# data[].attributes.body
Using his methodological advice and looking at the communication between participants and co-participants without trying to categorize speech acts beforehand we can see a deeper layer of meaning revealed in the chicken dinner dialogue. At first, it appears that this conversation is about Shane doing a complaining action in relation to the amount his potatoes are cooked that also requests a response from the cook, Vivian, with Nancy and Micheal acting in agreement or disagreement to the original act of complaining by Shane. It becomes clear when one analyzes all the social context and the ways in which people did respond to individual things that there is another layer of actions being enacted. One thing revealed is that Nancy in line five is not actually requesting a response from him about how he likes to eat his potatoes, rather is indirectly responding to his complaining action by acting to divert the conversation away from the quality of her friend’s cooking and in doing so acting to support her friend. Based on the most immediate response to Shane’s first comment, Vivian saying “Ah-oww,” it is clear that Shane’s speech act was not misinterpreted by the group as anything other than him complaining about the uncooked state of the potatoes, despite his indirect word choice. Therefore, Nancy, by bringing up potato mashing in the context of the speech actions of the other co-participants, is clearly doing more in her speech act than was originally let on by simply reading the dialogue. The deeper level of this dialogue as being more about friendship loyalty than the actual potatoes is made even more clear when Micheal is prompted by his girlfriend’s speech act to agree with her opinion that the potatoes aren’t cooked. His adjacent speech act is giving a non-committal response and asserting that part of the potato is undercooked. By looking at the context, it is revealed that him saying this isn’t actually him accomplishing Nancy’s request for his opinion, but is instead him acting to avoid to request so as to not get in trouble with either his friend, Shane, or his girlfriend, Nancy, by disagreeing with either of them.

# data[].attributes.body
There is a mountain that overlooks the town where I grew up called Mount Tam. On that mountain is a specific winding road called the Bolinas-Fairfax Ridge. The referential view of this place is a random road high on the mountain where you can see the beach. In fact, locals have a much more socially developed view of this place as a specific street where high school students often hang out at sunset on the weekend, bringing a blanket, dinner, or another type of substance to consume. The local toponym for this place is actually Sunset due to how common this is. When I was in high school, I would often use this name to index the full social meaning of this road with my friends. For example, someone would mention that a group of high schoolers got in a car crash coming down from Sunset and I would know that they might have been under the influence. Another example is that if I asked whether my friends wanted to go to Sunset and they said yes, then we all knew without having to discuss it that our departure time would be about 40 minutes before the sun went down and to bring a blanket. All of this extra context about social interactions was gleaned by simply mentioning the toponym, information that a non-local with only a referential view wouldn’t have access to.

# data[].attributes.body
There are multiple felicity conditions that must be met for this brief dialogue to complete its intended function. For one, the use of place names had to be a known convention procedure with a specific conventional effect within this group and be used within its appropriate circumstance. In this case, that means that the group needed to be made up of Western Apache speakers who understood how to use place names and that it was the correct social setting to invoke this speech act. As all conversation participants were Western Apache, knew how to use place names, and were in a situation where place names are commonly utilized (to give advice from the ancestors and to handle delicate situations where someone’s feelings could be offended) these were felicitous conditions for this dialogue. All of the place names and speech acts were completed correctly and completely according to the participants in a later interview, making that part of the dialogue felicitous as well. Lastly, according to Austin, when the procedure is designed to be done by a person with certain feelings/thoughts or to invoke certain feelings/ thoughts then the participants must intend to have and actually end up having those feelings/thoughts for the instance to be felicitous. As the place names used in this dialogue were honestly intended by the speakers to help Louisa feel supported and positive and to provide her with thoughts about specific ancestral stories, and did, this last aspect of Austin’s felicity conditions was also met by this dialogue. There were also many perforative effects of the use of these place names in a felicitous way. One main effect was that the speakers, excepting Louisa, could express their sympathy and well wishes towards Louisa’s brother without lying about the foolishness of his actions or forcing Louisa to defend him. Furthermore, these performative speech acts worked to transition the conversation away from Louisa, who was initially uncomfortable having to concentrate the conversation on her brother’s foolish actions, and ended up making her feel comforted. Additionally, on a smaller scale, each speech act that included a place name invoked the social context of that location in each listener’s head, allowing them to travel there in their thoughts and hear the advice and wisdom of their ancestors.

# data[].attributes.body
Using the methodological advice from Schegloff the reader of “chicken dinner” is able to deduce a lot more meaning from the interaction between the 4 individuals. Rather than looking at the topical themes of what people are talking about, Schegloff employs people to think about it from the perspective of “action formation.” In this method one examines how, “the practices of talk and other conduct… have an outcome on the production of a recognizable action.” (pg.7) In line 2 of transcript, Shane appears to be complaining about the hardness of the potatoes. While this can be read at face value, he is perhaps also attempting to get help from others, or voice that the potatoes aren’t cooked. Nancy’s addition to this transcript isn’t one of a legitimate question, but instead attempting to diffuse any tension or blame that would be going to Vivian. When Shane begins complaining again, he wants people to take his side that the potatoes are indeed undercooked. Nancy is quick to respond that they seem done to her, and prompts her boyfriend to agree with her by bringing him into the conversation, acting as a tiebreak or reinforcing the notion that the meal is ready. 

# data[].attributes.body
There is a set of tennis courts a couple of blocks from my house that have a profound importance to me and have come to represent an integral part of my relationship with my dad. I played tennis for 12 years before I started college and it was always something that my dad and I did together, sometimes with my brother. The tennis courts were always a place for us to spend quality time together, bonding over a shared hobby. The actual coordinates of the tennis courts are 30.3487° N, 97.7413° W, but my family always refers to this area as “North West Park.” While this does coincide nicely with the actual geographical location, it has come to serve as a cornerstone of spending time with my family. This term is used on a small scale, just encompassing my nuclear family, so only we understand the socially specific meanings we have assigned to this place. 

# data[].attributes.body
My family has spent our summers in the same place since the summer I was born. We spend the time with family and an abundance of family friends, including my best friend and her family. Even the place-name - Salcombe - immediately brings memories, inside jokes and ideas to the forefront of my mind. When I talk with my best friend, we never really need to say more than "I can't wait to be back in Salcs" because we know the ins and outs of what that place-name means to us. This reading also made me think a lot about the visual component to a place name. I am always so taken a back when someone takes me to their "special place-name" and it looks completely different to how I imagined it when they described the place to me. It's fascinating that imaginary-visuals can contribute to the discourses we have about the meanings behind place-names.

# data[].attributes.body
Austin's felicity conditions are absolutely necessary to the "speaking with names" conversation. Firstly, there is an accepted procedure of using place-names as a way to implicate further meaning. both visually and conversationally. Secondly, those participating in the conversation are all of the same page of what is being discussed as well as the direction the conversation is taking. Everyone is participating and are doing so in a way where the place-names are successfully revealing more than what meets the ear. Finally, the speakers are being cautious to the consequences of their words, stories and place-name significance. As a result of these felicity conditions, Louise was left feeling comfortable and not embarrassed on behalf of her son.

# data[].attributes.body
Upon re-reading the Chicken Dinner transcript, it becomes clear what Schegloff means when he prompts readers to think about the intent of the language rather than the impact of the language. Vivian's utterances "it is?...it's not done? the potato?" may seem like standard directive questions but with a second read, it is revealed that Vivian may be asking these questions - not to receive an answer - but to create support or offer help around the situation. By studying how something was said rather than looking at the outcome, Schegloff reveals the action and intent behind language and the purposeful or performative nature that sounds language use. We would absolutely gain more insight on this transcript if we knew the body language, as Schegloff says.

# data[].attributes.body
In his work, Schegloff argues that one must primarily look at conversational turns—the smallest unit of performativity that accomplishes some kind of social act—in order to understand language. This is because focusing on conversational turns allow us to understand the intent of the language, or rather what the speaker appears to be trying to accomplish with their words. If we apply this to the "Chicken dinner" transcript," it is clear that Nancy is defending her friend's cooking during the meal. When Shane starts complaining about the quality of the potatoes, Nancy tries to divert the conversation away by asking if Shane mashes his potatoes as well. When Shane keeps complaining, Nancy states that the potatoes taste fine to her and asks Michael for his opinion—further defending her friend's cooking and looking for support in Michael.

# data[].attributes.body
Schegloff suggests that rather approach analysis from the speakers perspective, one should focus on what was done by their speech and specifically how the co-participants react to it. Shane’s first line elicits two responses. One from Vivian “[Aa-ow.” which I interpreted as worry, disappointment, and or surprise. And another from Nancy who’s response immediately changed the subject. From those two responses, I interpret Shane’s comment as either mildly offensive or taboo - due to the change of subject and surprise. Shane’s immediate interruption of Nancy’s response also suggested that he knew where he wanted to go with this conversation and was determined on driving it there. His comments in line 6, 7, 9 and 12 confirm what he was looking for. Looking at what his words do one can see its effect on the rest of the guests and host. Vivian, after a pause, is led to question her cooking abilities, and Nancy is encouraged to defend them. Shane’s comment acted as a light hearted attack. Nancy in a plea for reinforcements brings Michaels judgement into it.

# data[].attributes.body
I grew up right next to Washington Square Park in NYU housing for 7-ish years since I was 7 or 8. Adjacent to my building was a kids park that you needed a magnetic key to get into. I would spend every afternoon after school there and I met one of my best friends there. I have always only referred to it as the Key Park and between my friend and I, it essentially meant “do you want to hang out?” = “Are you going to the Key Park?” Surprisingly, 13 years later, I met another girl who grew up in the building across the street who also used the same park, and to my surprise knew exactly what I was talking about when I said the Key Park. I had no idea that it was called the “Mercer Playground” until looking it up on Google maps for this assignment. The “locals” in this instance all knew of it as the key park because of their understanding of its association with NYU housing. My friend Lily will immediately understand the experience and location when I use the toponym “Key Park,” but I’m not sure if it came to have a set of socially specific meanings. 

