“Discourse should be treated as an achievement; that involves treating the discourse as something ‘produced’ over time, incrementally accomplished rather than born naturally whole out of the speaker’s forehead, the delivery of a cognitive plan” (Schegloff 1982:73)
“it is the orientations, meanings, interpretations, understandings, etc. of the participants … which are privileged in the constitution of socio- interactional reality, and therefore have a prima facie claim to being privileged in efforts to understand it” (Schegloff 1997:166-167).
“Some aspects of the organization of conversation must be expected to have this context-free, context-sensitive status; for, of course, conversation is a vehicle for interaction between parties with any potential identities , and with any potential familiarity.” (Sacks, Schegloff & Jefferson 1974:700)
“In accomplishing the transfer of something of value–whether object, service, or information–from one person to another, there appears to be a preference for offer sequences over request sequences” (Schegloff 2007:82).
Among the most pervasively relevant feature in the organization of talk-and-other -conduct-in-interaction is the relationship of adjacency or “nextness.” (Schegloff 2007:14)
“… we … [still] rely on our vernacular understanding of typicalized courses of action—designed for the working of the society and not for the working of its disciplined study—to process much of the basic material of our inquiry.” (Schegloff 1996:211-212)
Is there nothing which transcends the heterogeneities of culture, language, ethnicity, race, gender, class, nationality…? Is it not, in the end, the formal organizations of interactional practice…which provide that armature of sociality which undergirds our common humanity? (Schegloff 1999:427)