Reduplication is a phenomenon that can be applied to various linguistic units. In this article, I determine what action the reduplication of the Danish change-of-state token nå accomplishes in interaction. Following previous research on reduplication and using the method of Conversation Analysis, I show that reduplicated nå serves to register that the previous turn at talk implemented a larger course of action, namely that of revision.
Barth-WeingartenD (2011) Double sayings of German JA – More observations on their phonetic form and alignment function. Research on Language and Social Interaction44(2): 157–185.
2.
EmmertsenSHeinemannT (2010) Realization as a device for remedying problems of affiliation in interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction43(2): 109–132.
3.
GolatoAFagyalZ (2008) Comparing single and double sayings of the German response token ja and the role of prosody: A conversation analytic perspective. Research on Language and Social Interaction41(3): 241–270.
4.
HeinemannT (2003) Negation in interaction, in Danish conversation. PhD Thesis, University of York, UK.
5.
HeinemannT (2005) Where grammar and interaction meet: The preference for matched polarity in responsive turns in Danish. In: HakulinenASeltingM (eds) Syntax and Lexis in Conversation. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 375–402.
6.
HeinemannT (2009) Two answers to inapposite inquiries. In: SidnellJ (ed.) Conversation Analysis: Comparative Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 159–186.
7.
HeinemannTSteensigJ (forth) Justifying departures from progressivity: The Danish turn-initial particle altså. In: SorjonenM-LHeritageJ (eds) Turn-initial Particles in Interaction. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
8.
HeritageJ (1984) A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In: AtkinsonMHeritageJ (eds) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 299–345.
9.
HeritageJSorjonenM-L (1994) Constituting and maintaining activities across sequences: And-prefacing as a feature of question design. Language in Society23: 1–29.
10.
JeffersonG (2004) Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In: LernerGH (ed.) Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 13–31.
11.
KeevallikL (2010) Social action of syntactic reduplication. Journal of Pragmatics42: 800–824.
12.
NielsenFM (2002) Nå! En skiftemarkør med mange funktioner [Oh! A change-of-state token with many functions]. Studier i Nordisk2000–2001: 51–67.
13.
SchegloffE (1987) Recycled turn beginnings: A precise repair mechanism in conversation’s turn-taking organization. In: ButtonGLeeJRE (eds) Talk and Social Organization. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, pp. 70–85.
14.
SchegloffE (2011) Word repeats as unit ends. Discourse Studies13: 367–380.
15.
SchegloffEJeffersonGSacksH (1977) The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language53: 361–382.
16.
SteensigJLarsenT (2008) Affiliative and disaffiliative uses of you say x questions. Discourse Studies10(1): 113–133.
17.
StiversT (2004) ‘No no no’ and other types of multiple sayings in social interaction. Human Communication Research30: 260–293.
18.
WilkinsonSKitzingerC (2006) Surprise as an interactional achievement: Reaction tokens in conversation. Social Psychology Quarterly69(2): 150–182.