# data[].attributes.body
In my first semester of college, the study room in the tower at Lyon Court dormitory became my friends' favorite place to study and hang out. Because it had the only printer between Lyon and Harwood Court (where I lived), it quickly became our go-to whenever we had an essay or assignment due the next day. Coincidentally, I seemed to run into my same friends whenever I was up at the Lyon tower, who were using it as a quiet place to study. Pretty soon, my friends and I started to coordinate study sessions at the Lyon tower. We created a "potent shorthand" to refer to the study room there, calling it the "printing tower." Although this toponym doesn't reveal much when examined referentially, my group of friends knew all of the socially specific meanings whenever we proposed to study at the "printing tower." Although this room doesn't have the best lighting and honestly felt kind of dingy, we spent countless nights up there bonding and having a good time.

# data[].attributes.body
In order to understand the performative effects of the conversation, it is necessary to know the stories behind the place-names in the Western Apache language. Obviously, there is more to these place-names than their referential definitions—for example, Whiteness Spreads out Descending To Water doesn't just refer to white rocks near a river bank, as the 30-45 second pause after the speaker mentions this place-name indicates that there is a story behind this place that evokes a socially specific meaning in Western Apache language. The performative effects of the place-name are that it evokes a story that everyone in Western Apache culture is familiar with, effectively making most place-names in Western Apache language inherently performative rather than referential.

# data[].attributes.body
Schegloff wants researchers to focus more on the the intention behind something said in language instead of the topical interpretation of an utterance. To look more deeply into why something is said, the researcher can pick up on something more subtle. In "Chicken Dinner," Shane's hidden meanings behind his questions about the rock hard potato is meant to tease (or insult? not sure he seems kinda annoying to me) Vivian by questioning whether or not she cooked it properly. At face value, "this one's as hard as a rock" could just be a descriptive sentence, but in this case it is said to criticize. When Nancy asks Michael to side with her or his friend, he has to choose whether or not he agrees that the rock is hard, meaning that he agrees with Shane that Vivian did not cook it properly. By using Schegloff's methodological device, the interpreter can see that something quite passive aggressive is happening in this exchange.

# data[].attributes.body
The conversation on page 79, if not a native Western Apache, can be difficult to fully comprehend. At first glance, the conversation is short, with only a few facts about the location of the accident listed between the two speakers. It is difficult to comprehend the full importance of this because of the cultural context we are lacking. Later in the reading, we learn how crucial these small facts were, “nothing is more basic to the telling of a Western Apache story than identifying the geographic locations at which events in the story unfold.” These names serve the purpose of not only providing depictions of where an event took place, but are tied to cultural and societal traditions and narratives. Between the two speakers, there is a common and accepted meaning behind these locations that all reference the same idea or meaning. The place-names were additionally used in such a way, performatively, that Louise didn’t feel bad about the events that had happened to her brother and she knew he was going to learn from them and be alright. 

# data[].attributes.body
Near my house there's a small outdoor shopping center known as Bethany Village. When I was little, I referred to it as Short Town, because it reminded me of the big city nearby but much (much) smaller, which equaled short in my mind. Even my parents picked up on the term, referring to it as Short Town to me and even other members of my family. I knew if my dad said we were going to Short Town, it meant that we were going to go grocery shopping or to the library, or even go to "Coffee Store," which is what I called Starbucks. So while others would recognize the name Bethany Village and understand it as a shopping center, when my family said we were going to Short Town, it meant a day of shopping and maybe even a treat for me as a kid.

# data[].attributes.body
In the speaking with names conversation, the first felicity convention that's met is the idea of following an accepted conventional procedure. As Basso mentioned, it's very important for an Apache speaker to mention locations. This allows for the listens to understand greater meaning behind the story. The people and circumstances must also be appropriate, meaning that the listeners had to know Louise's brother and understand what happened to him. Finally, the thoughts and feelings must be present and conducted. The other speakers were able to convey sympathy and support for Louise in her time of need, literally referring to places but performatively supporting Louise and invoking the knowledge of their ancestors.

# data[].attributes.body
According to Schegloff, methodology of observing interaction should include first observing singular pieces of data in its context, and observing how the speech was done and questioning what that piece was designed to do. He also mentions that TCUs can embody more than one action. If we apply this to the "chicken dinner" transcript we can re-analyze the conversation to see that what appeared to be at first a simple conversation about whether the potatoes were done or not, and to see who agrees and who disagrees, we see that there are more than one embodying action per TCU. For example, Nancy's comment of "It [the potato] seems done to me, " is not only serving the function of disagree with Shane, but is describing the state of the potato and demonstrating support for her friend. Similarly, Shane's question of "Alright, who cooked this meal?" both serves the action of asking but also functions as passive aggressive complaining, similar to the Starbucks transcript, where Shane knows the answer to the question but uses it to demonstrate his criticism of Vivian's ability.

# data[].attributes.body
Schegloff’s advice on p. 8 is that we should determine what action a particular piece of speech is performing, not by our prior expectations of what actions we would expect to be performed, but by what the participants in the conversation interpret the speech to be doing, as shown by the way they respond to it. In the Chicken Dinner transcript, Vivian initiates a turn in line 11 with “It’s not done? The potato?” Shane completes the turn in line 12 with “I don’t think so.” To interpret what action these two speakers were taking within this turn, according to Schegloff, we should look to how the conversational participants responded. In this case, the response was a pause of about 2 seconds, followed by Nancy’s “Seems fine to me, how about you Michael?” in line 14. The pause suggests that Shane’s line 12 response disrupted the flow of the conversation by taking a different action than would have been politely expected – rather than backing down from his critique of the potato when asked directly by Vivian, or being conciliatory, he doubles down on his insistence that it is improperly prepared. He has attacked Vivian and insinuated her incompetency, which is why Nancy, looking to defend Vivian, opposes his critique (“Seems fine to me”) and then seeks to rally Michael to her aid as well (“How about you Michael?”). So analyzing the response in line 14 tells us that Vivian’s action in line 11 was to give Shane a choice: (1) politely back down from his critique or (2) explicitly reveal himself as an aggressor to the entire table. Shane’s action in line 12 was then to choose (2). Similar analysis could be applied to the other turns in this exchange, and it would reveal the stages of the core conflict – Shane introduces an attack on Vivian, she brings it to the forefront of the conversation to enlist aid from Nancy and Michael, Nancy comes to her aid and pressures Michael to do the same, Michael tries to save face by agreeing with Shane in a reserved and noncommital way.

# data[].attributes.body
When I lived at Harvey Mudd I lived in East Dorm, and the set of people who lived in or spent time in East Dorm were my primary social circle. Our online semesters have brought into sharp focus just how much we use the toponym “East” in precisely this way. We frequently speak of wanting to meet “the new frosh in East,” which in the stricted sense means the first-year students who were assigned by the housing committee to live in East Dorm before the college announced going fully online. Of course these frosh are not in the building East Dorm at all, but what we really mean by “in East” is being an active participant in the culture. We’ve been using the phrase this way since long before the pandemic, we would frequently speak of people as being “in East” who actually lived in other dorms, but were actively participants in the culture, and likewise of people who lived in the dorm but did not participate in our culture, we would say things like “they live in East, but they’re not in East.” Of course I’m using the phrase “participate in our culture” as a shorthand here – that is a very complex issue and there is no clear definition of what our culture is and what it means to participate, and no two people would give the same definition. For me, “our culture,” and therefore “East” itself, means sitting in the dorm lounge (“The Lounge” - another toponym I could say a lot about) on a fairly regular basis to interact, do homework, watch movies, and things of this nature. For others, “our culture” has more to do with parties and late-night gatherings which I myself, though I would consider myself very much “in East,” have never been to. But these shades of meaning are usually conveyed by the identity of the person using the word “East,” rather than any difference in the word use itself.

# data[].attributes.body
The conditions seem to be: (1) all participants are familiar with the speaking with names convention (Austin’s A1), (2) all participants are familiar with the places and associated stories being referred to (close to Austin’s A2), (3) the speaker must correctly name the location which is associated with the story they wish to convey (close to Austin’s B1), and (4) the addressee must accept that the story is appropriate for the present situation. As with Austin’s “Gamma” conditions, condition (4) is necessary for the desired outcome to be achieved, but not necessarily for the situation to be classified as “speaking with names.” In the case of the conversation on p. 79, the desired performative effect of Lola and Emily’s speaking with names was to help Louise feel better about what her brother did and give her a way to talk about it did without either disrepecting her brother or condoning his behavior. Louise, the addressee, demonstrates her acceptance of the stories by laughing. Then because her brother’s behavior has been couched in terms of silly childishness by the stories, she is able to admit that he has acted foolishly without being too insulting to her brother, and so the intended effect of the speaking with names has been accomplished. The small-scale effect is that a potentially taboo discussion of a transgression has been made acceptable by reframing the transgression from a serious violation of community standards into a harmless “I guess we learned a lesson, didn’t we” kind of situation. The large-scale effect is that Lola and Emily have demonstrated their care and concern for their friend, in a tactful and respectful way that allows their friend to dictate the terms of the discussion, and so have preserved and strengthened their friendship.

# data[].attributes.body
In the Fall of 2019, I had the incredible privilege to study in abroad in Rabat, Morocco, an experience and a country that is by far my favorite part of college. Not only is Morocco incredibly beautiful, but for the first time in my life as a Muslim hijabi, I could comfortably "fit in" and be surrounded by Islamic symbols and practices that had always been so unique to my family, growing up in the U.S. My friend group and I would explore different parts of the country, but every day after school we would go to this cafe called "Cafe Renaissance." Typical to Moroccan styles, it was half outdoor half indoor, and we would spend hours drinking juice and doing HW, but what was special was that every Monday night, for $3, it would turn into a mini concert hall/open mic, with 70 young Moroccans packed into the cafe listening to a lot of rock and punk bands. Every Monday we would all message our groupchat asking who was going to the "open mic," even though we would go to this cafe all the time for other purposes, and barely even mentioned the location's real name. To an outsider who didn't know about these weekly events, they would not have known what location we were even talking about, but to our group, "open mic" referenced Cafe Renaissance. This indicates the difference between my socially developed view and the referential view--while "open mic" does reference the open mics, it doesn't encompass the abundance of happy memories of bonding with friends for hours over HW, enjoying different fruit drinks, and the concert and dancing we would enjoy.

