English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Using conversation analytic methodology, this article examines the use of the German tokens ach ‘oh’ and achso ‘oh I see’ in the uptake of repair. While achso has been studied from a functional-pragmatic perspective, no contrastive study of ach and achso exists. We investigate two questions: Do different forms of ach occur in the same sequential position? Are they associated with different interactional functions?  The paper shows that in sequentially third position, repairs are receipted with ach  or  achso . The different tokens have different interactional import. While ach receipts new informational content (claiming a change-of-state, similar to English oh ; Heritage 1984), it does not mark understanding. Achso , by contrast, serves as a receipt for information and prior action, claiming that speakers now share the same epistemic level and thus marking a successful repair resolution. Achso makes sequence closure relevant and is followed by a shift in action and/or topic while an ach -turn makes more talk relevant, specifically next turn confirmation.  The paper concludes by discussing the component tokens ach and so separately and outlining implications for the study of epistemics through ‘little words.’

Germanachandachsoin repair uptake: Resources to sustain or remove epistemic asymmetry