This article uses transcriptions from video recordings of airline pilots at work, on actual flights, to consider some locations and the interactional significance of a feature of routine talk in the airline cockpit: and-prefaced turns. As pilots’ work is formally organized for them as many discrete and ordered tasks, and-prefacing is a local means for maintaining an ongoing sense of their conduct of a flight as a whole. By and-prefacing their talk, pilots present some new talk or task as connected and relevantly next in a larger macro-sequence of work for their flight. And-prefacing is evidence of pilots’ orientation to a sense of sequence that can extend well beyond pairs of turns at talk and/or non-talk activities, or even a series of such paired sequences. It allows pilots to make salient the sequentiality of their work where the officially prescribed wordings they must use can leave this implicit.
Atkinson, J.M. and Drew, P. (1979) Order in Court: The Organisation of Verbal Interaction in Judicial Settings. London: Macmillan .
2.
BASI (Bureau of Air Safety Investigation, Australia) (1996) Boeing 747-312 VH-INH, Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport, New South Wales, 19 October 1994. Investigation Report 9403038. Department of Transport and Regional Development, Australia. Canberra.
3.
Button, G. (ed.) (1993) Technology in Working Order: Studies of Work, Interaction, and Technology. London: Routledge .
4.
Cushing, S. (1994) Fatal Words: Communication Clashes and Aircraft Crashes. Chicago, IL and London: University of Chicago Press .
5.
Dietrich, R. (ed.) (2003) Communication in High Risk Environments. Linguistische Berichte, Sonderheft 12. Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag .
6.
Drew, P. and Heritage, J. (eds) (1992) Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
7.
Frankel, R. (2000) ‘“Captain, I was Trying Earlier to Tell You that You Made a Mistake”: Deference and Demeanor at 30,000 Feet’, in J.K. Peyton , P. Griffin , W. Wolfram and R. Fasold (eds) Language in Action: New Studies of Language in Society. Essays in Honor of Roger W. Shuy, pp. 289-301. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press .
8.
FSF (Flight Safety Foundation) (1996) ‘Commuter Captain Fails to Follow Emergency Procedures after Suspected Engine Failure, Loses Control of the Aircraft during Instrument Approach’ , Accident Prevention53: 4 .
Goodwin, C. and Goodwin, M.H. (1996) ‘Seeing as a Situated Activity: Formulating Planes’, in Y. Engeström and D. Middleton (eds) Cognition and Communication at Work, pp. 61-95. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
12.
Goodwin, M.H. (1996) ‘Informings and Announcements in their Environment: Prosody within a Multi-activity Work Setting’, in E. Couper-Kuhlen and M. Selting (eds) Prosody in Conversation: Interactional Studies, pp. 436-461. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
13.
Harper, R.H.R. and Hughes, J.A. (1993) ‘“What a F-ing System! Send ’em All to the Same Place and then Expect Us to Stop ’em Hitting”: Making Technology Work in Air Traffic Control’, in G. Button (ed.) Technology in Working Order: Studies of Work, Interaction, and Technology, pp. 127-144. London: Routledge .
Hazlehurst, B. (2003) ‘The Cockpit as Multiple Activity System: A Computational Model for Understanding Situated Team Performance’ , International Journal of Aviation Psychology13(1): 1-22 .
16.
Heath, C. and Luff, P. (2000) Technology in Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
17.
Helmreich, R.L. (1994) ‘Anatomy of a System Accident: The Crash of Avianca Flight 052’ , International Journal of Aviation Psychology4(3): 265-284 .
18.
Heritage, J. (1984) ‘A Change-of-state Token and Aspects of its Sequential Placement’, in J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, pp. 299-345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
19.
Heritage, J. (1998) ‘Oh-prefaced Responses to Inquiry’ , Language in Society27: 291-334 .
20.
Heritage, J. (2002) ‘Oh-prefaced Responses to Assessments: A Method of Modifying Agreement/Disagreement’, in C. Ford , B. Fox and S.A. Thompson (eds) The Language of Turn and Sequence, pp. 196-224. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
21.
Heritage, J. and Sorjonen, M.-L. (1994) ‘Constituting and Maintaining Activities across Sequences: and-prefacing as a Feature of Question Design’ , Language in Society23(1): 1-29 .
22.
Hutchby, I. (2001) ‘“Oh”, Irony and Sequential Ambiguity in Arguments’ , Discourse and Society12(2): 123-141 .
23.
Hutchby, I. and Wooffitt, R. (1998) Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Applications. Cambridge: Polity Press .
24.
Hutchins, E. and Klausen, T. (1996) ‘Distributed Cognition in an Airline Cockpit’, in Y. Engeström and D. Middleton (eds) Cognition and Communication at Work, pp. 15-34. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
25.
Hutchins, E. and Palen, L. (1997) ‘Constructing Meaning from Space, Gesture, and Speech’, in L.B. Resnick , R. Säljö , C. Pontecorvo and B. Burge (eds) Discourse, Tools, and Reasoning: Essays on Situated Cognition, pp. 23-40. Berlin: Springer .
26.
Kent Jones, R. (2003) ‘Miscommunication between Pilots and Air Traffic Control’ , Language Problems and Language Planning27(3): 233-248 .