# data[].attributes.body
Schegloff encourages us to consider what a bit of talk appears to do, what action it performs. The majority of the lines in the chicken dinner transcript are, at face value, about the potatoes and how they're cooked, but in reality each serve a social purpose beyond that. By complaining about the potatoes it appears that Shane is asserting some sort of social dominance or power over his girlfriend Vivian, when given the context that Shane often teases Vivian in this way. In doing this teasing in public, Shane is attempting to draw lines and force the friends to pick a side: Shane or Vivian. Nancy's first comment is not merely a connection over ways to eat a potato, but is also a diversion, warning Shane not to force this division on them and attempting to give them all a chance not to go down that road. Shane, however, doubles down and continues. Nancy sides with Vivian when she says her potato seems done to her, and Michael hedges but leans towards Shane by saying a little bit isn't done. Shane's "that's right," is his way of not just agreeing, but asserting his victory in this argument over Vivian.

# data[].attributes.body
Austin's felicity conditions refer to the conditions that must be in place and the criteria that needs to be met for an utterance of speech to complete what is was designed to do, or its purpose. Among these include the participants of the conversation understanding the language used, that the participants understand or know the accepted meanings of the locations mentioned, and that by referencing the location, the group would not only know the context, but understand it the way it was meant to be said. The author explains that the reason the reader, us, may be confused is because we don't have the information needed to establish sequences and relate the utterances to each other, in that we can't coherently assemble the meanings of the words together. The performative effects include that the names of the places mentioned relay the specific locations and tones of these places, whether positive and negative, and affirm the culturally symbolic meanings behind them. Furthermore, they affirm Luisa's belief in the cultural understanding of the danger of snakes, and validate her concerns about her son , and how he did not follow her wishes. Lastly, the author. mentions the practice of "speaking with names" and the way this conversation exemplifies this: by referencing the locations it indicates the participants relationship to their own self awareness of the land, as well as attributing silent cultural meaning to remembering one's ancestors.

# data[].attributes.body
Schegloff suggest that observing the actions of the speaker and how their dialogue is being spoken is incredibly important. He writes that rather than starting from the “names of types of action… classes of action”, one should start by paying close attention to the small bits of data that are embedded in the conversation that helps the reader get in the nitty gritty of what was truly happening in the scene (8). With the “Chicken Dinner” conversation, I can assess that Nancy, in order to support her friend Vivian’s cooking, is trying to divert the conversation from Shane’s complaints towards the meal. She starts with asking Shane if he also mashes his potatoes. Shane is insistent on criticizing the dinner, which Nancy is clearly surprised by and Vivian is also surprised/hurt/disappointed with his comments. When he continues to complain about the hardness of the potatoes, Nancy supports Vivian by proclaiming that the meal is well-cooked and seems find to her.  She looks to her parter Michael for support, asking him if he also has well-cooked potatoes. Michael is put in an awkward position to either support his partner and Vivian or agree with Shane, and ultimately sides with Shane. The reader can very clearly interpret the tone and passive aggression in the conversation.

# data[].attributes.body
A place that is rich in meaning for me is a town that is more or less adjacent to my hometown of Poulsbo. This place is called Bainbridge Island, and it’s a mere 15-minute drive away from downtown Poulsbo. However, it has the social index of being a place where wealthy, sometimes snooty, people live. Often times the inhabitants of Bainbridge work in Seattle and commute on the ferry. They tend to associate themselves more with the city than with the rural communities they are adjacent to. My cousins live on Bainbridge Island and my uncle is a lawyer in Seattle, so I could see the reality of this stereotype play out on a familial scale. (I feel like I should note here that I love my family). Additionally, people will talk about “Bainbridge” in specific ways which extend beyond the coordinates they pick out. For instance, a friend of mine in high school shop lifted a cliff bar at a regional grocery store there. He was apprehended and charged by police officers. We have a sister store in our hometown, and we always say that the only reason they went to such extreme measures over a cliff bar was because it was “Bainbridge.” When we say this, we aren’t implying that those coordinates have a special affect, but rather that their culture meaningfully intersects with their location. To charge someone with breaking the law over something so small is seen as an act which is indicative of a place that deals with very little real Socioeconomic conflict. It is seen as a “Bainbridge thing to do” by people from Poulsbo. Also, this is reflected in real life consequences as there are many people from Bainbridge at the 5Cs (No offense to anyone if you are in this class), while I am the only person to my knowledge who attends from Poulsbo. Additionally, I only knew about Scripps through a college advisor that my parents hired from…. You guessed it. Bainbridge Island.

# data[].attributes.body
Condition A1 is fulfilled as Basso describes the use of the phrase “in this very place”. It is accepted that this means to think back on the history of said place and its accompanying story. Condition A2 is also fulfilled because the use of “in this very place” was appropriate for the difficult story Louise was trying to tell. It was further appropriate because of the atmosphere. Conditions B1 and B2 are fulfilled in that all participants in Louise’s conversation understood the procedure of using toponyms to give greater social context and even to elicit stories. We understand it to be complete through the silence of remembrance and Louise’s reaction to their words. I’m not sure how R1 and R2 apply to toponyms. Toponyms, used in this context, are meant to convey a story which speaks a greater truth about a situation and has less to do with the action of the speaker and more so to do with the content of what they are saying. One could interpret it as “I sympathize” or otherwise where the speaker’s intention, feeling, and action are forthright and acted upon. Considering this, the dialogue does fulfill R1 and R2 as Emily and Lola do feel sympathy and empathy for their friends situation and “do” such emotions through toponyms. 

# data[].attributes.body
I never had a particular place that I shared with friends growing up, so when I got to college, it was a new experience to have specific spots that my friends and I could all communicate about without being explicit about it. Mount Baldy, officially known as Mount San Antonio, is a common spot for Claremont residents to go and smoke weed/hang out/hook up. As a first-year, my friend, who was a sophomore, texted me asking if I wanted to go up to Baldy. I didn’t quite know what she meant by that, but quickly realized the significance and meaning behind that sentence. In my head, going to Baldy refers to more of a hand out spot, rather than a hike (if I were to hike on Baldy, I would text my friend “wanna hike Potato?” Or “wanna do the summit hike?” rather than texting them “wanna hike Mount Baldy?”. It differs from the relationship I have with other mountains, which are more directed towards overnight backpacking trips or hikes. In my head, “going to Baldy” references a place to watch the sunset, to get high, to laugh, to hang out, which is exactly the same as my close peers. It creates a sense of community around a mountain that seems so vast, yet so community oriented, and simultaneously, separates those who don’t live around Mount Baldy with those who frequent it a lot.

# data[].attributes.body
The conversation between Lola and Louise is difficult to decipher without background knowledge of the Western Apache culture. The Felicity conditions that are necessary for the conversation are based on the appropriate language surrounding locations, people, and shared experiences in order to fully comprehend the deeper meaning behind such a short conversation. Lola and Emily use “speaking with names” to help make Louise feel better about her brother’s foolishness. As a reader that is unknowledgeable about the Western Apache culture and the locations that they are referring to, it is impossible to account for the ways “in which its constituent utterances are related to each other” (80). However, those who have knowledge of the Western Apache grammar could much more easily navigate the conversation in a deeper and more positive way/less accusatory way, much like Lola and Emily being able to use place names to comfort Louisa.

# data[].attributes.body
Schegloff suggests that we analyze a specific bit of talk and the response it elicits instead of trying to making categories of outcome actions. In Chicken Dinner, Schegloff tells us that Shane is teasing Vivian, so it is probably appropriate to interpret her first response to his statement about being unable to mash the potato as joking disappointment. Either this teasing dynamic might be unintelligible to Nancy or she is so used to it that she ignores him, and she changes the subject to ask about the way the potatoes are cooked. I choose to interpret it as a polite way to ignore Shane. Shane continues to complain, and Vivian responds with what seems like a question to ask if the potatoes are cooked. However, here she is acknowledging him because he won't be quiet, but instead of apologizing or acknowledging fault, she is expressing surprise and distancing herself as cook. Michael joins in the teasing, but it seems like he is joking because of laughter notated in the text.

# data[].attributes.body
My town claims to be the town where the exorcism incident in the book that was inspiration for the movie the Exorcist occurred. (One other town nearby also makes the same claim.) The house where this possessed girl supposedly lived was a couple blocks from my house, but legend has it that the houses on the property kept burning down, so they turned it into a park. It's not a great park, but there's been nothing in my experience to indicate it's spooky or supernatural in any way. Nevertheless, my friends and I call it "Exorcist Park," which conjures memories of taking snacks there in middle school and feeling brave because of all the spooky stories. Now the name just makes us laugh. Another example is my county, PG County, which is nationally known as the wealthiest majority African-American county in the US. For many people, it connotes Black excellence and success. The reality is that PG county is very diverse racially, ethnically, and socioeconomically, but the wealthiest neighborhoods are almost entirely African-American. However, because so much of DC is gentrifying and full of the power players that the term Washington, connotes, talking about being from PG is a way of signaling a position of opposition to all of that. Instead of the highly elitist, historically white parts of the west side of the city that produced Brett Kavanaugh, PG county is a place where the majority of elected representatives are Black and where people tend to stay planted for a longer period of time. It's the main place where the people who had lived in DC for generations and had to move because of gentrification have moved to. When people say they're from PG, it's a sense of opposition to the ultra-elite connotation of Washington and connoting a rootedness in the other history of the region for people who have lived here generationally.

