 Miscommunication theory says that because males and females, they interact in separate domains. They learn the peach-habbers of their own domain. They never mix with each other. But whenever there is some situation in which they interact with each other, because they are unfamiliar with the language habits of each other, they may misunderstand or misinterpret each other. This is called miscommunication theory. Let's see whether conversation analysis accepts this theory or not. CA tells us that meaning is co-constructed by speakers during exchange of utterances. Speaker A speaks and speaker B listens. Then speaker B speaks and speaker A listens. And because of their pair of utterances, they co-construct meaning of their talk. External assumptions, background, context, they never matter in the meaning of their utterances. Gender, other identity factors, age, color, etc. They have no role in construction of their meaning. These conversational actions or functions are performed by adjacent pairs. First utterance is uttered by speaker A. Second by speaker B. Two different speakers produce these two utterances. And these two utterances, the pair of utterances together, make function of the interaction, function of the conversational pair. Such pairs, because they are adjacent with each other, one comes soon after the other, we call them adjacency pairs. So actually in conversation, adjacency pairs construct the meaning. Now, we formally define adjacency pairs. First, there is sequence of paired utterances. They come in order one after that. Second, they produced by different speakers. Third, the first utterance sets expectation for the second. From first utterance, we know that what would be the second utterance that is expected by the speaker A. For example, if one speaker reads, it is expected that the other would reply again in form of greeting. Greeting follows greeting. It makes a pair adjacency pair. If one speaker invites, the other speaker would accept this invitation or refuses this invitation. So again, two adjacent pairs of utterances uttered by two different speakers and first utterance sets expectation for the second. Similarly, if first speaker asks questions, then the second speaker would provide answer to that. For example, this interaction. Is there anything bothering you? Speaker A asks a question. Now, there is expected an answer according to this adjacency pair definition. But the answer doesn't come. There is pause of at least one second. Then speaker A continues asking question. Yes or no? Again, there is pause of one and a half second. Then no answer comes because answer is expected and it is expected conventionally. So again the question, come on. Then speaker B replies now. So this is how pairs are related with each other. Sometimes this adjacency is extended. The pattern is the same. Answer a question. But between this pair, further utterances are inserted. These are called insertions. But the basic pattern of pairs remains the same. For example, would you like an ice cream? This is question by speaker A. Speaker B, what flavors are there? Instead of providing answer says, what flavors are there? He asks question in response to question. But this is not expectation by the speaker A. Speaker A then finally answers. And this is how if question and answer are interrupted by insertions or more utterances even then the expected pairs are maintained. More insertions, more than one, two, three are possible between two pairs. But the basic pattern would prevail. That would be retained. And this question-answer pairing is mutually expected. Both speakers expect that if there is question, there would be answer. So we conclude that conversational actions are functions like requests, invitations. They are performed through adjacency pairs.