conversational anaylsis

The purpose of this conversation is to gain information  and provide information about the scene that has just happened, this is why transitional language is used. The dynamics of this text is a police officer asking a witness about details of the event which has previously taken place , a car crash. The conservation is held at a formal tone due to the severity of the situation. The witness' agenda was to provide information , they have a less formal register, this symbolises shock. The officers agenda is to find out as much information as they can about the scene, throughout the text the officer remains to a high register and uses a more formal language as he is following a general procedure.

There are many non fluency features within in this text, the constant use of pauses (or hiatus) demonstrates the shock and fright the witness is in and shows us [that they are the weaker person within the scene. When the text begins it is started off with an interrogative sentence , by the officer starting with this question it shows that they are the person with the authority.

With this text taboo and colloquial language is used. The multiple use of 'bloody' is there to emphasise the panic they are is , it also shows us that they are a passer-by in on the street and posses no form of formality and remain at a low register throughout the conversation. This idiom is dependent on the actual word , ie the way they have used bloody shows us the extremeness of the situation.There lexical choices also demonstrate their informality , for example the use of abbreviation/elision  'we'd' shows that they do not speak the Queens English and that they are using mono-syllabic words 'far' , 'long' allows them to keep the informality throughout the conversation, his constant use of informal lexis also contributes to that. the use of socialist language shows that he is from the lower class , most probably working class.

The use of ' and everything' that is used after describing the crash , the us of 'everything; is a common lexical choice and can be seen as a superlative because it is including everything and not leaving one single thing out. By using this lexis it adds a common feel to the speaker and shows them to be weaker and in shock because they are not able to go into full detail and they have to summarise the on goings of the event.

This conversation follows the discourse structure of analysis and explanation due to the situation it is set in. The witness is explaining what he has seen and the police officer is taking the information and using it for further anylasis.