# data[].attributes.body
On page 8, Schegloff emphasizes the importance of observing how dialogue is performed. He encourages scholars to analyze "singular bits of data, each in its embedding context, and seek out what - in that instance - the speaker appeared to be doing, and what in the talk and other conduct underwrote or conveyed that that was what was being done," (pg 8). That is, Schegloff argues that scholars must observe to the best of their ability the circumstances and intent behind conversations before trying to interpret the outcome actions. In the case of the "Chicken dinner" on page 4, this methodological approach can be used to better understand the implicit meaning of different speakers' statements. In this scenario, a college student, Vivian, and her boyfriend Shane are hosting a dinner party for two friends, and Shane is continually complaining about the quality of the potatoes Vivian has cooked. Vivian responds to these complaints with questions: on line 8, "It is?" and on line 11, "It's not done? The potato?" By using Schegloff's approach, the reader can better understand Vivian's obscured calls for reassurance, she is asking for her friends to support her and verify whether Shane is being truthful. When Nancy joins in at line 14, she helps Vivian out and pushes her boyfriend Michael to do the same. Without Schegloff's approach, one might think this was a congenial conversation about dinner, but when you look closer there is a complex social dynamic at play.

# data[].attributes.body
Speaking with names is reserved for times when "speaking of absent parties to persons closely connected to them must be accomplished with delicacy and tact," (91). For this to be effective, all speakers must be aware of Western Apache landscape, stories, and linguistic conventions. They do not need to have the same exact memory of stories because the hearer is supposed to conjure their own mental images. Speaking with names allows speakers to allude to stories steeped in ancestral knowledge, which can be comforting to the interlocutor. It also allows speakers to avoid directly speaking about the situation , which could be socially sticky for both the speakers and their interlocutor.

# data[].attributes.body
For me, the best example of this would be the toponym of "Claremont" which I use with my friends and family as shorthand for the experience of college in Claremont, specifically at Pitzer, and all of the actions and behaviors associated with it. The referential view of Claremont is literally the town of Claremont itself. But when I'm away from school and tell my friends or family that I miss Claremont, they and I know that I am not referring to the town of Claremont, but to the colleges and the experiences that went with them in Claremont. Claremont doesn't mean the actual town, but it means getting meals with friends, seeing people while walking from class to class, going to Target with people, working at the Admissions office, going to parties in Mead, going rock climbing, or just hanging out with friends.

# data[].attributes.body
Speaking with names is not something that is done in every conversation, or even in many. It's reserved for times when reminding others of a story that provides a moral lesson may be comforting, distracting, or educational. In these situations, a person who is not present is being talked about, and speaking with names allows people to not sound judgemental or critical while also expressing their opinions. By speaking with names, speakers transport listeners to a story that occurred at a place by referencing a specific vantage point of that place. Listeners transported to these places are reminded of the stories, their moral implications, and how they were resolved. When chosen appropriately, places spoken of can be reassuring forces. Anxiety and emotional turbulence can give way to "inner quiet" or "softness."

# data[].attributes.body
A place that has a lot of meaning for me is the ice cream shop I worked at in high school called Scoop N Stick. My friends and I often hanged out in the shop with me working since not a lot of people dropped by and my boss was very nice, letting me do my homework or having free ice cream on the job. The coordinates of the shop (that no longer exists) are very different from my perception of it and doesn't hold the same meaning and emotions to me. I often just referred to it as Scoop N Stick to my friends since it was such a funny name and people understood it as the ice cream shop that I gave them discounts for.

# data[].attributes.body
In high school, it was a tradition for most students at my school to head to the Whataburger across the street after home football games on Friday nights. The small fast food building would fill up quickly, and you had to leave the game early if you ever wanted a chance of finding a seat. Referentially, the Whataburger itself is sort of dingy and just one of many within my hometown Houston. To an outsider, it may seem like a random fast food joint, however, it has a lot of indexical meanings for people who have gone to my school. If a student heard the words, "Do you want to go to Whata this week?" they would immediately know where and likely when this event was supposed to happen. They would also have a clear idea of who would be there and what to expect. To insiders, the name itself carries a lot of social context.

# data[].attributes.body
Schegloff encourages observers to ask what a speaker's way of talking could accomplish, what their talking is designed to do, and what action their talking is practice for. Schegloff recommends grounding investigation in these questions and focusing on classes of actions rather than the names of types of actions. Actions may not have a specific name. When Shane complains about the potatoes in the Chicken Dinner transcript, he isn't necessarily being honest, so the potatoes probably aren't hard. When he starts complaining, Vivian either doesn't notice or pretends not to, but as Shane continues complaining, she begins to express what appears to be concern at the merits of her cooking. As her distress rises to the surface, Nancy attempts to intervene by asserting that the potatoes seem done, and enlists Michael to help, who provides a subpar and wishy-washy response. Michael appears to think that some of the potatoes are hard but is trying not to offend. Whether or not he actually thinks they are hard is irrelevant because Shane takes Michaels middle-of-the-road statement as a reassurance that the potatoes are hard, or at least, that Michael is not opposed to Shane pretending the potatoes are hard.

# data[].attributes.body
A lot of insider knowledge is necessary to fully understand what is being said in this conversation--meeting the felicity conditions is essential. A listener not only must understand the Western Apache tradition of "speaking with names," but they must also have some knowledge about the physical locations to which the speakers refer to, as well as the historical stories to which they allude. When successful, "speaking with names" can be very powerful. In Basso's example, Louise's friends "speak with names" to provide her reassurance, and while Louise doesn't know all of the stories to which her friends refer to, the meaning still comes across. The conversation is felicitous and provides Louise tranquility. In Western Apache communities, "speaking with names" serves as an important social tool that people can use to demonstrate empathy, give advice, and provoke inner reflection. In Basso's words, they can "heal wounded spirits."

# data[].attributes.body
In this short conversation in Apache, the speakers have a very socially developed perception of these placenames. The pauses that Basso records implies that these speakers are thinking deeply about the memories they have of these toponyms, possibly reminiscing. The silence broken by Louise only to be interrupted by Lola shows that everyone has been thinking of Louisa's sick brother, and the placenames are now marked with the memory of Louisa's brother who is now sick from there.

# data[].attributes.body
On the first line, wherein Shane is making a somewhat dramatic statement about the difficulty he has mashing his potatoes, we can discern that he meant to imply that the potatoes were not cooked fully/correctly. Based on Schegloff’s preface to this interaction, we can assume this is a flirtatious action aimed implicitly toward his partner, Vivian. We can then view Nancy’s statement, which is posed as a question but can be taken as a strategic maneuver, as a way to redirect the conversation away from a topic that could hurt her friend’s feelings. She may or may not be aware of Shane’s true intent. If she is, it is probably a more playful redirection than if she is not. It is, either way, an act of loyalty to her friend. Shane, however, has no interest in following Nancy’s lead as partway through her statement he continues his action of flirtatious insulting through a hyperbolic metaphor, relating his potato to a rock. This is also an act of defiance towards Nancy. He spoke over the tacit request she made towards him to change the subject. He then commented “yeah,” as a halfhearted fulfillment of Nancy’s request by engaging with her topic on the surface level. However, it is clear at this point that he has no interest in granting her true request to change the subject. Vivian, Shane’s partner, finally speaks as she asks if what Shane says is true. Shane continues in his previous action of discussing the potatoes hardness, which may be seen as an indirect answer to her question. She asks again, seeking a more serious reply than she believes she is getting, as to the truth of what he is saying. He finally answers her request for information by stating that he doesn’t think the potatoes are done explicitly. Nancy then cuts in to defend her friend by stating her disagreement with Shane. She also requests her partner’s support. This has put Michael in the difficult position of choosing whether to align his loyalty with his friend or his partner. He ultimately decides to position himself somewhere in the middle. This can be seen as his way of appeasing both his girlfriend and his friend, although it is clear that he has no actual thoughts about the potatoes. Shane then announces his victory, by implying that Michael’s statement was aligned with his own, although it was clearly somewhere in the middle ground. This method reveals a complex hidden network of teasing via hyperbolic insults, loyalty, and conflict, all taking place on an abstract level.

# data[].attributes.body
1.)   The felicity conditions which are required for a “speaking-with-names” action to be successful are many. Firstly, at the fundamental level, a shared knowledge must be in place between both speakers about the cultural history of a place-name. Then, the correct social dynamics must also be in motion. These include, as Schegloff outlines, when an absent party has made a regrettable error, but the present party does not wish to pass judgement or be perceived as lacking compassion. They instead feel that ancestral knowledge might help those present find advice and peace given the present difficult circumstances. This practice is also used in more general settings when it seems that ancestral knowledge may help to heal the spirit of a person enduring a difficulty. Some of the performative effects that result include acts of reassurance and solidarity. They also may be seen to induce a shift in mood more generally. Furthermore, they can help relieve the duty of a family member from appearing to condemn their kin, which is taken very seriously by the Western Apache people, and having to deny their wrongdoing, which would bring their own sanity/mindset into question. Finally, these place-names actually transport the interlocutors, in a sense, to a place which is situated in-between a place looking forward towards the future, and a place looking back at the path of the ancestors that endured hardship before them.

# data[].attributes.body
I appreciate that Schegloff reorients the methodology from starting at the end point to starting with an observation and asking "why?". In the case of the "chicken dinner" transcript, if we ask why Shane says "Ah can't- Ah can't get this thing mashed" in line 1, we can assume through context he is feigning difficulty at cutting the potato, and in so doing, teasing his girlfriend (it's hard for me to imagine this not being embarrassing for Vivian, but that's beside the point). We can make a similar inference if we ask why Shane makes his statements in lines 6, 9, and 12. If we ask why Vivian asks "It is?" in line 8 and "It's not done? th'potato?" in line 11, we can answer that she is probably seeking assurance that the meal she prepared is not awful. As Schegloff points out, Nancy's utterance in line 14, "Seems done t'me how 'bout you Michael," seems to act both as validation for Vivian, and as a request to Michael, her boyfriend, to back up herself and her friend. Michael's utterance in line 17 equivocates, saying a bit of it isn't done so as not to inflame either host.

