1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Interactional Linguistics
  4. Volume 2, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 2, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2666-4224
  • E-ISSN: 2666-4232
PDF
EPUB

Abstract

Abstract

Participants in conversation have a range of options for referring to co-conversationalists – lexical, grammatical, embodied – regardless of their language. Personal pronouns have been described as the most unmarked way of achieving reference, where little else is accomplished other than the action of referring. We demonstrate that speakers in a multi-party conversation whose language distinguishes between second and third-person pronouns, or between inclusive and exclusive pronouns, are constantly attributing and managing participation roles when referring to co-participants, even when using the default reference forms. Grammatical contrasts within pronoun inventories are recruited, often in conjunction with points and gaze, to indicate which co-participants are being addressed and which are being referred to. Address is constantly recalibrated through practices of reference. Speakers also draw on more marked referential expressions in order to emphasise the attribution of participation roles more explicitly. This study is based on a corpus of casual multi-party conversations in Jaru, an endangered Australian language with a dual pronominal system which encodes three grammatical numbers (singular, dual, and plural) and specifies whether the referents of first-person dual and plural pronouns exclude or include the addressee(s).

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/il.22005.dah
2023-05-04
2024-12-02

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/il.22005.dah
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/il.22005.dah.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/il.22005.dah&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Anderson, J., & Keenan, E.
    (1985) Deixis. InT. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description: Grammatical categories and the lexicon (Vol.31, pp.259–308). Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Auer, P.
    (2018) Gaze, addressee selection and turn-taking in three-party interaction. InG. Brône & B. Oben (Eds.), Eye-tracking in Interaction: Studies on the role of eye gaze in dialogue (pp.197–232). John Benjamins. 10.1075/ais.10.09aue
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ais.10.09aue [Google Scholar]
  3. (2021a) Turn-allocation and gaze: A multimodal revision of the “current-speaker-selects-next” rule of the turn-taking system of conversation analysis. Discourse Studies, 23(2), 117–140. 10.1177/1461445620966922
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445620966922 [Google Scholar]
  4. (2021b) Gaze selects the next speaker in answers to questions pronominally addressed to more than one co-participant. Interactional Linguistics, 1(2), 154–182. 10.1075/il.21002.aue
     https://doi.org/10.1075/il.21002.aue [Google Scholar]
  5. Bhat, D. N. S.
    (2004) Pronouns. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bickel, B., & Nichols, J.
    (2005) Inclusive–exclusive as person vs. number categories worldwide. InE. Filimonova (Ed.), Clusivity: Typology and case studies of inclusive-exclusive distinction (pp.49–72). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.63.05bic
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.63.05bic [Google Scholar]
  7. Blythe, J.
    (2010) Self-association in Murriny Patha talk-in-interaction. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 30(4), 447–469. 10.1080/07268602.2010.518555
     https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2010.518555 [Google Scholar]
  8. (2013) Preference organization driving structuration: Evidence from Australian Aboriginal interaction for pragmatically motivated grammaticalization. Language, 89(4), 883–919. 10.1353/lan.2013.0057
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2013.0057 [Google Scholar]
  9. Blythe, J., Gardner, R., Mushin, I., & Stirling, L.
    (2018) Tools of engagement: Selecting a next speaker in Australian Aboriginal multiparty conversations. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 51(2), 145–170. 10.1080/08351813.2018.1449441
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2018.1449441 [Google Scholar]
  10. Capell, A.
    (1956) A new approach to Australian linguistics. University of Sydney.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Cysouw, M.
    (2003) The paradigmatic structure of person marking. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Dahmen, J.
    (2022a) Bilingual speech in Jaru–Kriol conversations: Codeswitching, codemixing, and grammatical fusion. International Journal of Bilingualism, 26(2), 198–226. 10.1177/13670069211036925
     https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069211036925 [Google Scholar]
  13. (2022b) An interactional-linguistic perspective on Jaru conversation [PhD dissertation]. Macquarie University. 10.25949/21708251
     https://doi.org/10.25949/21708251
  14. Drew, P.
    (1987) Po-faced receipts of teases. Linguistics, 251, 219–253. 10.1515/ling.1987.25.1.219
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1987.25.1.219 [Google Scholar]
  15. Enfield, N. J.
    (2007) Meanings of the unmarked: How ‘default’ person reference does more than just refer. InN. J. Enfield & T. Stivers (Eds.), Person reference in interaction: Linguistic, cultural and social perspectives (pp.97–120). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486746.006
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486746.006 [Google Scholar]
