OVERLAP TYPES IN GOLDEN GLOBE AWARD INTERVIEW BY THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER

The aim of this research is to categorize what types of overlap are constructed in Golden Globe Award Interview 2020 with Nicholas Braun by The Hollywood Reporter. In an interview, it is one of turn taking violations which still becomes a rife phenomenon where many speakers aren’t aware yet about it. The approach used in this research is descriptive qualitative by documentation technique. The main theory of overlap types is based on Schegloff (2000) and French & Local (1983). There are 13 data found which contain 11 non-competitive: 1 terminal overlap, 5 continuers, 4 conditional access to the turn, 1 choral and 2 competitive: 2 high pitch and increased loudness. So, it can be concluded that the most dominant of overlap type is continuers that categorized as unproblematic for the speakers and conversation structure. Because the next speakers used it to respect the current speakers. Therefore, this result is expected as one of overlap examples which can be applied.


INTRODUCTION
In a conversation, people need to keep their behavior to create a cooperative conversation. In fact, there is still a problem relate to it namely overlapping talk. Schegloff (2000, p. 7) states that overlap happens when more than one person talks at once in conversation. It is an incomer speaker's action to take a turn when the current speaker has not finished the utterance so they talk simultaneously. Therefore, it's categorized as a violation in the form of taking other's turn right and disrupting the conversation It is still founded in daily conversation especially formal conversation such as an interview. According to Have (in Wijayanti, 2020, p. 195), interview is an activity between two or more interviewer and interviewee in question-answer form where the question is often made by the interviewer and the answer is often made by the interviewee. In this research, after looking for several interviews, the researcher chooses an interview with Nicholas Braun by The Hollywood Reporter from one of famous American Awards: Golden Globe 2020. So, it becomes the research object that represents overlap as relevant phenomenon in United States' formal conversation.
The award has a function as appreciation for artists who have wonderful talents. Then, in making this special moment being known by many people, it needs a program such as an interview. From the interview, it can be got much motivating information. However, overlap in an interview will disrupt the interview's ethics and purposes in collecting that information and it needs to be more concerned.
There are two styles in a conversation namely high-involvement and high-consideration speakers. For high-involvement, they will not think overlap as an interruption or problematic but to show their interest and enthusiasm of the topic while high-consideration will consider overlap as an interruption and choose to be silent when overlap occurs (Fasold, R. W & Connor-Linton, 2006, pp. 355-356).
It means high-involvement and high-consideration's viewpoint also occur among the participants in this interview and the viewers from all countries. In fact, this different viewpoint makes these people haven't been really aware yet on problematic and unproblematic overlap. They are just walking subjectively about overlap then causing pro and contra.
Meanwhile, Schegloff (2000, pp. 4 & 12) argues that there are two types of overlap namely competitive which occurs when the incomer speaker tries to compete for the turn while the current speaker has not finished yet. Next, noncompetitive happens when the incomer speaker doesn't intend to compete for current speaker's right.
After that, because the object is in international scope. So, it becomes interesting reasons for the researcher to research this problem by analyzing overlap types in the chosen object based on Schegloff's (2000) and supported by French & Local's (1983) theory. By understanding and taking example from the research, it will help people to differentiate problematic overlap which interrupts and unproblematic overlap that can be used in certain situation.
Moreover, there are two previous researches related to the topic that the researcher has been learned: first is a research thesis with the title "Conversational Overlap and Interruption in The Second Presidential Debate: Hillary Clinton VS Donald Trump" (2018) which is written by Syifaa Alawiyah Zulfah, a student of State Islamic University of Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta. The problems' focus of this research are to categorize the kinds of overlap and interruption then to analyze the reasons why the overlap and interruption are done in The Second Presidential Debate: Hillary Clinton VS Donald Trump.
The second is a research thesis with the title "An Analysis of Pauses, Overlaps and Backchannels in The Reasonable Doubt Movie by Peter Howitt" (2017) which is written by Khapsoh, a student of State Islamic University of Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta. This research focused on types and reasons analysis of pauses, overlaps and backchannels. There are several differences between this research and those previous researches. This research will only focus on overlap's types as a turn taking violation without any connection with interruption like the first previous research so the results will be different. Next, this research is discussing the types of overlap based on Schegloff's theory and supported by French & Local's theory namely competitive and noncompetitive overlap meanwhile the second previous research is based on Sidnell and Stiver's theory which consists three types of overlap namely turn-terminal, turn-initial and mid-turn. Then, in this research, backchannel is discussed as a part of overlap's types and pause as a part of overlap's reasons, not discussed separately like the second previous research. So, it can be seen, there are no one discuss overlap specifically yet which relate to current social problems that need to be solved and aware more. Therefore, to make it more different, researcher chooses to analyze overlap types with another object namely interview.
This topic becomes important and unique to be researched which creates its own novelty that will give a development for previous researches, increase pragmatics field relation in real life, add more knowledge about overlap theory and help next researchers that study the related topics to create new version. Therefore, the aim of this research is to know overlap types that will make people be able to avoid and use it beneficially for every speaker in the conversation.

Types of Overlap
According to Schegloff (2000, p. 4), there is an overlap type called noncompetitive overlap. This type is divided again into four types: 1. Terminal Overlap It happens when the incomer speaker makes their turn while the current speaker almost finishes their turn (Schegloff, 2000, p. 5).

Continuers
In this type, the incomer speaker just makes short turn and doesn't intend to make their full turn at that time because they respect and realize that the current speaker has not finished yet their turn (Schegloff, 2000, p. 5).

Conditional Access to The Turn
It's made by the current speaker that actually hasn't finished yet their turn but they invite the next speaker to join the turn and it becomes a collaborative turn (Schegloff, 2000, pp. 5-6).

Choral
This type actually must be done at the same time. It is not to compete but to make intimacy such as laugh together, make greetings, say congratulations and leave-takings or closing the conversation (Schegloff, 2000, p. 6).
Besides non-competitive, French & Local (1983, p. 17)  It is done by overlapper to make their turn by increasing pitch then ended with decreasing pace when they have succeeded getting the turn (Schegloff, 2000, pp. 11-12). However, not only overlapper that increased pitch and decrease pace but also the overlappee when they are overlapped, they will increase pitch and pace so it looks like they make a competition then at last they will decrease pace to yield their turn and they have been cut off. According to French & Local (1983, p. 17), the type is categorized into prosodic features which is an irrespective and a competitive action done by incomers to win the turn.

Completion
Overlappee tries to continue their turn when overlapper tries to get turn and both of them increased the loudness even pace to finish each turn as well as give signal that they have not completed yet (French & Local, 1983, p. 26).

Delayed Completion
Although overlapper tries to finish their turn, the overlappee doesn't try to finish theirs at that time but let and give a time to the overlapper to finish it first. However, after the overlapper finishing their turn, the overlappee will decide to repeat their last words that getting overlap and continue their sentences. Here, overlappee didn't think it's a competition. French & Local (1983, p. 31) mention that although there are no participants who increase pitch and pace, in fact it's still competitive because the overlapper has made competition and caused the overlapped yielded the turn.

Re-start/Recycling
Overlapper re-start their words, that have experienced overlap when they tried to make turn while the overlappee was still speaking, to get proper beginning in saying what they want to say (French & Local, 1983, p. 33).

METHOD
This research uses qualitative as its method. Aspers & Corte (2019, p. 142) say that qualitative method is a nonnumerical method usually used to describe and analyse events which occur in community namely social phenomenon. Tessier (2012, p. 451) states that qualitative data collecting can be done by downloading or from tape recording. However, this research will use downloading as data colleting technique. For data analyzing techniques it will be done by several steps: after finding the problems based on the stated topic and identifying the object, the researcher will collect the data from the participants' utterance in the interview by downloading the transcripts in order to transcribe oral utterances to written forms with Jeffersonian symbols. Next, watching the video while classifying the utterances and the context such as timestamps and speakers on transcript to get the data for overlap types analysis. Then, looking for Previous researches, journal articles. digital and printed books to support the main theories of overlap types in analyzing. Last, it will be made a conclusion of the results.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Results
For the analysis, because the data come from oral utterances, the video will be transcribed into transcript forms by using square brackets ([ ]) based on Jefferson system symbols theory (2004, pp. 24-25) to mark overlap occurrences and other symbols that support overlap occurrences.
After analyzing the data, the researcher found 13 data for overlap types. There are 11 data of noncompetitive overlap which consist of 1 terminal overlap, 5 continuers, 4 conditional access to the turn, and 1 In this utterances, there is an overlap between the interviewee and interviewer which categorized as noncompetitive overlap namely terminal overlap. Schegloff (2000, p. 5) states that terminal overlap is one of noncompetitive overlaps that happens when the incomer speaker starts their turn when the current speaker almost finishes their turn because the incomer speaker has predicted it before.
For this situation, it was started when Christine gave a question (54) for Nicholas and he answered it shortly then give a brief pause (.) (55) so it triggered Christine to start her turn because it might Nicholas had nothing to say more or he prepared several words to be said before ending his turn. Kuswandi & Apsari (2019, p. 283) mention that pause usually used because of hesitation, doubt or preparation. After predicting, Christine began her turn (56). However, Nicholas continued his turn again (57) in order to bold his previous answer (55). Then, it caused Christine words overlapped Nicholas's follow-up words but it didn't happen so long because Christine had reached her end of turn and so had him. This was what caused the overlap became non-competitive because both of them still felt comfortable to finish each turn and didn't think it as a big problem. Last, the conversation was also audible and not getting cut off.

Continuers (Non-Competitive) Datum 2:
(00:00-00:08) There are two overlaps from two data. They are categorized into noncompetitive overlap namely continuers or backchannel. Schegloff (2000, p. 5) states that continuers happens where the incomer speaker wants to show their involvement and agreement but in a short duration because they respect that the current speaker still owns the turn. From the first data, Nicholas had given his first impression by stating "Oh my gosh" (1) then when Christine as the woman interviewer opened the conversation by showing her impression too, her first word (3) being overlapped each other with Chris's continuers in responding Nicholas's first impression (2). However, it didn't become a big problem because Chris as Christine's partner respected that she still had words to be uttered so Chris didn't continue his continuers with other sentences. It caused the overlap occurred so fast that didn't disrupt each turn.
It also happened in the second data, when Christine asked a question to Nicholas (36) that answered by Nicholas BAHTERA: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra, Volume 22 Nomor 1 Januari 2023 http://journal.unj.ac.id/unj/index.php/bahtera/ P-ISSN 0853-2710 E-ISSN : 2540-8968 61 BAHTERA : Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra, Volume Januari 2023 directly (37). After that, Chris wanted to give continuers by "yeah" (38) for his agreement towards Christine's question that seemed like he also supported that question to be asked to Nicholas. However, Nicholas suddenly continued his utterance (=) (39) at the same time with Chris's continuers that made both of them being overlapped. Nonetheless, it was still not a big problem as an overlap in first data, because Chris didn't make a long turn and it didn't cause interference for both of them but the current speaker still could continue the turn until finish and built the conversation form better. In this conversation, the overlap that occurred is categorized into noncompetitive overlap namely continuers. Schegloff (2000, p. 5) states that continuers is not a problem because this type doesn't cause much interference for each speaker where they can hold their turn until finish.
Continuers is non-competitive, cooperative and supportive because it makes the current speaker knows that they can keep talking until the end of their turn rather than stop it. It becomes a brief signal that the listeners pay attention to what the current speaker said (Niapele et al., 2022, p. 15).
For this situation, the overlap happened between the interviewee and the woman interviewer. It started when Christine as the current speaker told about her feelings towards Nicholas (3) but suddenly she uttered "I apologize" that triggered Nicholas to make his turn as a feedback in the form of continuers by stating "I will watch that" while shaking his head that actually he wanted to make continuers of "no" for Christine's apologize but in other words (4). Unfortunately, it overlapped Christine's utterances that had not finished yet. However, it was not a problem that proved by Christine who didn't think it as a competition of turn. She knew that she was overlapped and she knew it just happened in a short time as a short feedback from Nicholas so she made prolongation (:::) in order to hold her turn and let Nicholas finished his turn. Then, the conversation was still going well because every pair reached its end perfectly. [That's a good one.]" 24 Christine: "You can drop that name anytime. " as Brad says,"LDC!" In this conversation part, the occurrence of overlap happened between the interviewee namely Nicholas and the man interviewer namely Chris. The overlap is categorized into noncompetitive overlap called as continuers. Schegloff (2000, p. 5) states that continuers is used to show agreement in a short duration which shows there is no intention to compete the turn. It was showed by Chris that knew Nicholas was still on his turn, so he quickly finished his turn to respect him. Actually, the overlap BAHTERA: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra, Volume 22 Nomor 1 Januari 2023 http://journal.unj.ac.id/unj/index.php/bahtera/ P-ISSN 0853-2710 E-ISSN : 2540-8968 62 BAHTERA : Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra, Volume Januari 2023 that done didn't mean that Chris was irrespective to Nicholas but it showed his respect action in listening and giving feedback to Nicholas's utterances.
It was started when Chris gave a question to Nicholas (19) and directly Nicholas answer it with a simple sentence that totally had answered the question from Chris (20). Then, Chris made his feedback after hearing that by "wow" (21) and made a pause that pushed Nicholas to make a turn again (22). Nicholas started it with "so" that usually used as the signal to end the turn with conclusion. However, it seemed like he didn't prepare and had nothing to say because he looked like thinking by giving a brief pause (.) before stating "moment". It caused Chris continued his previous continuers (21) that overlapped Nicholas's words. Then, after Chris finished stated his continuers, Nicholas also stopped his. Actually, Chris didn't make continuers that made Nicholas yielded up for his turn because at the first Nicholas had been confused what to say again. It was also proved when Christine talked then Nicholas prefer to continue about the new topic brought by Christine. So, it was clear that Chris didn't compete for the turn but he indirectly covered Nicholas's confusion. Then, the conversation was still structure well because everyone could finish each pair form either question or answer. In this conversation, the overlap that occurred is categorized into noncompetitive overlap namely continuers between the woman and man interviewer. Schegloff (2000, p. 5) mentions that continuers is categorized as non-competitive because it just happens in a short time and the incomer doesn't have any intention to compete the turn with the current speaker because they know that the current speaker has not finished yet and they just wanted to show their agreement. It can be seen that Christine could be said as the current speaker because she was the first that made turn in asking and responding to Nicholas. However, when Christine gave a very brief pause (.) before continuing her utterances (56) then when she continued (58) suddenly Chris also made his turn (59). Actually continuers usually in the form of yeah, uh huh, and mm hmm. However, Chris's overlap was called as continuers because if it was seen from Christine's utterances (56), he tried to show his agreement but instead of saying "yeah" he chose to repeat the same sentence with Christine. It was done because they were partners and Chris agreed with Christine.
Although, it became an overlap for Christine and uttered by Chris with quite long sentence but it didn't make it as a problem. Because Chris tried to support Christine and build the conversation better by making turn on that way. Fortunately, it also happened for a very brief time and Christine was not disrupted much but she could continue her turn until finish. In this part, the overlap that happened is marked by two brackets. It occurred between the woman interviewer namely Christine and the interviewee namely Nicholas. Based on the context, it can be seen that Nicholas was talking about one of winners namely Leonardo DiCaprio who watched his show (20). Then, Christine selected herself to be the current speaker and made a joke that Nicholas could mention Leonardo DiCaprio several times as he wanted (24). However, it was like a signal for Nicholas that had a meaning if he wanted to mention Leonardo DiCaprio's name for several times, it might be little difficult because it's too long. So, when Christine wanted to give a signal again by giving an example what Nicholas had to do like making an abbreviation, Nicholas had got what Christine's meant since she gave a short pause after "anytime". Then, it made an overlap between Christine's word when she just started her new sentence by "as" (24) and Nicholas's understanding (25).