# data[].attributes.body
This past weekend, I wanted to show my partner my favorite place to go to from high school, a place filled with memories and sweet moments. I was having trouble remembering all the turns I had to take to get there, and so I asked him to look for a park on the edge of the water on Apple Maps in the direction we were going. I had always referred to it as Sunrise Park with my friends, because it was beautiful spot to stop at both at sunrise and sunset, but he couldn't find it on the map because it wasn't officially named Sunrise Park -- and I, no matter how hard I tried, could not remember the official name of the park. Once we found it and saw that it was actually called "Melton Peter Demetre Park," he actually asked why we didn't call it Demetre Park, and I realized that there were no memories tied to Demetre Park, it was only Sunrise Park in my mind. I am fairly certain that if I were to have said Demetre Park back in high school, people wouldn't have known what I was even talking about, whereas Sunrise Park, or the toponym, had developed socially among locals here on the island.

# data[].attributes.body
Schegloff's methodological advice is to look for the deeper meaning of what is has been said -- similar to the idea of a performative, we are trying to understand what is being conveyed, accomplished, or implied by what people say. By noting the way things are said, the intonation, the emphasis, volume, and speed, we are able to pick up more by what is being put down. Therefore, in the Chicken Dinner conversation, we are able to gather that when Nancy responds in line 5, she is already beginning to note Shane's tone and opens up an opportunity to share a way doing something, but Shane, by asking, "Who cooked this meal?" knowing full well who cooked it, is commenting on the inadequacy of the meal (in his opinion), while Nancy provides various instances of support for Vivian and opportunities for tension relief in the conversation -- which Shane of course ignores.

# data[].attributes.body
In senior year of high school, my friend Rosie and I started going every Wednesday to this cafe called Cafe Jax. It felt like an oasis to us because, due to our schedules, we got to leave school early and go to this place where we would talk, drink coffee, and work on a crossword. After we graduated, "Do you wanna go to Jax?" didn't mean the same as "Do you want to hang out?" or even "Do you want to go to Starbucks?" It implied a time for just the two of us, being together and not working on homework or talking with or about other people. The last couple years we've had several "Jax" calls where we work on a crossword and treat the time together as more sacred than usual. When I say "Jax" out loud I don't mean the referential view of it as a cafe on a specific street with a certain amount of square footage and coffee offerings, but of the moments it promises and memories it triggers. When I say it to Rosie, I think she has the same response. But if I were to offer Cafe Jax as a meetup spot with someone else (which I would be unlikely to do), I imagine they would only see it as a plausible meet up location and a destination on Google Maps.

# data[].attributes.body
Austin's felicity condition A.1. that "there must exist an accepted conventional procedure having a certain conventional effect, the procedure to include the uttering of certain words by certain persons in certain circumstances" is definitely in play in Basso's "speaking with names" conversation on p. 79. If two white New Yorkers repeated this exact same conversation at my high school, it would not perform in the intended way of the speakers. There is no "conventional procedure" apparent at my high school that would allow for this conversation to be meaningful or significant. Similarly, Austin's felicity condition A.2. that "the particular persons and circumstances in a given case must be appropriate for the invocation of the particular procedure invoked" is also necessary for Basso's "speaking with names" conversation. If the same exact conversation took place when Louise's brother was present, or if I were the one speaking what Lola or Emily did, the act would be infelicitous due to the circumstances or speaker. I am unfamiliar with speaking with names, and so it wouldn't mean much for me to refer to Trail Extends Across A Red Ridge With Alder Trees. Likewise, if Louise's brother had been present, it would have been inappropriate for the others to give her consolation in such a way, and so would not perform in its original way.

# data[].attributes.body
The felicity conditions, in more simple terms, outline that in order for a performative to be felicitous, the circumstances and people are appropriate and it must be accepted and sincerely executed by all participants. In this case, Apache people are sincerely and completely executing the performative, allowing for the performative effects to take place. One effect would be the way that they use place names not only as place names, but also as a way to comfort Louisa. There are stories and moments tied to the place names that are difficult for non-Apache people to grasp, but when all the conditions of the performative are fulfilled, it allows the performative to do its job in comforting, advising, and also reflect on the situation.

# data[].attributes.body
Schegloff uses non-standard spellings, such as "Howijuh" to convey accent and contractions (25). I dislike this way of annotating accents for relatively short sections of speech because it takes a long time to get adjusted to what you are reading, and it can be truly hard to tell what kind of sounds the notation is trying to imitate. I think this method is most effective if a reader is going to engage with a particular system of non-standard spelling or that system's description for an extended period of time, like Zora Neale Hurston's Their Eyes Were Watching God. After a while the reader gets used to the spelling system and begins to understand the internal logic. Consistent internal logic is an advantage of IPA. It can be really useful for highly educated people who need to engage with different languages briefly without learning their orthographies, like opera singers. However, I am skeptical of the IPA's ability to notate all the difference in speech that different hearers are able to discern. Some types of non-standard spellings might be more advantageous in this setting. Additionally, it takes time and resources to learn, although extended time for understanding is also a pitfall for non-standard spellings. Lastly, standard spellings are useful in that most readers are familiar with their internal logics. However, they don't do a great job of showing variations in accents

# data[].attributes.body
It is crucial to include multimodal information in transcripts because a large part of language and communication is non-verbal and multi-modal. When people kneel during the national anthem, they are communicating powerfully without speaking at all. In a spoken conversation, multi-modal information can be crucial to understanding which indexical meaning a speaker is trying to invoke.

# data[].attributes.body
#Metoo is the second pair part of an exchange where the first pair part is a survivor's story of sexual trauma. This construction is so powerful because it subverts the expectation that stories of sexual trauma will be met with disbelief. It also performs the phatic function of language by connecting survivors together in community. I would say that the informative and expressive functions exist secondarily in conveying a particular experience in a particular tone. Durrani worries that #metoo has limited performative capability for lasting change, and I am curious to talk to her about that. My personal consumption of media during 2017 and 2018 was different than what she described in national trends, so that may be influencing me, but I saw #metoo as incredibly effective.

# data[].attributes.body
I thinked the biggest pitfall with Schegloff’s approach is that it makes non-standard American English speakers appear less educated than standard American English speakers. For example, when Shane in line 12 of the Chicken dinner transcript (1.02) says “Ah don’t think so,” rendering the first word as “Ah” rather than “I” is likely done to accurately convey the sounds Shane is making, Shane likely having what I would call a Southern accent. If Shane were using a standard American English mode of speech, his words would likely be rendered as simply “I don’t think so,” which would make most readers perceive him as more educated, even if this happened at a subconscious level. So the issue with Schegloff’s method isn’t that it “misspells” English, it is that it “misspells” to a differing degree depending on the speaker. On the advantage side, Schegloff’s method does manage to convey the sounds the speaker is making in a way that might be more intelligible to a reader unfamiliar with the International phonetic alphabet. This is one pitfall of the IPA – that it is dense and unfamiliar except to those trained to use it. The upside of the IPA would be that, for those familiar with it, it would more clearly represent what the speakers are actually saying, and all speakers would look about equally “weird” regardless of where they come from. The standard spellings are the clearest for untrained readers, but they lose a lot of information about variations in the way people pronounce words which can carry important information – perhaps the words that are less important to their performative actions are more slurred together, for example.

# data[].attributes.body
The example from the blog post gives an instance where bodily information is crucial to understanding the actions taking place in the setting. To fully transcribe what is taking place in the football game, one would have to note down that Kaepernick was sitting down, and that the rest of his teammates and the crowd were standing. One would also want to note the time at which those who stood stood, and the physical positioning of Kaepernick at a distance away from his teammates. This situation is very different from, say, the applause at the end of a play, where one or two audience members will stand up, and then people will slowly follow until only a few people are sitting down. A careful enough transcript will make the difference clear – everyone in the stadium but Kaepernick stood up roughly at the same time, making his behavior a clear violation of the norm which likely carries a significant meaning (which would of course be his protest), while in the theatre, the more staggered nature of the standing would suggest that the act is not so much a norm expected of everyone, and so those audience members still sitting by the end are not as likely to be engaging in protest. His spacial positioning away from his teammates also suggests protest, while audience members in a theatre stay all together. If one were to make a transcript of the football game with no multi-modal information at all, it would simply record that the national anthem played, which would carry no information whatsoever about the culturally significant protest going on.

# data[].attributes.body
The movement seeks to redress a wrong in our culture, which is that the first pair part of someone discussing their sexual abuse is met with an unfitting second pair part, of dismissal or disbelief. The central phrase the movement is named for is a better second pair part which completes the adjacency pair in a more positive way. In terms of Jakobson’s functions, the movement has a strong phatic function, as part of it is about drawing attention to how difficult it is for abused people to communicate with others and be heard. It calls on people to reflect on our system of communication itself – the way that we begin by presuming women’s stories of sexual harassment and abuse to be untrue, shutting out and ignoring voices we don’t want to hear. It also has a function that is aimed at holdign abusers accountable for actions they have previously gotten away with, which I can’t really situate in terms of Jakobson’s functions, but which is nonetheless an important performative component. Maybe Jakobson needs a “seeking to effect change” function.

# data[].attributes.body
The blog post's analysis of multimodality exemplified in Colin Kaepernick's post powerfully demonstrates the indexical signs and hidden, meaningful messages that simple actions can symbolize, that are needed in a conversational transcript to reflect the holistic understanding of the situation. For example, if Colin Kaepernick was to say, "I will not stand for the anthem until black people and people of color are allowed equal liberties of justice and equality," a transcript that excludes expressions, gestures, and body movements would not relay the symbolism behind his taking a kneel, as well as the way it differentiates him from his team: metaphorically, his kneeling also portrayed the way his white teammates had the privilege of playing the sport and navigating life without having to deal with the political experiences, Kaepernick, a Black man had to face. Furthermore, in many languages, especially those belonging to Black or people of color, hand movements and body language are a significant mode of expressing something, and often considered as part of the language itself. I believe that multi modal information should be included in a transcript because it accurately reflects the cultural diversity of languages and centers cultural relativism, by not only viewing language within this Euro centric, rigid form of transcription, but one that is more inclusive and intersectional.