  16. (2012) Reference in conversation. InJ. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp.433–454). Wiley-Blackwell. 10.1002/9781118325001.ch21
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118325001.ch21 [Google Scholar]
  17. Enfield, N. J., & San Roque, L.
    (2017) Place reference in interaction. Open Linguistics, 3(1). 10.1515/opli‑2017‑0029
     https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2017-0029 [Google Scholar]
  18. Enfield, N. J., & Stivers, T.
    (Eds.) (2007) Person reference in interaction: Linguistic, cultural and social perspectives. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486746
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486746 [Google Scholar]
  19. Ennever, T.
    (2021) A grammar of Ngardi: As spoken by Freda Tjama, Margaret Yinjuru Bumblebee, Dora Mungkirna Rockman, Peggy Yalurrngali Rockman, Yunuja Nampijin, Dampa Yujuyu Nampijin, Maudie Mandigalli, Kathleen Padoon, Payi Payi Napangardi, Patricia Lee, Nyirrpingawurru Japaljarri, Mark Moora, Marie Mudgedell and Patrick Smith. De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110752434
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110752434 [Google Scholar]
  20. Filimonova, E.
    (Ed.) (2005) Clusivity: Typology and case studies of inclusive-exclusive distinction. John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.63
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.63 [Google Scholar]
  21. Goffman, E.
    (1979) Footing. Semiotica, 25(1–2), 1–30. 10.1515/semi.1979.25.1‑2.1
     https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1979.25.1-2.1 [Google Scholar]
  22. Goodwin, C.
    (1979) The interactive construction of a sentence in natural conversation. InG. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language: Studies in Ethnomethodology (pp.97–121). Irvington Publishers.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. (1981) Conversational organization: Interaction between speakers and hearers. Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Goodwin, C., & Goodwin, M. H.
    (2005) Participation. InA. Duranti (Ed.), A companion to linguistic anthropology (pp.222–244). Wiley. 10.1002/9780470996522.ch10
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470996522.ch10 [Google Scholar]
  25. Haspelmath, M.
    (2006) Against markedness (and what to replace it with). Journal of Linguistics, 42(1), 25–70. 10.1017/S0022226705003683
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226705003683 [Google Scholar]
  26. Hepburn, A., Wilkinson, S., & Shaw, R.
    (2012) Repairing self- and recipient reference. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(2), 175–190. 10.1080/08351813.2012.673914
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.673914 [Google Scholar]
  27. Heritage, J.
    (2007) Intersubjectivity and progressivity in person (and place) reference. InN. J. Enfield & T. Stivers (Eds.), Person reference in interaction: Linguistic, cultural and social perspectives (pp.255–280). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486746.012
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486746.012 [Google Scholar]
  28. Himmelmann, N. P.
    (1996) Demonstratives in narrative discourse: A taxonomy of universal uses. InB. A. Fox (Ed.), Studies in anaphora (pp.205–254). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.33.08him
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.33.08him [Google Scholar]
  29. Hudson, J.
    (1983) Grammatical and semantic aspects of Fitzroy Valley Kriol (Vol.81). SIL–AAB.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Jacobsen, W. H., Jr.
    (1980) Inclusive–exclusive: A diffused pronominal category in native western North America. InJ. Kreiman & A. E. Ojeda (Eds.), Papers from the parasession on pronouns and anaphora (pp.326–406). Chicago Linguistic Society.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Jakobson, R.
    (1971) Shifters, verbal categories, and the Russian verb. InSelected writings: Word and language (Vol.21, pp.130–147). De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110873269.130
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110873269.130 [Google Scholar]
  32. Jefferson, G.
    (2004) Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. InG. H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp.13–31). John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.125.02jef
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.125.02jef [Google Scholar]
  33. Jespersen, O.
    (1922) Language: Its nature, development and origin. George Allen and Unwin.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. LaPolla, R. J.
    (2005) The inclusive–exclusive distinction in Tibeto-Burman languages. InE. Filimonova (Ed.), Clusivity: Typology and case studies of inclusive-exclusive distinction (pp.291–311). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.63.14lap
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.63.14lap [Google Scholar]
  35. Lerner, G. H.
    (2003) Selecting next speaker: The context-sensitive operation of a context-free organization. Language in Society, 32(2), 177–201. 10.1017/S004740450332202X
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S004740450332202X [Google Scholar]
  36. Lerner, G. H., & Kitzinger, C.
    (2007) Extraction and aggregation in the repair of individual and collective self-reference. Discourse Studies, 9(4), 526–557. 10.1177/1461445607079165
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445607079165 [Google Scholar]
  37. Levinson, S. C.
    (2006) Deixis. InL. R. Horn & G. Ward (Eds.), The handbook of pragmatics (pp.97–121). Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470756959.ch5
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756959.ch5 [Google Scholar]
  38. Masica, C. P.
