VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES PHẠM THỊ HIỂN A STUDY OF INTERRUPTIONS IN 2008 US PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES (NGHIÊN CỨU VỀ NGẮT LỜI TRONG CÁC CUỘC TRANH LUẬN TỔNG THỐNG MỸ NĂM 2008) MA MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS Field: English Linguistics Code: 60220201 Hanoi – 2016 LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add luanvanchat@agmail.com VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES PHẠM THỊ HIỂN A STUDY OF INTERRUPTIONS IN 2008 US PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES (NGHIÊN CỨU VỀ NGẮT LỜI TRONG CÁC CUỘC TRANH LUẬN TỔNG THỐNG MỸ NĂM 2008) MA MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS Field: English Linguistics Code: 60220201 Supervisor: Assoc. Kiều Thị Thu Hương Hanoi – 2016 LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add luanvanchat@agmail.com ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The completion of this study would not have been possible without the assistance of special and wonderful people. First of all, I would like to acknowledge my indebtedness and gratitude to Assoc. Kieu Thi Thu Huong, for her unfailing encouragement, constant support and supervision during all stages of the study.
Her enthusiastic assistance, guidance, support, and wisdom greatly contributed to the fulfillment of my thesis. I would also like to thank my supervisor for her patience in reading and editing my drafts. It must have been an unenjoyable experience. My sincere thanks go to all lecturers at the Faculty of Post-Graduate Studies ULIS – VNU for their profound knowledge and outstanding teaching during my study here.
My heartfelt gratitude is also to Dr. Huynh Anh Tuan, the Head of the Faculty and all the staff members who have been of great help to me and all other graduate students. Last but not least, I would like to give my deepest gratitude to my parents, my husband, my daughter, and my colleagues for their moral support and encouragement throughout my training course. i LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add luanvanchat@agmail.com DECLARATION I certify that this thesis is the result of my own research and has not been submitted to any institution or university for assessment purposes before.
In addition, I acknowledge that all sources used and cited in the study are in the reference section. Hanoi, November 2016 Signature Pham Thi Hien ii LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add luanvanchat@agmail.com ABSTRACT This paper investigates interruptions in the three rounds of the 2008 U. presidential debates between Barack Obama and John McCain to explore patterns of interruptions employed by each candidate, and the ways the two nominees utilize interruptions to achieve their goals in the debates. By employing a syntactic-driven typology and a content analysis, the study provides an in-depth look at the phenomenon of interruption, which is often seen to be negative and should be avoided in debates as well as in social interactions.
It is observed that interruption plays a significant role in the success or failure of each candidate. Of the two candidates, Obama proves himself the more flexible and smarter user of interruption to defeat his political enemy, Mc Cain. iii LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add luanvanchat@agmail.com TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION .iii ABBREVIATIONS AND CONVENTIONS. vi LIST OF FIGURES AND CHARTS.
vii PART A: INTRODUCTION. Rationale for the study. Aims and objectives of the study. Scope of the study.
Methods of the study. Significance of the study. Design of the study. 5 CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW.
Turns, turn-constructional units, and turn-taking. Definitions of interruption. Definitions of interruption by lexicographers. Definitions of interruptions by linguists.
Classifications of interruption. Roger, Bull & Smith’s categorization. Kennedy & Camden’s classification. Interruption and dominance and power.
Concept of dominance and power. Interruption and dominance and power. Debates and televised presidential debates. Concept of debates.
Concept of televised presidential debates. Studies on interruption in political settings. Studies on the 2008 U. 22 CHAPTER 2: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.
Restatement of research questions. Appropriateness of research approach. 24 iv LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add luanvanchat@agmail. Context of the study.
Setting of the study. The presidential candidates. Effects of the three debates. Data collection and analysis procedure.
27 CHAPTER 3: DATA ANALYSIS. Classification of interruptions. Butting-in interruptions. Functions of interruption.
Subject change interruption. The relative frequency of different categories of interruption in the three debates. The functions of interruptions. Effects of interruption patterns.
Limitations and suggestions for further studies .XXVIII v LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add luanvanchat@agmail.com ABBREVIATIONS AND CONVENTIONS BA Bachelor of Arts CA Conversation Analysis C-SPAN Cable-Satellite Public Affairs Network MA Master of Arts ICS Interruption Coding System TCU Turn-constructional unit TRP Transition-relevance place U. The United States of America & and vs. versus vi LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add luanvanchat@agmail.com LIST OF FIGURES AND CHARTS FIGURES Figure 1: Idealized schema for interruptions……………………….10 Figure 2: Ferguson’s classification of interruptions…………………………….…14 Figure 3: Roger, Bull & Smith’s Interruption Coding System…………………….15 CHARTS Chart 1: Relative frequency of different categories of interruption made by Obama and McCain ……………………………………………………………………. 35 Chart 2: Functions of interruptions made by Obama and McCain………….…36 vii LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add luanvanchat@agmail.com PART A: INTRODUCTION 1.
Rationale for the study Conversation is an “enterprise” which is characterized by turn-taking – the rule of the speaker and the listener’s changes. Turn-taking means that “one person speaks, then the other responds” (Tannen, 1995, p. 139) and it is a repetitive process (Levinson, 1983, p. 296) in order for the conversation to run smoothly.
During the turn-taking process, participants are supposed to obey the one-at-a-time rule, i., one person should not talk while another person is already talking (Sacks, 1995, p. In other words, there should be no interruptions1 in an ideal conversation, but in practice interrupting2 still occurs. Interrupting is not a thing that people are supposed to do in conversation. But interrupting occurs in conversation.