# data[].attributes.body
In regards to the #MeToo movement, the first pair part operates as a means by which the survivor can share their story of sexual trauma and violence. Repeatedly, and this still occurs frequently today, many people in society viewed this open truth as a taboo topic, either violently denying the truth of the speaker or shunning them, accusing them of exaggerating or wanting attention. The #MeToo Movement powerfully created a revolutionary response instead in believing and empowering survivors, by utilizing the second pair part of the utterance of "Me too." This expression not only affirms and offers a space of healing and safety for the survivor, but also highlights the necessity of destroying oppressive systems that endanger survivors, and the unfortunate reality that experiences of sexual trauma happen extensively in communities, evident by this shared experience of "me too." I believe this movement is a form of Jakobson's mention of the Conative function, in which the forms of address are used to create a link between the speaker and the addressee. The digital forms of the #MeToo Movement directly create a link between the viewer and the information portrayed, especially when the viewer is a survivor, by not only emphasizing the collective feelings of these experiences, but by encouraging the viewer to consciously think of the ways sexual trauma has played a role in the lives of people around us.

# data[].attributes.body
I personally find Schegloff's approach to transcribing American English as somewhat confusing, especially because he does use a lot of non standard spellings. For example, in the situation with Vic talking to his friends, it is clear they have some sort of accent, and he writes this out, but not in a way that I truly comprehend at first. Similarly, in the chicken dinner transcript, in line 17, Michael is said to say something like "hh" which is not clear whether he is stuttering , or laughing, or even choking on his food. I think a major pitfall of IPA is its internal bias, because it is based mostly on Latin alphabets and excludes many other non Euro centric alphabets and systems, and its inability to express other contexts and social information that isn't directly shown in the transcript. Furthermore, it takes a while to learn and understand the system, and can be inaccessible to outsiders attempting to understand. However, an advantage is that it allows phoneticians and linguists around the world an ability to use one consistent system to analyze languages, and have a common mode and way of conducting research. Other forms, like non standard spellings, allow linguists to seemingly adapt or convey culturally specific utterances of a group of languages, and provide a easier framework to understand it, but at the same time, they might be too limiting as well, in which only native speakers or experts would understand what is going on in the language expression.

# data[].attributes.body
I notice that Schegloff’s approach to transcribing American English(es) is non-standard. This makes it difficult to interpret at times. If one imagines how a linguist who speaks another language might approach a text like this, we can see how it would be preferable to use either orthographic standard spelling or IPA. This is because a person who is not completely aware of all of the variants of English pronunciation would have a very difficult time interpreting a non-standard version of orthography from a language that is not their own. If the material was in standard it would be translatable (roughly) at least, and important indexes from pronunciation could be specified separately. IPA would of course be best in such a scenario as any linguist in the world could read it and know precisely what the words sound like and how they differ from other speakers’ pronunciations. It will in turn make analyses of these differences between speakers on a phonological/phonetic level much easier. On the other hand, many people do not know the IPA system, and so using it creates a barrier for non-linguists to interact with the material. For English spellers who do not know IPA, the nonstandard spelling will probably do the best job of approximating the actual pronunciation of different dialects which they will probably be familiar with via their indexes to social and economic factors. Lastly, there is the question of whether universal access to knowledge and what it means is truly a good thing. As we can see, there are pros and cons to all options. I personally would advocate most strongly for IPA as I think its universally intelligible nature is a huge asset to linguists. It could also be that IPA is used only in scenarios wherein the speaker deviates in a meaningful way from the general population. We could also further divide IPA transcriptions into narrow and broad ones, and utilize narrow transcriptions only when necessary and then use broader transcriptions of IPA, or even standard English orthography, in all other cases. There is an issue with the euro-centric roots of IPA characters, however this seems to be an issue with IPA itself rather than its principles of mutual intelligibility. I would naturally be in favor of modifying the IPA chart to use more diverse characters so long as such a shift is universally adopted. The characters themselves are not the sounds of language, but rather a superficial manifestation of the sounds they represent. These can be changed without losing the underlying usefulness of such a system.

# data[].attributes.body
Schegloff definitely approached the transcription of American English(es) in a non-standard way. It appeared that he preferred to transcribe the words how he heard them, rather than using proper spelling (for example he writes "Howijuh" instead of 'How would you..."). I think nonstandard spelling definitely has more pitfalls than advantages. Not only is it an adjustment for the reader, (who has to work harder to translate the non-standard spelling) but it is unfortunately very subjective. For example, at another point in the transcript, Schegloff spells out "night." No native English speaker would actually be pronouncing the "g," "h," and "t" sounds in a row, yet he doesn't attempt to write this word as it actually sounds. The fact that he is choosing which words to transcribe in a standard form and which to transcribe in a non-standard form proves that this transcription can't be done objectively. Therefore, in my opinion, non-standard transcription should't be used without specific reason. IPA is a much better tool to transcribe a language based on pronunciation. While it is Eurocentric in origin, it is also an objective metric to use. Of course, the other pitfall of IPA is that it is very exclusionary to those who haven't studied it formally. Because of this, IPA is more useful in very technical articles whose principle audience is other linguistics. Standard spelling should probably be used for articles trying to reach the lay person, though, unfortunately, standard spelling does often excuse the ability to show specific pronunciation, which is very vital for understanding speakers' positionally and social context. Personally, if I were writing an article with non-linguistics as my audience I would use standard spelling and then use non-standard spelling in specific cases if I thought their was another level of context to be gained by the pronunciation specifically in that line of transcription.

# data[].attributes.body
When transcribing a conversation, Schegloff tends to use non-standard english spelling in an attempt to capture the essence or qualities of the speakers. The dialect people use can in many ways reveal a lot about the speaker. Based on their accents, or words they use, it can help reveal where a person is from geographically, or their age. This is something standard spelling would not be able to capture in quite the same way. While I do find this to be a benefit, I think it also relies heavily on stereotyping of certain communities that have very real and  tangible effects. Reading a transcript in this style can also be hard to follow along at a steady pace as the reader is left to decipher some of what the words actually mean. When using the International Phonetic Alphabet, one reading the transcript may get a better understanding of how things are pronounced (similar to benefits of non-standard spellings), but not everyone has the resources to interpret this dense information.

# data[].attributes.body
Multimodality seems like such a crucial aspect in conversational transcripts. Actions like facial expressions, gestures, and gazes can all show larger meaning in conversation and are key in expressing things like sarcasm, if something is meant to be satirical, or to point to the fact that something is serious. Without these indications and non-verbal ways of communicating, it can be difficult to actually interpret the meaning behind a transcript just by reading the exchange of words. I found it really interesting there are some multimodal actions that are expected of us, like standing for the anthem and putting our hand over our hearts. This is something that we have been practicing since elementary school and is so heavily ingrained in us from a remarkably young age. Given that Colin Kapernick chose to kneel during the anthem (ignoring the expected norms) speaks volumes about police brutality and the worsening race relations in the United States and captures the sentiment of protesting the overt racism practiced in the U.S. Without this multimodal account, one is not able to fully recognize the issue Kapernick is bringing attention to.

# data[].attributes.body
In the context of the me too movement, coming to terms with sexual trauma and abuse is not always met with the support, belief or acknowledgement that it deserves. The phrase “me too,” serves as a second pair part (SPP) that aims to a acknowledge, sympathize and create a safe space for those who have faced sexual violence. This serves as a stark contrast to the disbelief, discrediting and delegitimization that many victims face. Using this term online, in the age of interconnectedness has been a catalyst to many stepping forward and sharing their stories with sexual harassment. By using it online, one person's first adjacency pair can have hundreds if not thousands of responses in a matter of days creating a network and mass movement pushing for societal change. The words, “me too,” have a variety of other linguistic functions as well. In the article, the founder of the Me Too movement, Tarana Burke was saying “me too” to a story of sexual assault, phatically, in order to keep the lines of communication open and to show she was listening and resonating with everything that was being said. Additionally, it can be used referentially to describe an experience that someone went through. 

# data[].attributes.body
I would argue that multi-modal information, especially that which is heavily tied to ideological or emotional meaning, is critical to include in conversational transcripts. In both the initial multimodal act, such as taking a knee during the national anthem, and in the national response to that “call to action”, the burning of jersey’s, etc., we find indexes to ideologies about liberty, justice, and nationalism. The act is showing the position of the actor and the response to the act is showing the position of the audience (in relation to the indexes of the original act). This is a huge piece of communicative information. It can serve as either a “conversation starter,” FPP, or the second of an adjacency pair, an SPP.

# data[].attributes.body
Schegloff uses non-standard approaches to transcribing American English, most notably by spelling words in a way that conveys the speakers' accent and contractions. For example, on page 22 he transcribes Ton's last line as "Well I wz wondering when 'e left." Clearly, wz and 'e aren't normal transcriptions, but Schegloff transcribes these words this way in order to capture the particular nuances each speaker has. One advantage of using non-standard spellings like Schegloff's is that it helps illuminate social or cultural influences on language—because Schegloff emphasizes accents, his transcriptions might reveal a speaker's cultural/regional background. However, a downside is that it makes it pretty difficult to discern transcripts sometimes—I had a tough time understanding some of Schegloff's transcripts because of his unusual spelling. Advantages of using spellings such as the International Phonetic Alphabet are that IPA solves the legibility issue with its standardized symbols and spellings. However, standardized spelling such as the IPA are often Eurocentric in nature (a lot of the symbols are from the Latin alphabet, goes from left->right, etc.). We also lose a lot of the individual nuances of speech that reveal social/cultural influences with standardized spellings.

