This paper examines conversational dialogue. It is divided into four parts. The first presents arguments for dialogic analysis, the second lists some failings, the third applies this critical view to the notion of a ‘reply’; the final part is an overview.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Erving Goffman (1976) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: