Lerner (1991)

Focusing on the syntactic composition of co-construction, Lerner (1991) identifies several ―compound turn-constructional units‖ (Compound TCUs) as resources for the participant to achieve co-construction in English conversation. He observes that ―compound turn-constructional units‖ in the speaker‘s turn can orient the recipient to the opportunity of turn-taking and completing the speaker‘s sentence-in-progress. Compound turn-constructional units, such as if-clause or when-clause, serving as the preliminary component, projects the coming of the final component to complete the sentence. Speaker change is thus made available for the

next speaker at the end of the preliminary component of a compound turn-constructional unit by the syntactic and semantic features of the compound TCU.

Lerner argues that such two-part formats in conversation are projectable resources for collaborative production of anticipatory completion.

Of particular relevance to the present study are the four major compound turn-constructional units Lerner points out in his study: (1) If X-then Y, (2) When X- then Y, (3) X said-Y, and (4) Instead of X-Y. Syntactically, these compound turn-constructional units make clausal projection, which projects an upcoming clause in the following speech. These turn-constructional units are presented in detail as follows.

If X-then Y logically presents a conditional relationship. The preliminary component if X, projecting the preliminary component completion and a compound construction format, orients the participant to the turn transition place after the completion of the first component for a possible place for co-completion, as in (3).

(3) If X-then Y Rich:

Carol:

if you bring it intuh them ih don‘t cost yuh nothing

(taken from Lerner 1991:445)

In (4), similar to (3), the ―turn-initial compound format marker‖ when (Lerner 1991: 445) in the compound format When X-then Y projects a final component of the compound sentence. The listener is provided with an opportunity for a collaborative production.

(4) When X-then Y

Dan: when the group reconvenes in two weeks=

Roger: =they‘re gunna issue strait jackets

(taken from Lerner 1991:445)

The third compound constructional unit, the quotation structure X said-Y, is proposed by Lerner (1991:446) for three functions: (1) projection of an upcoming quote, (2) offer of a place for the upcoming quote, and (3) signal of the requirement of a quote. All in all, it creates space for an upcoming quote. In (5), Speaker B completes Speaker A‘s quotation with the quote ―why don‘t you come over honey?‖

(5) X said-Y

A: I just wish I were gonna eat a turkey dinner someplace ahh, he, I wish that he‘d say, he said, I have to be back around four, because our family is having something and I wish he‘d say

> B: why don‘t you come over honey?

A: yeah

(taken from Lerner 1991:446)

Lastly, Instead of, as a turn-initial compound unit marker, projects a contrastive offer in the final component, as shown in (6).

(6) Instead of X-Y

Ken: insteada my grandmother offering him a drink, of beer she‘ll say Louise: wanna glassa milk?

(taken from Lerner 1991:450)

In this example, both the compound constructional units, Instead of and X-said, project a potential place for a final component upon its completion. The quotation marker X-said transforms the projected offer from Instead of into a reported offer, but it does not block the projectability of the compound constructional unit, Instead of X-Y. Rather, as Lerner argues, the quotation marker ―places an additional constraint on the production of the projected component‖ (Lerner 1991:450).

With these four compound constructional units, Lerner provides a clear argument

on two-part formats as resources for co-construction. Projection is made available by two-part syntactic formats. There are also some other kinds of two-part formats that are revealed by discourse organization, such as list structure, prefaced agreement, or preformulated formats.

List structure, as pointed out by Lerner, is also a projectable feature in co-construction, which regularly has a three-part structure (i.e., three items) in its construction (Jefferson 1990; Sacks & Schegloff 1979). During the list construction, the possible place for co-completion is made available upon the completion of the second item. In a way, the list structure provides ―a compound turn-constructional unit format‖ (Lerner 1991: 448) from a wider stretch of talk in conversation.

Prefaced disagreement, like the word ―well‖, is also regarded as a projectable element because ―the turn-initial component is typically followed by a disagreement, rather than agreement‖ (Lerner 1991: 449). Therefore, the prefaced component projects an upcoming component showing disagreement. Preformulated formats in the discourse can also serve as the pre-preliminary component, forecast the speaker‘s course of speech, and create a possible turn completion place. Lerner‘s discussion of list structure, prefaced disagreement, and preformulation shows that although co-construction is mainly projected by two-part syntactic formats, there are some occasions where the listener jointly completes the speaker‘s utterance when he is signaled by the compound constructional units in the wider stretch of talk in conversation. In addition, story preface (Sacks 1974), pre-pres (Schegloff 1980), two-syllable names, contrastive-stressed formats, or question-answer pairs can also serve as two-part formats that provide a preliminary completion place for the anticipatory completion to begin and thus provide opportunities for co-construction.

In conclusion, Lerner (1991) explores two-part formats in conversation and identifies several compound constructional units in which the preliminary component

projects the final component for anticipatory completion, orienting the listener to possible junctures for co-construction of the projected units. Some of the two-part formats can be syntactic, such as the if X-then Y format, while some others can be interactionally constituted, such as prefaced disagreement. Lerner‘s detailed characterizations of the compound turn-constructional units undoubtedly throw light on the present study.