Readings for Jan 29

I thoroughly enjoyed the Agar article. I find it fascinating to read about other cultures and to see you what seems normal to me, is foreign and odd to someone else. It's amazing how people from two different cultures can interpret a pause so differently.

I loved the concept of Garfinkeling! I can think of people who Garfinkel and throw me off from the normally expected structure of a conversation. Actually, one of my good friends just called me and she Garfinkeled on the phone. I said hello and she immediately went off into her own thought and story. It always throws me off guard for a second, but since we are so close and I know her, it doesn't really bother me. It's funny how Garfinkeling is more acceptable with people you know well. If a stranger Garfinkeled, it would take me a much longer time to recover. I used the opportunity to explain to her the concept of Garfinkeling. Now we are keeping score to see who Garfinkels the most.

I found Agar to be an easy read, but very informative at the same time.

Tannen's article was also informative, but I didn't find it as interesting as Agar's. I think part of why I had a hard time being as interested was because I couldn't grasp how the conversation truly went since I was reading a transcript. I'm such an aural learner, that reading a conversation just doesn't do it justice. I wish technology was at a point where sound files could be embedded in an article or book and one could listen while reading the transcript. That would be wonderful! I have a feeling we will get to this point soon.

It was interesting to read Tannen's analysis of the conversation and learn about the various cultures of American conversation structure. One thing that stood out to me was her analysis of overlapping. I could relate it to the transcript of my own conversation. For Tannen, the overlapping was a sign of enthusiasm, interest in the topic, and sign of good rapport (p. 77). I think the same is true of my conversation. The overlapping was a sign of enthusiasm, interest, and rapport between both speakers.

I did struggle with Schegloff and Sacks. I understood it better than I thought I would, but still felt there were times of "too much information." It did cause me to reflect on my own conversation closing techniques. I know closing a conversation "properly" is very important in my conversation structure. For example, I told the story in class about how I called a friend back just to say goodbye. We had been talking and were coming to the closing comments when the call was dropped. I called her back, literally, just to say goodbye. I couldn't let the conversation end without those words. I didn't want her to think I had hung up on her or had been mad. I just had to say goodbye.

While reading Schegloff and Sacks' article, I couldn't help but do some reflection and think more about how I close a conversation. There are lots of times when I say, "I gotta go." I feel that directly lets the other person know that the conversation needs to end. I also recall times where I feel like I've run out of things to say and immediately go to, "Well, OK...... So I guess I'll talk to you later." I think I'm curious to know more about how people close a conversation when they are having a conversation with a person they really don't want to be talking to. Sometimes I run into people at the store and I say hello to be polite, but I don't really want to talk. That usually ends up being the person who jumps into some long, drawn out story and wants to chat for a while. My mind is always quickly racing for closing statements in order to get out of the conversation. I am curious to know more about how closing comments might be different for people in the "flight" mode compared to people who are enjoying the conversation.

Overall, very interesting readings and I look forward to discussing them in more detail in class.