Hostname: page-component-77c78cf97d-5vn5w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-03T20:45:50.821Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Preference for Self-Correction in a Tai Conversational Corpus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2026

Michael Moerman
Michael Moerman*
Affiliation:
University of California, Los Angeles
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The organization of repair in a corpus of conversations in the Lue, Yuan (or Myang), and Siamese dialects of Tai is examined with regard to the preference for self-correction described by Schegloff, Jefferson & Sacks 1977 for an English corpus. In both corpora, repair is found to be an identically organized sequential phenomenon involving repair segments in the course of ongoing talk. The initiation and outcome of repair, as well as the reticulated details of the relationship between self- and other-correction, are the same in Tai and English.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 53 , Issue 4 , December 1977 , pp. 872 - 882
Copyright
Copyright © 1977 by Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Haas, Mary R. 1964. Thai–English student's dictionary. Stanford: University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moerman, Michael, and Sacks, Harvey, ms. On ‘understanding’ in natural conversation. To appear in Relations of anthropology and linguistics, ed. by M. D. Kinkade. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Schegloff, Emanuel; and Jefferson, Gail. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Lg. 50.696–735.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel, Jefferson, Gail; and Sacks, Harvey. 1977. The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Lg. 53.361–82.Google Scholar