    (2001) The definition and significance of linguistic areas: Methods, pitfalls, and possibilities (with special reference to the validity of South Asia as a linguistic area). InP. Bhaskararao & K. V. Subbarao (Eds.), The yearbook of South Asian languages and linguistics (pp.205–267). Sage. 10.1515/9783110245264.205
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110245264.205 [Google Scholar]
  39. McConvell, P.
    (1996) The functions of split-Wackernagel clitic systems: Pronominal clitics in the Ngumpin languages (Pama-Nyungan family, Northern Australia). InA. L. Halpern & A. M. Zwicky (Eds.), Approaching second: Second position clitics and related phenomena (pp.299–331). CSLI Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Meakins, F., & McConvell, P.
    (2021) A grammar of Gurindji: As spoken by Violet Wadrill, Ronnie Wavehill, Dandy Danbayarri, Biddy Wavehill, Topsy Dodd Ngarnjal, Long Johnny Kijngayarri, Banjo Ryan, Pincher Nyurrmiari and Blanche Bulngari. De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110746884
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110746884 [Google Scholar]
  41. Meakins, F., & Nordlinger, R.
    (2014) A grammar of Bilinarra: An Australian Aboriginal language of the Northern Territory. De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9781614512745
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614512745 [Google Scholar]
  42. Mondada, L.
    (2001) Conventions for multimodal transcription. https://www.lorenzamondada.net/multimodal-transcription
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Mushin, I., & Simpson, J.
    (2008) Free to bound to free?: Interactions between pragmatics and syntax in the development of Australian pronominal systems. Language, 84(3), 566–596. 10.1353/lan.0.0048
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.0.0048 [Google Scholar]
  44. Oh, S.-Y.
    (2010) Invoking categories through co-present person reference: The case of Korean conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(5), 1219–1242. 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.09.019
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.09.019 [Google Scholar]
  45. Raymond, C. W.
    (2016) Linguistic reference in the negotiation of identity and action: Revisiting the T/V distinction. Language, 92(3), 636–670. 10.1353/lan.2016.0053
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2016.0053 [Google Scholar]
  46. Raymond, C. W., Clift, R., & Heritage, J.
    (2021) Reference without anaphora: On agency through grammar. Linguistics, 59(3), 715–755. 10.1515/ling‑2021‑0058
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2021-0058 [Google Scholar]
  47. Raymond, C. W., & White, A. E. C.
    (2017) Time reference in the service of social action. Social Psychology Quarterly, 80(2), 109–131. 10.1177/0190272516689468
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272516689468 [Google Scholar]
  48. Ross, M. D.
    (1988) Proto Oceanic and the Austronesian languages of western Melanesia. Australian National University.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G.
    (1974) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696. 10.1353/lan.1974.0010
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1974.0010 [Google Scholar]
  50. Schegloff, E. A.
    (1996) Some practices for referring to persons in talk-in-interaction: A partial sketch of a systematics. InB. A. Fox (Ed.), Studies in anaphora (pp.437–485). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.33.14sch
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.33.14sch [Google Scholar]
  51. (2007a) Conveying who you are: The presentation of self, strictly speaking. InN. J. Enfield & T. Stivers (Eds.), Person reference in interaction: Linguistic, cultural and social perspectives (pp.123–148). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486746.007
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486746.007 [Google Scholar]
  52. (2007b) Categories in action: Person-reference and membership categorization. Discourse Studies, 9(4), 433–461. 10.1177/1461445607079162
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445607079162 [Google Scholar]
  53. Schegloff, E. A., Ochs, E., & Thompson, S. A.
    (1996) Introduction. InE. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp.1–51). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620874.001
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620874.001 [Google Scholar]
  54. Senge, C.
    (2015) A grammar of Wanyjirra, a language of northern Australia [PhD dissertation]. Australian National University.
  55. Simon, H. J., & Wiese, H.
    (Eds.) (2002) Pronouns: Grammar and representation. John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.52
     https://doi.org/10.1075/la.52 [Google Scholar]
  56. Stivers, T.
    (2021) Is conversation built for two? The partitioning of social interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 54(1), 1–19. 10.1080/08351813.2020.1864158
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2020.1864158 [Google Scholar]
  57. Tsunoda, T.
    (1981) The Djaru language of Kimberley, Western Australia. Pacific Linguistics.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/il.22005.dah
Loading
Calibrating recipiency through pronominal reference
Interactional Linguistics 2, 190 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1075/il.22005.dah
/content/journals/10.1075/il.22005.dah
/content/journals/10.1075/il.22005.dah
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): address; Australian Aboriginal languages; clusivity; gaze; Jaru; morphological contrasts; participation frameworks; person; pronouns; reference

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error