180 A Grammar of Spoken English Discourse
(28) /↑NOW // what HAPpened after sepTEMber the
a w v p n
ele/↑VENTH // and this ex\PLAINS // i /THINK //c N V con
the PREsidents \POlicy // [T2-Dc-23]
d e N #The target state realized after the production of the increment adds
to the existing state of speaker/hearer convergence: it does not contain
information which is contrary to the previously generated expectations. Dc
does not seem to particularize the lexical item now as the lexical item is
not used to draw an explicit temporal contrast with the non-present.
The increment initial high-high/termination invites an active hearer inter-
vention but in the context of the utterance does not project any contrastive
implications. There were eight further examples where the initial high key/
termination was attached to a closed lexical item such as now and of course,
and conventions such as I mean. There were ten increment initial high key/
terminations located in the corpus which were attached to open class lexical
items but did not realize an independent key value e.g. (29).
(29) that we should con\↑TINue // to disCUSS the \ISsues //
w N V V' V' V' d N+
that we were GOing to \↓DIScuss // [T1-Bc-11]
w N V V' V' #The initial state prior to example (29) has projected a state of speaker/
hearer convergence which includes the information that the scheduled
meetings will continue despite the terrorist attack. The target state achieved
by the production of (29) is in line with the prior discourse expectations.
The initial high key/termination invites active intervention and generates a
local meeting which focuses the hearer on the continuing act of discussing;
the items discussed are presented as being anything but routine.
Before considering the communicative value realized by high key/ter-
mination in increment medial and fi nal positions it is useful to summarize the
argument so far. It appears that the high-key value in increment initial high
key/termination may signal that the increment is contrary to expectations;
but that on occasions the communicative value signalled by the high key is
redundant. In the words of Brazil (1997: 63), in order to invite adjudication
the speaker ‘may attach unnecessary, but harmless contrastive implications’
by reason of the simultaneous high key/termination selection.