# data[].attributes.body
The example of Colin Kapernick kneeling for the national anthem in protest is a perfect example of why it is so vitally important to include multi-modal information in a conversational transcript. If a transcript of that instance of the national anthem being played occurred without conveying multi-modal information (in this case the bodily gesture of Kapernick kneeling) the transcript would only include the words of the national anthem and would not be able to explain the national uproar that occurred afterward. This example proves just how powerful and expressive non-verbal expression can be and why, therefore, it is necessary for linguistics to include it in their transcriptions if they hope to convey the full social context of an interaction.

# data[].attributes.body
Colin Kaepernick's protest is a perfect example of the importance of including multi-modal information in a conversational transcript. Although his protest of taking a knee during the national anthem didn't involve any form of transcribable speech, it still communicated his intended message that Black Americans still suffer from racial, social, and economic discrimination and inequality. His actions are a powerful indicator of how multimodal linguistic interaction is performative, as he wouldn't have been criticized by conservative football fans and media if his actions were taken referentially and outside of any social/cultural context. (in this case, the literal action of kneeling down). Furthermore, in both the Sarah Cooper clip as well as the fast food employee-customer interaction, it is clear that the inclusion of multi-modal information like facial expressions, gestures, and etc. were really useful as performative information that let us know what the speakers were really thinking as they were speaking.

# data[].attributes.body
I also found Schegloff's transcriptions confusing and difficult to understand. I felt myself putting on accents or changing my own voice to conform to the "sounds" he placed on the page. In a way, it made me read the transcriptions of the conversations less carefully because I was never able to fully understand them. Whilst this is absolutely a pitfall, I think it is also significant that he felt the need to prove his point by not using standard spellings in the first place. Schegloff realised that he could convey more by noting the changes in pace, sound, rhythm and tone yet his use of a non-universal spelling is confusing. The use of IPA seems like a more simple fix in that is focuses on the sound of production. Using IPA, however, definitely omits social cues and notes on intonation or phrasing. Furthermore, as we discussed in class - there are accessibility issues that come into play when using the IPA in a non-academic or non-linguistic setting. How might transcribers find an effective way to write in standard-english whilst noting where speech is more than just the language that is being spoken?

# data[].attributes.body
Schegloff's notion of adjacent pairs is central to Durrani's explanation of the #MeToo movement. Because the words "Me too" are the second part of an adjacent pair, this hashtag emphasizes not only that survivors of sexual abuse have solidarity with others, but also conveys the origin of the movement in a co-oxygenated setting, which personalizes the movement. The speech components of a listener and speaker and a code of norms both also play a role. The speaker and listener component once again reminds survivors that they are not alone as the words "Me too" are being received by a person and the "too" part references having been confided in by another survivor. Additionally, the fact that the societal norms of convention around sexual abuse is to silence it or deny it makes the hashtag #MeToo uniquely powerful because it co-opts the norm to be one of believing and supporting survivors. Furthermore, the hashtag #MeToo completes multiple language functions, including expressive, referential, and phatic, that are all valuable in the context of sexual abuse. First of all, saying "Me too" provides the referential information that another person is also a survivor of sexual abuse, breaking the silence reporting the frequency that this abuse occurs. This is important for progress and activism in its own right. Yet, "Me too" is not just referential, because in this context in brings along an extremely emotional and expressive context of confiding in someone about your own personal trauma. Lastly, it acts as a phatic function because "Me too" is a response to someone else expressing their trauma and simply prompts them to continue with an expression of support and solidarity. This is valuable for the movement as it further promotes breaking the silence on and continuing the conversation about sexual abuse in our society.

# data[].attributes.body
IPA allows for transcriptions of accents which may add to the context of a transcription. However, this can also be achieved the way Schegloff did it in his transcription by simply spelling words differently to highlight their pronunciation. Benefits of using non-standard spelling or IPA in this fashion include potentially adding some context as to the location or origin of the speakers. However, IPA may not be understood outside of people who've studied linguistics and non-standard spellings can be somewhat disorienting or not convey the correct accent or meaning. By using standard spellings, you might lose some context from accents, but the transcript will be much clearer to all readers.

# data[].attributes.body
It seems to me as though it would be incredibly important to include multi-modal information in a conversational transcript. Much of what we say can change meaning based on multi-modal information, so it may be necessary context when analyzing meaning as Schegloff suggested. A "what?" might have very different meanings based on someone's facial expression or gestures, similar to the example in the blog post. Without this context, readers might take the wrong conclusion or assume the wrong meaning behind a phrase. Multi-modal information can also help understand the action being performed by a TCU in some cases, as the speaker may use their body to drive home a point or clarify something that can't be or wasn't spoken. It can also convey sarcasm, feelings towards what they are saying, and relationship to others, which are all important things to consider when analyzing a transcript.

# data[].attributes.body
There are a few characteristics to keep in mind while evaluating Schegloff's approach to transcription as compared to others. I specifically kept in mind accessibility and accuracy. Schegloff's personal orthography may have been more easily understandable to him and easier to learn and use, but still requires the reader to learn a key of his notations. Using a personal transcription method may also prohibit Schegloff from transcribing languages that are not Latin-descendent or Eurocentric. In contrast, IPA is much less accessible (not impossible, but a layperson could not understand how to transcribe or read IPA right off the bat), but allows for more diverse transcriptions (not limited to Latin descendant languages). In conclusion Schegloff is high in accessibility, low in accuracy whereas IPA is low in accessibility, and high in accuracy. Both of these methods fail to account for multimodal communication.

# data[].attributes.body
The inclusion multi-modal information in a conversational transcript is massively important for a number of reasons. First of all, we all know that body language has a big impact on how we judge a conversation or even one word that someone might say to us. Even if a conversation is silent, messages can absolutely still be conveyed through facial expressions, body language and even fidgeting. Multimodality even expands beyond the inclusion of body expressions as it includes the context and scene of the conversation at place. This example of Kapernick taking a knee during the national anthem is a significant example as his body language (and not language) spoke to millions of people across the nation and the world. If we can convey such impactful messages without even speaking - this should be reason enough to include multi-modal information into our conversational transcripts.

# data[].attributes.body
Multi-modal information is integral to the way we communicate. Thinking about the Colin Kapernick example, we were all able to understand what he was "saying" without him actually having to "say" anything (until prompted in an interview). Multi-modal information can indicate whether someone is invested in the conversation or not. It can also provide vital context to strictly language information. Multi-modal also can index a specific saying or phrase.

# data[].attributes.body
The response "Me too" is the second part pair of the adjacency pair as a response to an expression or explanation of sexual trauma. It fulfills multiple functions according to Jakobson including the expressive, informative, and phatic functions. The action of saying me too is expressive in its capacity of expressing empathy; it is informative in that it is giving the addressee information about the speaker; and lastly, it is phatic because it encourages the addressee to continue telling their story through the index that the speaker believes them. The #MeToo fulfills the same functions but in a different space with a different audience.

# data[].attributes.body
The "MeToo" movement acts as the response in an adjacency pair in a way that affirms the original statement without de-centering the subject. This simple yet powerful response of the addressee has sparked solidarity among those who have suffered trauma. This saying has become an index specific to the context of sexual assault. This adjacency unit reflects expressive, informative, phatic and metalinguistic functions.

# data[].attributes.body
As Durrani asserts, "Me Too" in the sense of #MeToo serves as an SPP, in relation to an FPP of a woman sharing a story of harassment or assault. In a broader sense, this brings an entire community of women into this conversation, all relating to one another. This is an example of the phatic functions that Yaguello mentions, which "maintains contact between speakers," (12). As a result, more attention is brought to this challenge that women face, which tends to be taboo and therefore not mentioned often.

# data[].attributes.body
I noticed that a lot of Schegloff's transcriptions for American English often have to do with suprasegmental elements, like intonation, quietness, speed, etc. Some of his symbols seem intuitive, such as an up arrow for rising intonation, but others seems arbitrary, like degrees signs for quietness. IPA in general is a very inaccessible orthography, especially for anthropologists who have not encountered it a lot. However, I see that IPA can be very useful in certain cases, if phonetics plays a social role. The problem with using standard English spelling is that English spelling can be confusing and non-phonetic. Oftentimes, when Schegloff tried to transcribe something without the standard English spelling, I was confused. Some lines in the chicken dinner transcript were hard to understand. It seems though that every writing system has its fallbacks.

# data[].attributes.body
Multimodal information is oftentimes significant in conversations, and to completely capture the social aspects of speech, it is best to include multimodal information in transcriptions. Probably the most difficult part of this is how exactly to transcribe multimodal information. Sometimes the specific gesture like a facial reaction is important, but to describe it in detail can become arduous and difficult. For example, there are multiple ways someone can roll their eyes, and to pinpoint the differences between different types can be confusing.

# data[].attributes.body
The way that Schegloff approached transcribing American English was really difficult to understand, at least to me. Even when I was saying the sounds out loud, I was having trouble understanding what a conversation was about when the transcript was also filled with transcription symbols that I had to keep going back and forth to. Thus, I think that having that universal way of transcribing such as the IPA would be helpful in this case, because I feel like non-standard spellings can be up to personal interpretation. For example, with the "Howijuh" spelling of "How would you" in a southern accent, I felt that it was not accurately showing how it sounds in a southern accent (I'm from the south and ~occasionally~ my accent slips out). Another reason it may not be interpreted the same way as he intended is the linguistic background of the reader -- I showed the word to my partner whose native language is Japanese, and his instinct was to read it as it would sound in Japanese -- very different than intended -- and avoidable with the IPA (had we known how to read IPA, because we don't). I think having a transcript of the standard spellings actually would have been really helpful for these transcriptions, to add the needed clarity. Of course, in using standard spellings alone, you would lose the extra information gained in knowing they're speaking with a southern accent.

# data[].attributes.body
Based on the example from the blog post, I would agree that multimodal information is crucial in understanding the depth of a conversation or simply recognizing that there are ways to communicate that are not verbal. In the case of Colin Kapernick, taking a knee had indexical meaning -- in that context, it was a way of protesting that was easily recognizable and which carried social and political implications. Furthermore, multimodal information is essential when considering ASL, because things like gestures, facial expressions, and bodily hexis are a necessary component of ASL. Therefore, if you were transcribing a conversation that included ASL, failing to include multimodal information would mean missing out on essential information.

