“Shortlisting candidates”: Syntactically incomplete turns in assessments of absent third parties

In group discussions where participants evaluate and make selections of non-present third parties, making negative assessments is a potentially face-threatening and socially delicate action that requires caution and deliberation. Previous research has identified syntactically incomplete turns as a key interactional resource in treating a matter as delicate, leaving negative assessments unsaid when they are due. However, the use of syntactically incomplete turns in multi-party interaction remains underexplored. The current study contributes to this line of research by investigating how a steering committee of older adults in a retirement community, who are non-hierarchical peers planning a community-wide event, assess their neighbors as candidates for leadership roles. Based on an examination of approximately 12 h of audio-visual recordings of meetings, we identify two types of syntactically incomplete turns: first, those appropriately received and responded to but not syntactically completed by recipients, and second, those syntactically co-completed by recipients. In the former case, speakers continue to either pursue or abandon the projection of delicacy. In the latter case, speakers eschew delicacy and express their epistemic authority in making the assessment. Our findings contribute to the existing knowledge of delicacy projection and management when making negative assessments as part of group decision-making. In particular, by examining the multimodal nature of syntactically incomplete turns in face-to-face interaction, this research illuminates how “hidden prejudices” of a selection committee might play out in the turn-by-turn deliberations by committee members.