24)3 Sometimes interrupting is proved to be able to function as manifestation of the interrupter’s support, cooperation and understanding in the conversation (Tannen, 1984, 1986; Goldberg, 1990). However, it is normally claimed to have association with dominance, power and control (Černý, 2010; Drass, 1986; James & Clarks, 1993; Octigan & Niederman, 1975; O’ Donnel, 1990; Pschaid, 1993; Tannen, 1991; Zimmerman & West, 1975). The interrupter and the interruptee are seen as “a malevolent aggressor” and “an innocent victim” respectively. In intimate relationships, the accusation of interruption is particularly hurtful because “interrupting carries a load of meta-messages that a partner does not care enough, does not listen, is not interested” (Tannen, 1991, p.
Consequently, in presidential debates where politicians aim to promote “their own opinions, their party and their personas – and also to defame the political enemy” (Luginbühl, 2007, p. 1376), interruptions are expected to occur more 1 In this study, the word “interruptions” – the plural form – is used to refer to cases of interruption 2 The word “interrupting” and “interruption” are used interchangeably to refer to the act of interrupting as a concept, a linguistic phenomenon 3 as cited in O’Reilly (2006, p. 550) 1 LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add luanvanchat@agmail.com frequently and ferociously than in daily conversation. However, surprisingly studies on interruptions in political debates are still in short supply.
This paper is, therefore, conducted to investigate the way two presidential nominees – the Democratic Party nominee Senator Barack Obama and the Republican nominee Senator John McCain − employ interruptions in the 2008 U. presidential debates to win the hearts and minds of American voters. Aims and objectives of the study The study aims at making a conversation analysis of interruptions in the three rounds of the 2008 U. presidential debates, and then giving some theoretical and pedagogical implications for utilizing interruptions in debates as well as other challenging and competitive speech exchanges.
To be more specific, to achieve these aims, the specific objectives of the study are: Firstly, exploring patterns of interruptions employed by each candidate in the three debates; Secondly, analyzing how interruptions are utilized by the two nominees to achieve their goals in the debates. Research questions From the above-mentioned objectives, the present paper seeks answers to the following research questions: 1) What patterns of interruptions are employed by each candidate? 2) What are the effects of each candidate’s interruption pattern? 4. Scope of the study Due to the size and limitation of a preliminary research, the present paper only takes into consideration the three rounds of the presidential debates between Obama and McCain. The vice-presidential debate between Vice-President Joe Biden and Governor Sarah Palin is not selected.
Furthermore, non-verbal interruptions in the three debates are also excluded from the study. Only verbal instances of interruptions are focused on so as to identify types of interruptions employed by each candidate and the effects of these interruptions in the debates. 2 LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add luanvanchat@agmail. Methods of the study The database of this study is drawn from transcripts and videos of the debates, both are officially available from the Commission on Presidential Debates – the organizer of the presidential debates.
However, the investigation is mainly done on the basis of vocalized interrupting tokens. Both quantitative and qualitative methods are used in this paper with priorities given to the quantitative. Specifically, instances of interruptions in the three debates are identified and calculated manually by the writer. Also, a Conversation Analysis transcription is conducted to detect non-fluencies in turn- taking.
Meanwhile, the functions and meanings of those interruptions are examined by a content analysis. In addition, such methods as descriptive, analytic and comparative are also utilized to describe, analyze and compare the data in order to bring about the patterns of interruptions used by each candidate and their effects in the three debates. Significance of the study This study is expected to contribute humbly to the knowledge of those who want to improve their debating skills. Hopefully, the information provided in this study will shed some light into and raise interest in the phenomenon of interruption in political debates which is usually underappreciated.
When employed appropriately, interruption can be an effective tactic to achieve the interrupter’s objectives. Design of the study The study is organized into three main parts and subdivisions as follows: Part A (Introduction) deals with the rationale, objectives, research questions, scope, methodology, significance, and design of the study. Part B (Development) consists of three chapters: Chapter 1 (Literature Review) provides a theoretical framework and a compendium of relevant existing studies on interruption in general and interruption in political settings and presidential debates in particular. 3 LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add luanvanchat@agmail.com Chapter 2 (Research Methodology) presents a detailed description of the study including restatement of research, appropriateness of research approach, context of the study, research instrument, data collection and analysis procedure.
Chapter 3 (Data Analysis) supplies a description and analysis of classification and functions of interruptions. Part C (Conclusion) recapitulates the study, reveals several major findings, suggests several theoretical and pedagogical implications, points out the limitations, and proposes some suggestions for further studies. 4 LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add luanvanchat@agmail.com PART B: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW 1. Background Conservation analysis (henceforth, CA) is originally to be found on the work of two American originators: Goffman and Garfinkel (Schegloff, 2003a, as cited in Heritage, 1998, p.
103), and then developed by Sacks in association with Schegloff and Jefferson (Heritage, 2008, p. It is “a rigorously empirical approach which avoids premature theory construction” (Levinson, 1983, p. 286) and “one of the key methodological approaches” to the study of verbal interaction (Wooffitt, 2005, p. By far, CA has become “the dominant approach to the study of human social interaction across the disciplines of Sociology, Linguistics and Communication” (Stivers & Sidnell, 2013, p.
At its core, CA is “a set of methods for working with audio and video recordings of talk and social interactions” (Sidnell, 2010, p.