Essay
Spontaneous speech is an exotic world of unrehearsed, unplanned, emotion exposing form of language. It consists of a lot of ‘talking on the spot’ and improvising. Spontaneous speech will include a lot of informal language sometimes depending on what situation a person is in.it can range from everyday casual conversations to being on a interview on TV.I will be evaluating two interviews; one will be about a dialogue between simon cowell and piers morgan on his show and the other will be the interlocution between David Cameron and David letterman.
You can see that both DC and DL use an informal level of communication as the interview progresses. for example DL expresses the question “ umm, first of all, rule Britannia, err written by whom?” the language here is so informal that it almost distracts you from the fact that he was cleverly trying to test DC as politicians tend to do. The word ‘whom’ indicates of a direct subject as in this case he is verbally trying to get to the direct point of the subject and disguise his determination to catch David Cameron out on the spot. The fact that he uses a non –lexical filler before the sentence- which was “umm”-displays the fact that he himself was giving himself a chance to think through what he is going to say so he doesn’t come out to look like a fool whilst trying to make David Cameron seem like one. In my opinion, David Cameron lacked in informal language in the interview. You can see this demonstrated in the quote “I think there was some, there was some, there was some good bits and there were some less than good bits” the language – particularly the phrase ‘good bits’ and ‘less than good bits’ was quite a sluggish way to define such a serious history. You could tell this was an awkward subject to discuss for David Cameron, this is specially indicated through the repetition used at the start of the sentence. Even though DL was clearly being more informal, as the interview continued I noticed daved cameron was progressing on his language, with longer sentences, more precocious words and just informality in general.
David Cameron starts out the interview by initiating an almost diffident vibe through embolalia. For instance “I was talking a lot about…err…the arab spring and about Syria, umm, and, err…”, it is as if he has no confidence at the beginning of the interview, given that he was a little humiliated during the Britannia music. David lettermen didn’t waste any time trying to get to the point of his question, you can say he virtually rushed into and almost catching Cameron of guard. David Cameron shows his cautiousness through his hand gestures as he uses them throughout the interview. It is said that hand gestures play a role in coordinating the timing and pacing of what is being said. Since he felt the need to coordinate the timing and pace of what he was saying, it was as if he was guiding himself because he was a little nervous
Ebolalia
Simon Cowell uses embolalia after piers Morgan asks him if this is his ‘ultimate nightmare’. He replies “err, yes, and literally, 5 minutes before we went on, I actually sat there and thought- what the hell am I doing.” His use in the non-lexical filler at the beginning refers to him thinking back. It could also suggest that he was thinking about how to reply to the question without seeming like a wuss. This might be because he’s frequently seen as this straight forward, cold hearted judge; so showing or admitting some sort of emotion isn’t what he’s typically use to .

Paralinguistic features
Simon cowell instantly displays a paralinguistic feature when he answers the very first question which was “so…nervous”, he replies “are you? (laughs)” . this may suggest that he really is anxious even though he disguises it with his words. The fact that he is being interviewed by his employee is probably what caused it but it’s also one of the reasons why the show was very intriguing for the audience. Cowell knows that morgan is going to try to get some witty questions that might end up in the magazines the next day, he even states before the interview that if piers went to far, he would sack him.
Battle for dominance
Like I mentioned before, the battle for dominance is not as discreet as david Cameron’s interview. simon is interrupted by piers on numerous occasions. For example “so you just flick on” “so what do you like then seriously-musically?” this simon cowell was fighting for dominance by constantly not answering questions in a straight forward way but in a way that almost changes the subject. And as you can see in the example, piers morgan retaliates by interrupting him and re-phrasing the question.
What Cameron and cowell have in common is that they both appeared to be nervous at the start of the interview, Cameron more nervous than cowell both nervous. They both showed this through embolalia, mostly non-lexical fillers; however, the both grew in confidence as the interviews went on. Both of them also had a higher authority than the interviewer. Cowell’s and morgan’s interview was less serious and their friendship was portrayed through humour and teasing.

There was definitely a convergence in dominance between the two. Like I mentioned in the previous paragraph, david Cameron didn’t seem very confident as he pursued a lot of non-lexical fillers, repetition and an over-use of hand gestures.it seems that david lettermen was taking advantage of this by constantly interrupting david Cameron. For instance “there was a moment when if you, the globe was like, a quarter pink. And that was err...” “now and historically, do we look back on that period now as just awful-don’t we?”. Notice how he adds the “don’t we” when really he means ‘don’t you’, he was obviously trying to make david Cameron uncomfortable and maybe wanted to pick out an interesting reaction for the media to maybe blab about later on. As the interview continues, david Cameron seems to grow in confidence. As he grows in confidence, his sentences seemed to grow aswell. You can see this In the quote “its err, very complicated. there’s amount of history involved in this.ahh, partly based on some religious defferences…” and so on.he also seemed to brag a bit in the paragraph as he talks about the relationship between england and Ireland.
There was some interrupted construction used by Cameron in the interview when he refers to the british empire. He says ‘’there was a moment when if you, the globe wwas like, a quarter pink. And that was err…’’ This is a big sign of discreet and cautiousness, since he is always in the eye of the public he knows he has to be careful on how he phrases his sentence, especially in America where they tend to have stereotypes of the british being ‘stuck up’ in any way. The first part of the sentence looked like it might have ended in an example of the british previously being in control of most of the world. Even though this is a very well-known historic fact you can tell he didn’t want to come off as being more opinionated than stating facts. his cautiousness is also displayed in the emolalia used in the end. A second example of Cameron using interrupted construction is when he says ‘’I think, I mean, I like to think, I think we’re getting over that now’’ again, he is being careful with his sentence. Notice how instead of stating that ‘we’re getting on now h’ he says ‘I think’, this is makes a huge difference because unlike the previous example, this time he put his view on it instead of stating it as a fact, this doesn’t make it seem as though he’s is trying to force this concept of complete amity between the us and the uk which I think is very important regarding political issues.