This article analyzes two different repair initiation practices that both utilize other-repetition. We call these framing and prefacing other-repetitions and show that they are treated as making different claims about the speakers' depth of understanding of the prior talk. Framing repetitions repeat the turn-initial components of the prior turn with a particular "long and flat" phonetic pattern; prefacing repetitions consist of a minimal repetition of the final grammatical structures of the prior speaker's talk, produced quietly and with a falling intonation contour. While framing repetitions are treated as displays of either a hearing or simple understanding problem, prefacing repetitions claim a more serious breakdown of understanding. Data are in British and American English.

Dit proefschrift onderzoekt de uitingen waarmee sprekers van het Engels aangeven dat ze een probleem hebben met het horen, begrijpen of accepteren van wat de gesprekspartner zojuist gezegd heeft. De vaktaalterm voor zulke herstelverzoeken is ‘other-initiation of repair’. Herstelverzoeken bevatten vaak specifieke talige aanwijzingen om wat voor probleem het gaat. Woordkeuze (vergelijk ‘what?’ versus ‘who?’) en constructie (‘he what’, ‘for who’, ‘you mean Maya?’) helpen om te bepalen wat de aanleiding is voor het probleem en wat de aard daarvan is. Intonatie kan daarbij van cruciaal belang zijn. Met een dalende intonatie lokaliseert het vraagwoord ‘who’ bijvoorbeeld een probleem met een voornaamwoord (‘he’, ‘she’, ‘they’), terwijl ‘who?’ met stijgende intonatie op een ander soort probleem wijst (bijvoorbeeld het niet herkennen van een eigennaam). Ook bij herhalingen heeft intonatie een belangrijke diagnostische functie. Een spreker kan met een hoog-stijgende en dan dalende intonatiecontour aangeven dat datgene wat herhaald wordt, niet acceptabel is en gecorrigeerd zou moeten worden. Het onderzoek is gebaseerd op een corpus van 150 uur gesprekken en combineert gedetailleerde linguistische beschrijving met conversatie-analytische methoden en theorie. Het brengt de talige middelen in kaart waarmee gespreksdeelnemers herstelverzoeken doen en toont aan hoe belangrijk prosodie daarbij is. Door te analyseren hoe vormgevingsverschillen diagnostische informatie verschaffen, benadrukt het onderzoek de actieve sturende rol van de luisteraar bij de organisatie van herstel. De studie draagt daarmee bij aan ons begrip van ‘repair’-organisatie als het resultaat van methodisch interactioneel werk.

This article examines one of the ways in which matters of truth, appropriateness, and acceptability are raised and managed within the course of everyday conversation. Using the methodology of conversation analysis, we show that by repeating what another participant has said and doing so with a high rise-fall intonation contour, a speaker claims that the repeated talk is wrong and in need of correction. There is an incongruity between two versions of the worldthe one presented in the repeated speaker's talk and the one the repeating speaker knows or believes to be true, appropriate, or acceptable. The ensuing sequences are routinely expanded and morally charged as the participants jostle for epistemic or moral authority over the matter at hand and work to repair the incongruity (even if, in the end, they agree to disagree).

Sometimes a person may require the previous speaker to repeat, explain, confirm, etc., what they have just said. Such "other-initiations of repair," as they are called, usually come sharply. On occasion, however, they are issued some time after the offending talk has passed. This might pose a puzzle to the previous speaker who would normally expect problems to be identified immediately. This article argues that recipients can help them by signaling that their other-initiation has, for whatever reason, become separated from the source of the trouble. This is first shown for the particular practice of using "you mean ... " to check one's understanding. A variety of similar practices are then collected together to suggest that the need for managing this puzzle is quite generic and widespread. Finally, it is shown that such practices can have consequences for our understanding of repair more broadly. Examining their use allows us to refine our characterization of where other-initiations normally occur and provides evidence that this contiguous positioning is preferred over noncontiguous positioning.

AbstractRepairis the cover term for a range of practices, found in all languages that have been studied, by which trouble of all sorts is managed.

AbstractThis entry builds on the entry “Conversation Analysis and Repair Organization: Overview” by examining the organization of other‐initiated repair. Excerpts (1) and (2) illustrate the two varieties, or trajectories, of other‐initiated repair: those in which the repair proper is performed by the speaker of the troublesome talk (other‐initiatedself‐repair)and by its recipient (other‐initiatedother‐repair). Thetrouble‐source(TS), theinitiation(I), and therepair proper(R) are labeled in the transcripts:

The use of self priming pumps has been substituted in many applications as a result of the rising popularity of submersible pumps. However, as Trevor Benjamin explains, suction pumps have a number of advantages, including easy access, lower parts and capital costs, and a wide choice of units. He reviews the basics of their operation and the different types of pumps available, and provides important dos and don'ts to ensure their effective operation.

Possibly, the most common pump-type in the world is the diaphragm pump and it comes in all shapes and sizes. However, its use in cars, trucks and stationary engines for fuel lift, means that many are well hidden. Trevor Benjamin looks at the types and applications of the most popular varieties and offers some tips for the potential buyer.

Before setting out to improve energy efficiency it is a good idea to remind yourself about one of Newton's laws — namely, that energy can neither be

The educator pump, or ‘ejector’, is as old as the Greeks, but it is not as well utilised as the centrifugal pump with which it shares some performa

Engineers, and the pump designers amongst them, have to make major compromises between the various conflicting demands of their customers and their users. Trevor Benjamin says that as the application gets more complicated, achieving the correct level of compromise also gets more difficult.