27.
Linde, C. (1988) ‘The Quantitative Study of Communicative Success: Politeness and Accidents in Aviation Discourse’ , Language and Society17: 375-399 .
28.
Local, J. (2004) ‘Getting Back to Prior Talk: and-uh(m) as a Back-Connecting Device’, in E. Couper-Kuhlen and C. Ford (eds) Sound Patterns in Interaction: Cross-linguistic Studies of Phonetics and Prosody for Conversation, pp. 377-400. Amsterdam: John Benjamins .
29.
Luff, P. and Heath, C. (2002) ‘Broadcast Talk: Initiating Calls through a Computer-mediated Technology’ , Research on Language and Social Interaction35(3): 337-366 .
30.
Mazeland, H. and Huiskes, M. (2001) ‘Dutch “but” as a Sequential Conjunction: Its Use as a Resumption Marker’, in M. Selting and E. Couper-Kuhlen (eds) Studies in Interactional Linguistics, pp. 141-169. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins .
31.
McHoul, A. and Rapley, M. (eds) (2001) How to Analyse Talk in Institutional Settings: A Casebook of Methods. London: Continuum International .
32.
Mondada, L. (2003) ‘Working with Video: How Surgeons Produce Video Records of their Tasks’ , Visual Studies18(1): 58-73 .
33.
Morrow, D. , Rodvold, M. and Lee, A. (1994) ‘Nonroutine Transactions in Controller-pilot Communication’ , Discourse Processes17: 235-258 .
34.
Nevile, M. (2001) ‘Understanding Who’s Who in the Airline Cockpit: Pilots’ Pronominal Choices and Cockpit Roles’, in A. McHoul and M. Rapley (eds) How to Analyse Talk in Institutional Settings: A Casebook of Methods, pp. 57-71. London: Continuum International .
35.
Nevile, M. (2002) ‘Coordinating Talk and Non-talk Activity in the Airline Cockpit’ , Australian Review of Applied Linguistics25(1): 131-146 .
36.
Nevile, M. (2004a) Beyond the Black Box: Talk-in-interaction in the Airline Cockpit. Aldershot: Ashgate .
37.
Nevile, M. (2004b) ‘Integrity in the Airline Cockpit: Embodying Claims about Progress for the Conduct of an Approach Briefing’ , Research on Language and Social Interaction37(4): 447-480 .
38.
Nevile, M. (2005) ‘You Always Have to Land: Accomplishing the Sequential Organization of Actions to Land an Airliner’, in S. Norris and R. Jones (eds) Discourse in Action: Introducing Mediated Discourse Analysis, pp. 32-44. London: Routledge .
39.
Ochs, E. , Schegloff, E.A. and Thompson, S.A. (eds) (1996) Interaction and Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
40.
Psathas, G. (1992) ‘The Study of Extended Sequences: The Case of the Garden Lesson’, in G. Watson and R.M. Seiler (eds) Text in Context: Contributions to Ethnomethodology, pp. 99-122. Newbury Park, CA: Sage .
41.
Sacks, H. (1992) Lectures on Conversation, Vols 1 and 2, ed. G. Jefferson . Oxford: Basil Blackwell .
42.
Sacks, H. , Schegloff, E.A. and Jefferson, G. (1974) ‘A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-taking for Conversation’ , Language50(4): 696-735 .
43.
Sarter, N.B. and Woods, D.D. (1995) ‘How in the World Did We Ever Get into that Mode? Mode Error and Awareness in Supervisory Control’ , Human Factors37(1): 5-19 .
44.
Schegloff, E.A. , Ochs, E. and Thompson, S.A. (1996) ‘Introduction’, in E. Ochs , E.A. Schegloff and S.A. Thompson (eds) Interaction and Grammar, pp. 1-51. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
45.
Schiffrin, D. (1986) ‘Functions of and in Discourse’ , Journal of Pragmatics10: 41-66 .
46.
Schiffrin, D. (1987) Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
47.
Selting, M. and Couper-Kuhlen, E. (eds) (2001) Studies in Interactional Linguistics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins .
48.
Sexton, J.B. and Helmreich, R.L. (2000) ‘Analyzing Cockpit Communications: The Links between Language, Performance, Error, and Workload’ , Human Performance in Extreme Environments5(1): 63-68 .
49.
Shuy, R.W. (1993) ‘Language Evidence in Distinguishing Pilot Error from Product Liability’ , International Journal of the Sociology of Language100/101: 101-114 .
50.
Sköries, U. (1998) ‘Features of a Blame Type using and: An Analysis of an Example’ , Journal of Pragmatics30: 49-58 .
51.
Sumwalt, R.L. and Watson, A.W. (1995) ‘ASRS Incident Data Reveal Details of Flight-crew Performance during Aircraft Malfunctions’ , Flight Safety Digest14(10): 1-7 .
52.
Szymanski, M.H. (1999) ‘Re-engaging and Dis-engaging Talk in Activity’ , Language in Society28: 1-23 .
53.
ten Have, P. (1999) Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide. London: Sage .
54.
van Dijk, T.A. (1979) ‘Pragmatic Connectives’ , Journal of Pragmatics3: 447-456 .