# data[].attributes.body
Schegloff transcribes spoken American English(es) based off of how they sound, not how they are spelled. This is helpful in that it allows readers to understand the accents of speakers. I personally, find it extremely tedious and difficult to understand, at least in the way that Schegloff does it. In his transcripts, he spells it how it sounds to him, not necessarily how it sounds to everyone else. Standard spellings are easier to understand, but don't convey accents. The international Phonetic Alphabet, similarly, is understood by more people but still inaccessible for the inexperienced. Furthermore, as some have already commented, it appears to be a little Eurocentric.

# data[].attributes.body
In Durrani's article, the idea of the adjacency pair in relation to the #MeToo movement is explored, discussing the power of the SPP -- in this case, the phrase "Me Too." The hashtag as well as the phrase serves as the response or affirmation to the FPP -- the stories sexual assault/abuse -- when for so long before, the institutional as well as social response was disbelief, silence, and doubt. The hashtag became an act of solidarity, similar to the way that Nancy demonstrates support or solidarity in the Chicken Dinner transcription. It also utilizes functions of language as outlined by Yaguello/Jakobsen, those most prominently being the metalinguistic, phatic, conative, and informative functions of the phrase #MeToo. These are the ones I find most prominent because they prioritize the analysis of this specific use of language, the implied affirmation to the addressee and the information conveyed by the message and then communicated through the use of a hashtag.

# data[].attributes.body
Schegloff uses non-standard spelling to emphasize the unique ways speakers converse with one another. When I first read his transcripts, I struggled to understand exactly what Schegloff was trying to convey. I found myself speaking the transcripts aloud in an attempt to sound out the words in his dialogues. I think Schegloff's style has pros and cons--he accurately portrays the intonations and accents of the speakers he records, but his style of writing can be hard to understand. Generally, though, I think it is relatively accessible. In comparison, while IPA can more accurately write out pronunciation, I think it is less accessible to non-scholars. Schegloff's style, while unconventional, is relatively intuitive, so readers can catch on much more quickly. Standard spelling, while easily understood, would cause unique dialects to be lost in transcription. All three styles have pros and cons.

# data[].attributes.body
In the Me Too movement, the adjacency pair becomes important for social justice and solidarity. For the addressee to respond back with an affirmation is meant to empower survivors, and to have someone acknowledge a survivor's testimony and comfort each other with a response. In the Jakobson, for example, in phatic or "small talk" speech, an addressee's response is crucial, because if there is no SPP in response to the FPP, that just creates more unnecessary discomfort and awkward silence in certain social situations.

# data[].attributes.body
Multi-modal information can completely change understandings of conversational transcripts. A person could be speaking in a very serious tone, but if they rolled their eyes or shook their head while doing it, it's likely they were being sarcastic. If that information is not included, readers miss out on the actual meaning of what they were saying, and if there were verbal or multimodal reactions from other speakers present, then the lack of multimodal information makes verbal responses seem like they're coming out of nowhere.

# data[].attributes.body
The blog demonstrates just how important it is to include multi-modal information in a conversational transcript. In the same way that context can change a word's meaning, a person's facial expressions, gestures, proxemics, etc can also alter the significance of an utterance. Without including this type of information, a reader may come to the wrong conclusion about a speaker's intentions or emotions. Kapernick's protest shows a clear instance in which multi-modal information alone can serve as a means of communicating an idea. Conversational transcripts need to include non-verbal clues to accurately produce a complete record of a discussion.

# data[].attributes.body
Schegloff’s approach to transcription using the IPA has both its advantages yet disadvantages. One thing that I immediately noticed was the confusion that I felt reading the dialogue— many of them short, yet very confusing, which took me away from deciphering the text like I would normally. While it felt a bit inaccessible to non-linguists, I can understand how linguists might benefit greatly from IPA/non-standard spellings. With practice and training around IPA, linguists can delve into short conversations and understand where the person is speaking from, the small hints of between-the-lines dialogue that would’ve been missed if one were to use standard spellings. Although, IPA is very white and euro-centric, it is more universal that using standard spellings, however, I think that it can be developed to be more diverse. I think that there are times in which using IPA is helpful, and other times, especially for those without IPA training, where it might be more detrimental to use IPA rather than standard spellings.

# data[].attributes.body
I was wondering about this the whole time--is there a universally accepted way to transcribe conversations, or is it as catch-as-catch-can as Schegloff's transcriptions seemed? I was thrown off by his writing out certain words with non-standard spellings so that the reader could pick up on an accent or inflection. The most striking element of this choice was that he did not do sound-alike spellings for every word. For instance, in line 4 of the chicken dinner transcript on page 10, he writes "butter." As Lia pointed out to us in class on Monday, there are many ways to say the word "butter" in English. Why did he choose alternate spellings for other words but not tell us how Michael said the word "butter"? My instinct was to agree with Matthew's point that he is painting his subjects as less educated. But on reflection, I think that may come just as much from my own conceptions of people that speak in the way he transcribed rather than the transcriptions themselves. I would want to ask Schegloff why he transcribed the way that he did. Regarding IPA, in certain contexts I think it is super useful. But when looking at the conversational turns, IPA seems to be too narrow and nitpicky of a device for that purpose. Standard spellings are tempting because they sidestep the annoyance of IPA and the questions posed by non-standard spellings. Then again, I heard someone say that anything made for the average person is really made for no person, since nobody falls exactly in the middle in every way. Standard spellings, precisely because they are standard, may be less useful because nobody talks exactly like that.

# data[].attributes.body
Multimodality is incredibly important when conveying information, especially in a conversational transcript. Like the saying “actions speak louder than words”, it is true that without motion, way fewer things would be expressed, and the ever-changing and diverse human aspect of language would be neglected. Colin Kapernick taking a knee is a very clear example of the importance of multimodality. He kneeled during the National Anthem during a football game, which sparked A LOT of criticism, conversation, and progress. He action was silent— he was conveying his point with his body, which would’ve been completely ignored if one was to transcribe just speech dialogue. In order to truly capture the meaning and importance behind a movement/conversation, one must take into account the unspoken elements and place a lot of emphasis on them.

# data[].attributes.body
The #MeToo movement attempts to recenter conversations about sexual violence and create a culture of believing survivors. As the second part of an adjacency pair, "Me Too" affirms prior stories of sexual violence and invokes a sense of unity. Survivors can respond to those who have shared their stories before. Jakobsen would likely classify this phrase as serving a phatic function as it conveys communion and starts a conversation.

# data[].attributes.body
When we look at Durrani's article on the #MeToo movement, Schegloff's notion of the adjacency pair is a crucial aspect to understanding how the movement empowers survivors. Instead of asking survivors to prove the validity of their story, "Me too" acknowledges the stories of women and acts as the second part or SPP of the adjacency pair. Because #MeToo opens up the floor for women to share their stories, it would be classified as a phatic function by Jakobson, as the phatic function is the part of communication that keeps the conversation alive and open.

# data[].attributes.body
I would push strongly for including multi-modal information in transcription because it can include as much--if not more--information as people's words. I'm thinking of the pauses in Schegloff's transcripts--are people giving each other significant looks? Is Nancy kicking Michael under the table? Those are bits of information that would greatly aid the reader's understanding of what is happening underneath the spoken. I understand, though, that once you enter the realm of multi-modal information the question quickly becomes 'where do you stop'? One transcriber might think all glances are important, while another thinks only larger scale physical movement is. I don't know how to counter that point except to say that a transcriber would have to use as much discretion to include multi-modal information as they would in choosing which spellings to use.

# data[].attributes.body
This is so cool! Framing #MeToo as a second pair part, and therefore a response, adds a whole layer of meaning. Of course there are the voices of people layering on top of each other ("Me too," "Me too," etc.), but to see all those calls as responses to one 13-year-old's specific sharing of her own trauma is particularly powerful. I appreciate how Durrani emphasizes that #MeToo as a second pair part alleviates some of the pressure of having to supplement a first pair part. So much sexual violence goes unpunished because of the difficulty of speaking about it. To offer survivors the language to add on but not to necessarily create, is an admirable venture. Durrani also asks the important question, though, of how effective the #MeToo movement has been in enacting real, measurable, lasting, structural change. This feels pertinent to Jakobson (via Yaguello)'s conative function. #MeToo really should be inspiring action. People's statements are a resounding call to change things for future generations. But the way Durrani shows the reception makes it seem that people are really receiving #MeToo as having a dominant expressive function. But it is not enough to just let survivors "express themselves." It is not even enough for them to be heard, if there is no subsequent, substantial action.

# data[].attributes.body
If we take into account Schegloff's notion of adjacency pairs, then #metoo is a Second Pair Part in response to the disclosure of trauma. It uses the phatic function of communion to convey solidarity and sympathy with survivors. #MeToo is code that allows for people to know that they are not alone. We may also consider that #MeToo goes beyond conveying communion to also convey emotion (expressive function) and information (informative function). Thanks to language, these two words signify a safe place and a much bigger movement.

# data[].attributes.body
Oftentimes, when survivors of sexual assault speak their stories, they are met with disbelief, shame, guilt, etc. The toxicity and blaming the survivor mentality that society has embraced causes so much harm to survivors and creates isolation and suppression. The “Me Too” movement came to battle that by changing the second part of the adjacency pair. “Me Too” is a response of support, solidarity, and community by validating the survivor AND expressing that they are not the only one who experienced such trauma. Jakobson’s referential and phatic function comes into play, as responses are based on the referential (the initial story) and the hashtag “Me Too” paves a space for the conversation to keep going. Durrani’s criticism towards the movement is valid, however, because while it creates solidarity, it is easy for specific cases to have attention and care put towards them, and easier for media to use the movement as an easy trendy hashtag. In order for this movement to keep having a positive effect, I think it is important to shine light on personal stories, raise awareness towards demographics and vulnerability factors, and pressure society to change the way we approach perpetrators and actually hold them accountable.