Speakers of English have available a set of terms dedicated to doing individual self-reference: `I' and its grammatical variants, `me', `my', `mine', etc. Speaker selection of other than these dedicated terms may invite special attention for what has prompted their use. This article draws on field recordings of talk-in-interaction in which speakers use `third-person' reference forms when speaking about themselves (e.g. when a woman says of her husband that `he's married to an Englishwoman'). We show that third-person forms are recurrently used for representing the views of someone else (a recipient or a non-present person, an indeterminate member of a category of persons, or an organization). We also show how — by drawing on resources such as the distinction between recognitional and non-recognitional person reference forms, and on category bound attributes — the particular third-person term selected can be fitted to and thereby contribute to the action(s) a speaker is implementing through their turn at talk.
Carter, H. (2003) ` Man Gets Court Ban on Saying “Paki” ', The Guardian, 13 August. Collins English Dictionary: Millennium Edition (1998) London : Harper-Collins .
2.
Drew, P. (1987) ` Po-faced Receipts of Teases' , Linguistics25: 219—53 .
3.
Edwards,D. ( 2005)` Moaning Whinging and Laughing: The Subjective Side of Complaints ', Discourse Studies7(1): 5—29 .
4.
Engel, M. (2002) ` Naïve Bush Slights Pakistanis with a Short-Cut' , The Guardian, 9 January.
5.
Glenn, P. (2003) Laughter in Interaction. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press .
6.
Goffman, E. (1981) Forms of Talk. Oxford: Basil Blackwell .
7.
Goffman, E. (1983) ` Felicity's Condition' , American Journal of Sociology89: 1—53 . Heritage, J. (1998) ` Oh-Prefaced Responses to Inquiry' , Language in Society27: 291—334 .
8.
Heritage, J. and Raymond, G. (2005) ` The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Talk-in-Interaction' , Social Psychology Quarterly68(1): 15—38 .
9.
Kitzinger, C. (2007) ` Is “Woman” Always Relevantly Gendered ?', Gender and Language1: 39—49 .
10.
Kitzinger, C. and Jones, D. (2007) ` When May Calls Home: The Opening Moments of Family Telephone Conversations with an Alzheimer's Patient' , Feminism & Psychology17(2): 184—202 .
11.
Land, V. and Kitzinger, C. (forthcoming) `Categories in Talk-in-Interaction: Gendering Speaker and Recipient', in S. Speer and E. Stokoe (eds) Conversation and Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
12.
Lerner, G. (1996) ` Finding “Face” in the Preference Structures of Talk-in-Interaction' , Social Psychology Quarterly59(4): 303—21 .
13.
Levinson, S. (1988) `Putting Linguistics on a Proper Footing: Explorations in Goffman's Concepts of Participation', in P. Drew and A. Wootton (eds) Erving Goffman: Studies in the Interactional Order, pp. 161—227. Cambridge: Polity .
14.
Pomerantz, A. (1984) `Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes', in J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis , pp. 57—101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
15.
Sacks, H. (1972) `An Initial Investigation into the Usability of Conversational Data for Doing Sociology', in D. Sudnow (ed.) Studies in Social Interaction, pp. 31—74. New York: The Free Press .
16.
Sacks, H. (1984) `On Doing ``Being Ordinary''', in J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, pp. 413—29. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
17.
Sacks, H. (1995a) Lectures on Conversation: Volume I. Oxford: Blackwell .
18.
Sacks, H. (1995b) Lectures on Conversation: Volume II. Oxford: Blackwell .
19.
Sacks, H. and Schegloff, E.A. (1979) ` Two Preferences in the Organization of Reference to Persons in Conversation and theirInteraction', in G. Psathas (ed.) Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology , pp. 15—21 . New York : Irvington .
20.
Schegloff, E.A. (1968) ` Sequencing in Conversational Openings ', American Anthropologist70: 1075—95 .
21.
Schegloff, E.A. (1986) ` The Routine as Achievement', HumanStudies9: 111—51 .
22.
Schegloff, E.A. (1988a) ` Description in the Social Sciences I: Talk in Interaction', Papers in Pragmatics2(1/2): 1—24 .
Schegloff, E.A. (1996) `Some Practices for Referring to Persons in Talk-in-Interaction: A Partial Sketch of a Systematics', in B.A. Fox (ed.) Studies in Anaphora, pp. 437—85. Amsterdam: John Benjamins .
25.
Schegloff, E.A. (2005) ` On Complainability ', Social Problems52(4): 449—76 .
26.
Schegloff, E.A. (2006) `Interaction: The Infrastructure for Social Institutions, the Natural Ecological Niche for Language and the Arena in which Culture is Enacted', in N.J. Enfield and S.C. Levinson (eds) Roots of Human Sociality: Culture, Cognition and Interaction, pp. 70—96. London: Berg .
27.
Schegloff, E.A. (2007a) `Conveying Who You Are: The Presentation of Self, Strictly Speaking', in N. Enfield and T. Stivers (eds) Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives, pp. 123—48. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
28.
Schegloff, E.A. (2007b) Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
29.
Schegloff, E.A. and Sacks, H. (1973) ` Opening Up Closings' , Semiotica8: 289—327 .
30.
Shaw, R. and Kitzinger, C. (2007) ` Memory in Interaction: An Analysis of Repeat Calls to a Home Birth Helpline' , Research on Language and Social Interaction40(1): 117—44 .
31.
Stivers, T. (2007) `Alternative Recognitionals in Person Reference ', in N. Enfield and T. Stivers (eds) Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives, pp. 73—96. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
32.
Stockill, C. and Kitzinger, C. (2007) ` Use of Alternative (Non-)Recognitionals: A Marked Practice to Display Social Distance ', conference paper accepted for presentation at the 10th International Pragmatics Association Conference, Sweden, 8—13 July.
33.
West, C. and Fenstermaker, S. (2002) `Accountability and Affirmative Action: The Accomplishment of Gender, Race and Class in a University of California Board of Regents Meeting', in S. Fenstermaker and C. West (eds) Doing Gender, Doing Difference: Inequality, Power and Institutional Change, pp. 141—68. New York: Routledge .
34.
Whalen, M. and Zimmerman, D. (1990) ` Describing Trouble: Practical Epistemology in Citizen Calls to the Police' , Language in Society19: 465—92 .
35.
Wootton, A.J. (1997) Interaction and the Development of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