Conditional Access to The Turn (Non-
It is categorized as one of noncompetitive overlap namely conditional access to the turn. Schegloff (2000, pp. 5-6) states that conditional access to the turn is called non-competitive because this overlap makes a collaborative talks between the speakers where the current speaker intentionally invites the next speaker to make their turn at that time so they complete each other. It was also showed by Christine and Nicholas where Christine invited Nicholas to get her signal even she added a pause for a second but Nicholas had got it before Christine wanted to give another signal and caused an overlap. Although Christine had to stop her word at that time but it still can't be called as competitive because it was clear that Christine let Nicholas to lead the next dialogue without continuing her word more. This overlap really made the conversation more cooperative because Nicholas succeeded in completing Christine's intention. At this part, there was an overlap that categorized into non-competitive overlap which called conditional access to the turn. It happened between Chris as the man interviewer as well as the current speaker and Nicholas as an interviewee. The occurrence of overlap happened because Chris gave a brief pause (.) before finishing his last words (28) and it gave a chance for Nicholas to make his turn on that pause. It is what called as conditional access to the turn where Chris intentionally give a pause to invite Nicholas complete Chris's turn and made a turn at that time, but when Nicholas had got the signal and started his turn by saying "LDC" (29), Chris continued again his utterances by saying "I love your work" (30) that meant Chris wanted Nicholas to answer something like that in completing Chris's previous words and made a long turn. Then, Nicholas succeed to follow the signal and answer it like had been exampled by Chris until the end before they changed the topic.
However, it didn't become competitive because Chris's last words helped Nicholas in giving a response. So, it made the conversation collaborated well. It also can be seen that both of participants helped each other to complete the turn where the current speaker gave a help and signal then the BAHTERA: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra, Volume 22 Nomor 1 Januari 2023 http://journal.unj.ac.id/unj/index.php/bahtera/ P-ISSN 0853-2710 E-ISSN : 2540-8968 64 BAHTERA : Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra, Volume Januari 2023 next speaker got it very well. Based on Schegloff (2000, pp. 5-6), conditional access to the turn is an overlap that intentionally done by the current speaker to make the next speaker does their turn in order to complete the sentence by giving a signal. For this section, the overlap that occurred is called as non-competitive overlap namely conditional access to the turn. Schegloff (2000, pp. 5-6) states that this overlap type happens when the current speaker intentionally invites the others to be next speaker in order to make a collaborative turn such as continuing or completing the current speaker's turn. For this situation, the overlap occurred between two interviewers namely Chris and Christine. First, Chris made a statement before asking a question (44) but it seemed like he had not prepared yet the question that showed by brief pause that he gave after uttering his statement and created a space for Nicholas to make his continuers (45). Then, when he wanted to continue asking, he repeated the word of "what" that obviously showed again his nothing preparation (46). This situation, became indirect factors from Chris that invited Christine as his partner of interviewer to help him continuing the utterances. Next, Chris still gave his effort and started to ask. However, Christine that had got the signal also made the turn (47) where both of them said "you guys" simultaneously. Then, Chris chose to stop his utterances because he thought Christine had understood what he wanted to utter and they had a same thought. It was proved when Chris (C) said "yeah" after Christine made a turn to help him. It seemed like Chris couldn't agree more with Christine who understood very precisely even after Nicholas finished give the answer (48), Chris didn't make another question or continue his previous utterances that being overlapped but he let Christine to make it. So, it was clear that Chris really wanted to invite Christine indirectly and didn't think Christine had competed his turn but to help him. He didn't consider it as a problem and it was normal for this type when the current speaker wanted to invite the next speaker their utterances have to be overlapped first to wait for the next speaker's start. Actually, the conversation pair forms were still structured well where Chris's pair form that being cut off was covered by Christine.