This article examines the questioning of US Attorney General Jeff Sessions by Senators Angus King and Kamala Harris during a congressional hearing. Analyses of the two exchanges, grounded in conversation analytic (CA) methodology, reveal that simultaneous and near-simultaneous talk initiated by the senators is pervasive in both exchanges. However, Sessions does ‘being interrupted’ (Hutchby 1996; Bilmes 1997)—that is, displays an orientation toward his interlocutors’ turns as a violation of his speaking rights—three times more often when he is questioned by Harris rather than King. The discrepancy in Sessions’ handling of the senators’ turns may explain why Harris is sanctioned by two colleagues during her questioning and why commentators have characterized her as aggressive and interruptive, while at the same time lauding (or ignoring) King. These findings ultimately suggest that doing being interrupted may influence how others perceive an interaction and those participating in it. (Institutional discourse, interruption, latching, overlap, political discourse)

中文翻译：

---

在政治谈话中“被打断”

本文探讨了参议员安格斯·金和卡玛拉·哈里斯在国会听证会上对美国司法部长杰夫·塞申斯的提问。基于会话分析 (CA) 方法对两次交流的分析表明，参议员发起的同时和近乎同时的谈话在两次交流中都很普遍。然而，塞申斯确实“被打断”（Hutchby 1996；Bilmes 1997）——也就是说，当他被哈里斯而不是金询问时，他的对话者的轮流表现出一种对他说话权利的侵犯的倾向——这是他的三倍。塞申斯对参议员轮换处理的差异可能解释了为什么哈里斯在她的提问过程中受到了两位同事的制裁，以及为什么评论员将她描述为咄咄逼人和打扰，同时赞扬（或无视）金。(制度话语、中断、锁定、重叠、政治话语）