This article examines the design and situated employment of reported `private thoughts' in both everyday and institutional interaction. By reported `private thoughts' we mean the `active voicing' of utterances characterized as `private thought' done in the first place for the speaker-feeler, rather than the listener. Examples are drawn from a large UK collection of over 240 instances from domestic telephone calls, interview talk, therapy sessions, and patient—provider interactions. Instead of treating reported `private thoughts' as neutral and transparent descriptions of the (...) inner mind, we focus on their `brought off ' nature. Drawing on the cumulative resources of conversation analysis and discursive psychology, we focus on lexical and non-lexical features of their design and its similarity to direct reported speech. We go on to illustrate the flexibilities of positioning reporting `private thoughts' affords, that is, how they can be done for the self as a `one-off ', as generalized or hypothetical and how they can be done for others. Our analyses draw attention to how `private thoughts' might be considered as a speaker's resource for handling everyday rational accountability in reporting and explaining actions and events. (shrink)

Memory is a central epistemic resource, yet the interactional organization of shared remembering is largely unexplored. Drawing on a large corpus of video- and audio-recorded interactions in English and Russian, we examine a collection of over 50 cases in which participants are engaged in the activity of co-remembering. We show that memory formulations are commonly used as an evidential method to legitimize or support a claim or point of view in contexts of challenges, objections, disagreements, skepticism, resistance and when alternative (...) positions are on the floor. Our study indicates that in deploying memory formulations, interactants rely on the robust character of excavatable shared past experiences to provide an upgraded epistemic claim to support a contentious stance toward an alternative position. (shrink)

This paper responds to Maria Wowk’s (Human Studies, 30, 131–155, 2007) critique of “Kitzinger’s feminist conversation analysis”, corrects her misrepresentation of it, and rebuts her claim to have cast doubt on whether it is “genuinely identifiable” as conversation analysis (CA). More broadly, it uses Wowk’s critique as a springboard for continuing the development of feminist conversation analysis through: (i) discussion of appropriate methods of data collection and analysis; (ii) clarification of CA’s turn-taking model and an illustrative deployment of it in (...) the analysis of a single case and of a collection (of if/then compound TCUs); (iii) exposition of a feminist CA understanding of “participants’ orientations”, and of the relevance of the distinction between participants’ and analysts’ orientations for feminist work. Finally, I suggest that feminist work in CA makes important contributions to the development of CA as a discipline. (shrink)

This conversation analytic study contrasts the German particles ach and achso. and discusses their form, function and interactional trajectory. It extends Golato and Betz’s work on ach and achso. in third positions of repair sequences to other positions and actions, and compares it to work on English oh. Based on the analysis of over 200 instances, I argue that ach so. is used to explicitly mark understanding of a prior action or of the import of the speaker’s own actions while (...) ach functions as a change-of-state token marking the receipt of information without explicitly marking understanding. I discuss the implications of the findings with regard to conversation and cognition and issues of translatability. (shrink)