Priorities in discourse analysis 85existence of irony does not disturb the normal way of interpreting language,
the existence of complex conversations does not disturb the normal way of
interpreting normal conversations.
I find it preferable, given this evidence, to make a general assumption
that each act and move realizes a single choice from a finite set. There is
no doubt that it makes for a simple analysis, but it requires sensitive interpretation
in doubtful cases, and of course it has to be set aside on the very rare
occasions when the general assumption is not valid.
THE THIRD MOVE
Is conversational discourse made up essentially of two-move structures or
three-move structures? The conversation analysts (Sacks MS; Schegloff 1973)
talk in terms of adjacency pairs, such as question and answer. Much observed
talk is of this kind, and certain types of conversational routine have routinely
two moves in their exchanges.
On the other hand, classroom discourse, which was our original reference
point, is noticeably three-move. So are quiz games, interrogations, many
service encounters and a lot of everyday talk. The problem is not going to
be resolved by a majority vote—by counting up whether the greater quantity
of talk is two-part or three-part in its exchange structure. We must seek an
explanation of the variability of the exchange.
Where there is a clear third move, it has a function which is different
from that of Initiation and Response. It offers an opportunity for participants
to check that they are agreed on the function of the previous pair, to comment
on the exchange as it stands, to react to the response in the context of the
initiation.
I Why? Did you wake up late today?
R Yeah, pretty late.
F Oh dear.
(data from Francis and Hunston)Presumably not all exchanges require this kind of support. Where participants
are well known to each other, in familiar situations and without specific
business to transact, it may be possible to have long stretches of two-move
conversation without the need for follow-up. Special routines like form-
filling or running through a series of checks are so obvious in their goals
that there may be no need to check all the time that both participants
understand the state of the discourse.
There is always the option, however, and in many types of discourse the
third move is virtually obligatory. In any kind of didactic or supervisory
discourse, it gives feedback to the person under supervision which is essential
to the efficient conduct of affairs.