Pysch 131: Mini-Paper 1

Name: Gilbert Zaragoza

Example 1:
Gilbert: So I was washing some dishes yesterday, and I went to rinse off a plate and -
(As he speaks he gestures as if washing dishes. The moment he begins to speak
about the plate he makes a face of disdain.)

Maneesh: Let me guess, the water splashed back at you and you got soaked.

Gilbert: Yeah, I got soaked and the water was hot! (Makes a facial expression of pain.)

Maneesh: Ugh, I hate when that happens, especially with hot water.

Example 2:
Kelly: (Looking excited and speaking rather quickly) Hey, did you see *the*

Gilbert: *The* A’s game last night? (Kelly nods to confirm Gilbert’s suspicion. Gilbert
reciprocates Kelly’s excitement.) Yeah it was a great game. I can’t believe it lasted 5
hours - and the A’s pulled it off.

Kelly: Yeah I can’t believe I was there, it was amazing!

Example 3:
Gilbert: Do you have any plans for tonight?

Jon: U:m, not really –uh– just planned on doing some reading and then maybe going out.

Gilbert: Hmm, do you know about *any-*

Jon: *Parties* tonight? Not really but Marat might. Hey Marat, do you know about any
parties tonight? (Jon assumes, from the context of the conversation thus far, that he has
correctly finished Gilbert’s question. Gilbert confirms this assumption by not invalidating
it. The question posed to Marat, is then a result of both Gilbert’s and Jon’s curiosity.)

Marat: Are you and Gilbert planning on going out?- (Directs question towards Jon.)

Gilbert: -Well I was.

Jon: Yeah, me too.

 Gilbert Zaragoza
Psych 131
Mini-Paper #1
Language as a process is a joint action of communication involving both a

speaker and an audience of at least one. However, in the event that a member of the

audience assumes the role of active speaker, midway through an utterance, who then is

accredited with having made the utterance? Consider the exchange in example 2, in

which Gilbert is able to complete Kelly’s utterance. Although Kelly initiates the

question, Gilbert’s completion of the utterance requires Kelly to respond indicating

Gilbert has correctly finished the question. According to the principal of closure,1 Kelly’s

nod affirms Gilbert’s suspicion providing Gilbert with the necessary evidence to proceed

to elaborate upon seeing the A’s game. Nevertheless, this closure seems to be premature,

since it was Kelly who posed the question, yet he was Kelly who seemingly also

answered the question. However, it’s important to note that Kelly’s non-linguistic

response does not answer the question, “Did you see the A’s game?”, instead it answers

the question posed by Gilbert, namely “Were you going to ask me if I saw the A’s

game?” In effect, while the two of them combine to utter a single question two questions

are asked. It is the principal of least effort2 that makes such an exchange acceptable,

given that joint closure3 is achieved.

Interesting enough, Gilbert is not an A’s fan, in fact he is a Dodger’s fan, yet in

responding to Kelly he recognizes the excitement in Kelly’s voice and body language.

This unusual reciprocation displays Gilbert’s understanding of Kelly’s question and also

that he grasps the signals being sent by Kelly; it also serves as a subtle validation of

Kelly’s enthusiasm. Gilbert then exemplifies his understanding by describing the game.

While Kelly did not ask Gilbert to describe the game, he does so to prove to her that he
did in fact see the game and that he wasn’t simply saying he did. Gilbert also does this as

a result of interpreting Kelly’s question to mean that she wanted to talk about the game.

Such an assumption is reasonable given Kelly’s excited look. The unusual excitement

from Gilbert about the A’s winning may also be explained by his completion of Kelly’s

question. It seems that in completing her utterance, Gilbert assumes a sense of co-

ownership to the question and embraces this ownership with a reciprocation of the

excitement to which the question originated. It’s as if co-ownership of an utterance

requires a shared understanding of both the explicit as well as the implicit meanings

attached.

Gilbert’s ability to complete Kelly’s question comes as the result of their shared

common ground.4 Both being members of a community near Oakland, each assumes the

other follows baseball and knows that the A’s are in the playoffs. Gilbert also happens to

know that Kelly is a huge Oakland A’s fan, and also that she had tickets to game the

previous night. While this knowledge is common to the both of them, Kelly was unaware

that Gilbert knew she had gone to the game. This allowed Gilbert to assume the lead in

the conversation by appealing to Kelly’s apparent jubilation and anticipation at

describing her 5 hour baseball experience. Gilbert encourages Kelly’s excitement by

expressing his disbelief in the quality of the game and in the A’s ability to win. He does

all of this with the presumption that Kelly will have lots to say about the game and will

enjoy talking about it. Ultimately, the completion seems to be the product of shared

knowledge, signaling, understanding. Without the proper foreknowledge, and accurate

signals, Gilbert would not have been able to finish Kelly’s question and respond to the

intention of this question, namely to start a conversation about the quality of the game.
1
Clark, H. Using Language Pg. 222
2
Clark, H. Using Language Pg. 224
3
Clark, H. Using Language Pg. 226
4
Clark, H. Using Language Pg. 93