The Role of Prosodic Features in Conversational Interaction : Hard Talk a Case Study
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study aims to look into the relationships between prosodic features from phonological perspective and interactional relationships and sequence organization from conversation analysis (CA) view. There are specific prosodic cues that speakers employ to signal to one another when it is their turn to talk in any speech situation. These cues serve as signs to let other people know when it is the speaker's turn to talk. It is important to demonstrate that some prosodic patterns indicate the end or continuation of a turn. Prosodic orientation, such as intonation and tone patterns, are hypothesized to reveal information about participants' matching and non-matching of a prior turn. The consistent use of the same pitch height indicates that there is agreement among the participants on a specific situation. PRAAT, a computer program is used for doing acoustic analysis to conduct the prosodic analysis following Ladefoged’s model. It is supposed that when the speaker makes a low pitch, he is no more interested in the topic raised or no more excited, but when there is a high pitch that means there is more to be added and some significant issues can be shown However, prosodic orientation is obviously used in political interviews in a manner similar to that of ordinary speech. As well as Political interviews commonly employ pauses, interrupted speech, and reasoning, some of which show a particular orientation to the preceding turns.
Metrics
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
College of Education for Humanities, TIKRIT UNIVERSITY. THIS IS AN OPEN ACCESS ARTICLE UNDER THE CC BY LICENSE http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
References
Acton, W. (1998). Directed motion in pronunciation instruction. Journal of Communication and International Studies 5, 47-64.
Chafe, W. (1994). Discourse, consciousness, and time: The flow and displacement of con- scious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Coulthord,M .(1985) . An Introduction to Discourse Analysis . Long man: Longman limited Group.
Couper-Kuhlen, E., & Selting, M. (Eds.) (1996). Prosody in conversation. New York: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Crystal, D. (1969). Prosodic Systems and Intonation in English. Cambridge University Press.
Erickson, F. (1992). They know all the lines: Rhythmic organization and contextualization in a conversational listing routine. In P. Auer & A. Di Luzio (Eds.), The contextualization of language (pp. 365-397). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Goodwin, C., & Heritage, J. (1990). Conversation analysis. Annual Review of Anthropology 19, 283-307.
Halliday, M. (1970). A course in spoken English: Intonation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Halliday, M. A. (1963). The tones of English. Archivum Linguisticum, 15(1), 1-28.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1967). Intonation and Grammar in British English. Berlin, Germany: Mouton.
Ladefoged, P., & Johnson, K. (2015). A course in phonetics (7th ed).Stamford : USA.
Laver, J., John, L., & Anderson, S. R. (1994). Principles of Phonetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Levelt, W. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Levinson, S . (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Liddicoat, A. (2007). An Introduction to Conversation. London: Continuum .
Pierrehumbert, J. (1980). The phonology and phonetics of English intonation. Un-published doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cam- bridge, MA.BIBLIOGRAPHY 2 9 3
Selting, M; Auer, P; Barden, B; Bergmann, JI ; Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth; Günthner, Susanne; Quasthoff, Uta; Meier, Christoph; Schlobinski, Peter and Uhmann, Su- sanne (1998). “Gesprächsanalytisches Transkriptions system (GAT).” Linguistische Berichte 173: 91–122.
Wennerstrom, A.(2001) .Intonation and evaluation in oral narratives. Journal of Pragmatics 33 (8), 1183-1206.