REFERENCES.

	Abercrombie David. 1965. Conversation and spoken prose: Studies in phonetics and linguistics. London: Oxford University Press.
	Argyle Michael, and Dean Janet. 1965. "Eye contact, distance and affiliation." Sociometry 28:289-304.
	Becker A. L. 1970. "Journey through the night: Notes on Burmese traditional theatre." The Drama Review 15/ 3:83-87.
	Blom Jan-Peter, and Gumperz John J. 1972. "Social meaning in linguistic structure: Code-switching in Norway." In Directions in Sociolinguistics, edited by John J. Gumperz and Dell H. Hymes. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
	Cook-Gumperz Jenny, and Gumperz John. 1976. "Context in children's speech." In Papers on Language and Context (Working Paper 46), by Jenny Cook-Gumperz and John Gumperz. Berkeley: Language Behavior Research Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley.
	The Evening Bulletin (Philadelphia), August 7, 1973.
	Falk Dean, "Language, handedness, and primate brains: Did the Australopithecines sign?" American Anthropologist 82 (1980): 78.
	Fisher Lawrence E. 1976. "Dropping remarks and the Barbadian audience." American Ethnologist 3/ 2:227-42.
	Goffman Erving. 1974. Frame analysis. New York: Harper and Row.
	-----. 1976. "Replies and responses." Language in Society 5:257-313.
	-----. 1978. "Response cries." Language 54/ 14.
	Goodwin Marjorie. 1978. "Conversational practices in a peer group of urban black children." Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
	Gossen Gary H. 1976. "Verbal dueling in Chamula." In Speech play, edited by Barbara Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, pp. 121-46. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
	Gumperz John. 1976. "Social network and language shift." In Papers on Language and Context (Working Paper 46), by Jenny Cook-Gumperz and John Gumperz. Berkeley: Language Behavior Research Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley.
	Hewes Gordon W. 1973. "Primate communication and the gestural origin of language." Current Anthropology 14:5-24.

-158-

Hockett Charles. 1963. "The problem of universals in language." In Universals of language, edited by Joseph Greenberg, pp. 1-29. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Hymes Dell H. 1974. Foundations in sociolinguistics. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Laberge Suzanne, and Sankoff Gillian. 1979. "Anything you can do." In Discourse and syntax, edited by Talmy Givón and Charles Li. New York: Academic Press.

Moerman Michael. 1968. "Being Lue: Uses and abuses of ethnic identification." In Essays on the problem of tribe, edited by June Helm, pp. 153-69. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

Polanyi Livia. 1977. "Not so false starts." Working Papers in Sociolinguistics, no. 41. Austin, Texas: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.

Ross John Robert. 1970. "On declarative sentences." In Readings in English transformational grammar, edited by Roderick A. Jacobs and Peter S. Rosenbaum, pp. 222-72. Waltham, Mass.: Ginn and Company.

Schieffelin Bambi B. 1979. "Getting it together: An ethnographic approach to the study of the development of communicative competence." In Studies in developmental pragmatics, edited by Elinor O. Keenan. New York: Academic Press.

Spiegelberg Herbert. 1973. "On the right to say 'we': A linguistic and phenomenological analysis." In Phenommological sociology, edited by George Psathas, pp. 129-56. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Strong P. M. 1979. The ceremonial order of the clinic. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Tannen Deborah, and Wallat Cynthia. Forthcoming. "A sociolinguistic analysis of multiple demands on the pediatrician in doctor/mother/child interaction."

Weinstein Eugene, and Deutschberger Paul. 1963. "Some dimensions of altercasting." Sociometry 26/ 4:454-66.

-159-

The following paper was originally presented as the Katz-Newcomb Memorial Lecture, University of Michigan, 1976. It was designed to be spoken, and through its text and delivery to provide an actual instance--not merely a discussion--of some differences between talk and the printed word. Nevertheless, with a modest amount of editorial work, the original format could have been transformed. Reference, laconic and otherwise, to time, place, and occasion could have been omitted; footnotes could have been used to house appropriate bibliography, extended asides, and full identification of sources mentioned in passing; first-person references could have been recast; categoric pronouncements could have been qualified; and other features of the style and syntax appropriate to papers in print could have been imposed. Without this, readers might feel that they had been fobbed off--with a text meant for others and a writer who felt that rewriting was not worth the bother. However, I have refrained almost entirely from making such changes. My hope is that as it stands, this version will make certain framing issues clear by apparent inadvertence, again instantiating the difference between talk and print, this time from the other side, although much less vividly than might be accomplished by publishing an unedited, closely transcribed tape recording of the initial delivery, along with phrase-by-phrase parenthetical exegesis of gesticulation, timing, and elisions. (This latter would be useful, but requires a bit much by way of warrant for public self-dissection.) I venture this plea without confidence, because it provides the

-160-

obvious (albeit the only valid) excuse for obliging readers to suffer a text that has not been reworked for their mode of apprehending it. Of course, both this abuse of readers and what they can learn about framing from being thus abused are somewhat weakened by the fact that the original speaking was not extemporaneous talk, merely aloud reading from a typed text, and that all spontaneous elaborations added to the script on that occasion (and on others when the paper was reread) have been omitted--a standard practice in almost all conversions from talk to print. The punctuation signs employed are those designed for written grammar, being the same as those employed in the typed text from which the talk was read; however, the version of this order that appeared in sound arises from the original in unspecified ways--at least unspecified here. (For example, quotation marks that appear in the reading typescript appear also in the present text, but the reader is not informed as to how the words so marked were managed in the speaking, whether by prosodic markers, verbal transliteration ["quotes"... "unquote"], or/and finger gestures.) Moreover, here and there I have not foreborne to change a word or add a line (indeed, a paragraph or two) to the original, and these modifications are not identified as such. Finally, a prefatory statement has been added, namely, this one, along with the bibliographical references which allow me to acknowledge help from Hymes (1975) and Bauman (1975), all of which is solely part of the printed presentation. Thus, however much the original talk was in bad faith, this edited documentation of it is more so. (For a parallel discussion of the spoken lecture, and a parallel disclaimer regarding the written version, see Frake [ 1977].)

-161-

Дата добавления: 2015-07-26