite responses to failed humor (by Bell, Nancy) 12. Failed humor in conversation: A double voicing analysis (by Priego-Valverde, Beatrice) 13. Part IV: Humor in bilingual interactions 14. Humor and interlanguage in a bilingual elementary school setting (by Kersten, Kristin) 15. Cultural divide or unifying factor?: Humorous talk in the interaction of bilingual, cross-cultural couples (by Chiaro, Delia) 16. Name index 17. Subject index

Repetition in canned jokes and spontaneous conversational joking1

Repetition of words and actions plays an important role in both canned jokes and spontaneous conversational joking; and theories of humor have stressed either the automatic aspect of repetition äs mechanical action or its creative aspect in clever Variation. This contribution investigates the dual character of repetition äs rote reproduction versus creative Variation in verbal humor from the perspective of both sorts of theories. It seeks to describe theforms andfunctions of repetition in canned jokes and spontaneous joking äs well äs to shed some light on the relation between the two.

Narratives of vicarious experience in conversation

Stories of personal experience have been a staple of research on narrative, while stories of vicarious experience have remained largely ignored, though they offer special insights into issues of epistemic authority, telling rights, and evaluation. This article seeks to show that stories of vicarious experience can fulfill the same functions as stories of personal experience in conversation, illustrating a point in an argument, sharing news, and for their entertainment value. Discrepancies between stories of vicarious experience and stories of personal experience follow from the distinction between third person and first person narrative along with corresponding differences in their participation frameworks in the sense of Goffman (1981): conversationalists cannot deploy third person stories of vicarious experience in functions such as mutual self-disclosure or to display resistance to troubles; conversely, stories of vicarious experience offer greater opportunities for co-narration. (Epistemic authority, evaluation, identity, narrative, participation frameworks, telling rights, vicarious experience)

A Theory of Humor in Interaction

Humor is a prevalent feature in many forms of interaction. Banter, teasing, irony and sarcasm frequently surface in everyday talk, and conversationalists often engage in telling funny stories if not outright joke-telling. Any complete theory of humor must include its exploitation in and effects on interaction, taking into account such matters as gender, power, solidarity, politeness and identity. Such an interactional theory of humor goes beyond a purely pragmatic description of jokes and joking. The data for an interactional analysis of humor can not be limited to joke texts in books. Humor competence must include knowing how to perform and how to receive and respond to humor and jokes, and this will encompass an account of timing for both the tellers and recipients. Research on humor in interaction has experienced a steady progression from the time that recordings and transcriptions of behavior became available in 1970s. Methods of analysis developed in Conversation Analysis, discourse analysis and interactional sociolinguistics allowed for the detailed examination of talk-in-interaction, and this enabled the description of humorous activities. Research has shown how joking can work as a strategy for enhancing intimacy, but also for controlling a conversation; an account of humor in conversation highlights the interactional achievement of puns, irony and sarcasm along with personal anecdotes and joke-telling between participants and the mutual construction of identity they accomplish in the process. Conversational joking – especially teasing and sarcasm – has a dual force: because it plays on relational identity, teasing directed at intimates can have the potential to hurt, even as it ratifies the bond between the interactants. Still, generally, humor facilitates friendly interaction and helps participants negotiate identity. Humor can be characterized as a gendered discourse resource on which both men and women regularly draw when negotiating their gender identities in interaction; Women and men deploy humor differently, just as those with more power or control in a particular interaction use humor differently than those who are one down. Researchers have noted significant differences in the characteristics of mens and womens self-targeted humor, and shown that women and men tell different kinds of stories illustrating different types of humor; The performance of a joke follows the pattern for storytelling generally; the major difference consists in the expectation of laughter at the conclusion. Jokes are told as ‘understanding tests’, since not everyone necessarily gets every joke, and getting jokes involves background knowledge and rational processing. This testing routinely aims to find common ground, rather than to embarrass the hearer, and both the teller and the hearer learn something about each other. Jokes allow group members to direct aggression at a third party, they can help create and enhance feelings of rapport. The conversational joke performance represents a particularly salient example of interaction between the teller and the listeners. Timing in the performance of a joke is compounded of elements depending upon both the teller and the recipient: there are standard joke prefaces, characteristic patterns of syntax and discourse organization in the areas of tempo, fluency and information flow, and customary reactions at the completion of the joke. Further, there are characteristic points where a teller and/or a listener may laugh before the punch line: both tellers and recipients of jokes sometimes laugh about problems in the telling of a joke, and listeners may laugh in response to the preface of a joke, and at various incongruities during the performance. All these features of joke-telling affect the overall timing of the performance: they guide the teller in how to construct and pace the performance, and they act as cues to the recipients of the joke, helping them respond to the performance in appropriate ways and to get the joke, so that they can laugh (or perhaps withhold laughter) at the right time. Our everyday talk thrives on all kinds of stories, especially humorous ones. In exchanging anecdotes about our personal lives, we present personal identities for ratification by the other participants in the conversation. Personal anecdotes present an amusing scene which invites listeners to laugh and offer comments of their own. A story by one of them may spawn collaborative narration, whereby two or more participants contribute to or comment on a story in progress Frequently the details, dialogue and comments tend to introduce humor to a serious story or to render an already humorous story even funnier. Humor makes any story more tellable, even a familiar story, and humorous stories have characteristic patterns of participation: in particular, co-narration is acceptable whenever it creates humor. Familiar humorous stories regularly appear, and co-narration of such stories occurs quite commonly as well. The tellability of familiar stories hinges not on their content as such, but on the dynamics of the narrative event itself, and humor makes communal retelling desirable. Personal narratives allow conversationalists to demonstrate group membership and present an identity on various levels; funny personal anecdotes add to these the introduction of entertainment and fun into the interaction and demonstration of a sense of humor as well as offering opportunities for active participation by others. One personal story often leads to another by a previous recipient, and two or more participants may co-construct a story about a shared experience: such collaborative narration serves to ratify group membership and modulate rapport in multiple ways, first because it allows participants to re-live pleasant common experiences, second because it confirms the long-term bond they share, third because the experience of collaborative narration itself redounds to feelings of belonging, and fourth because communal retelling serves to solidify shared stories and their significance for the members of the group.

Indirect Reports, Quotation and Narrative

An indirect report can take the form of a story, and a story may take the form of an indirect report, beginning with ‘she/he said (that) …’ Both direct reports and indirect reports can contain instances of quotation/constructed dialogue, indeed whole passages of narrative may be related as if repeating the words of a previous telling. So there is really a three-way distinction to maintain between direct reports, indirect reports and constructed dialogue, with the indirect report mode midway between the other two. Because of the way they relate to tellers, indirect reports realize different speech acts than direct reports and constructed speech. In spite of obvious differences in truth value from a logical perspective and speech act status, it seems not to matter to the audience whether a story is prefaced as an indirect report or even as a retold narrative in the mode of constructed dialogue.

The interplay of humor and conflict in conversation and scripted humorous performance

Abstract In this article we explore the interrelationship of humor and conflict. We focus first on contexts where humor provides a constructive means of attenuating conflict and ending disagreements in conversation. Then we turn to conflict talk as a source of humor. We identify three characteristic strategies for constructing humor around patterns of conflict talk, both in everyday conversation and in professionally scripted dialogue. The momentum and coherence of argument structure tends toward automatization even in everyday talk, and this property lends itself especially well to the creation of humorous dialogue. We show both how humor can mitigate conflict, and how conflict talk can be funny.