Volume 8, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2210-4119
  • E-ISSN: 2210-4127
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



The paper develops an ethnomethodological, conversation-analytic and multimodal approach of the theatrical rehearsal, examining how participants collaboratively read, understand and embody the script. After examining the spatial organization of the setting, the paper focuses on the following interactional practices: (1) from the participants’ perspective, the script appears as a written sequence of lines to connect with their knowledge of social interaction; (2) participants understand the script through their sequential and contextual readings; (3) they collaboratively connect the utterance of written lines with embodied behavior through the check-reading, and (4) by coordinating the lines with pauses and gaze directions. The analysis relies on video-recordings in French and Japanese collected at an Art center in Japan.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Baudy, Nicolas
    1946Le piano d’Arlequin. Editions Corréa: Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Boal, Augusto
    1992Games for Actors and Non-Actors. Routledge: London and New York.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Derrida, Jacques
    1988Limited INC. Evanston, IL, Northwestern University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Ducrot, Oswald
    1980Les mots du discours. Editions de Minuit: Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Garfinkel, Harold
    1967Studies in Ethnomethodology, Prentice-Hall: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Garfinkel, Harold and Sacks Harvey
    1970 “On Formal Structures of Practical Actions.” InTheoretical Sociology: Perspectives and Developments, ed. by John C. McKinney and Edward A. Tiryakian , 337–366. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Goffman, Erving
    1959The Presentation of Self in Every Day Life. Anchor Books edition, New York.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Goodwin, Charles
    1979 “The Interactive Construction of a Sentence in Natural Conversation.” InEveryday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. by G. Psathas , 97–121. New York: Irvington Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 2000 “Action and embodiment within situated human interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics32: 1489–1522.10.1016/S0378‑2166(99)00096‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00096-X [Google Scholar]
  10. Heritage, John
    1984 “A Change of State Token and Aspects of Its Sequential Placement.” InStructures of Social Actioned. by J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage , 299–345. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 1998 “Oh-Prefaced Responses to Inquiry.” Language in Society27: 291–334.10.1017/S0047404500019990
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500019990 [Google Scholar]
  12. Kendon, Adam
    1990Conducting Interaction: Patterns of Behavior in Focused Encounters. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. McHoul, Alexander W.
    1987 “An initial investigation of the usability of fictional conversation for doing conversation analysis.” Semiotica67–1/2: 83–104.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Mondada, Lorenza
  15. Sacks, Harvey
    1992Lectures on Conversation. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Sacks, Harvey , Schegloff, Emanuel A. , and Jefferson Gail
    1974 “A Simplest Systematics for the Organisation of Turn-Taking for Conversation.” Language50: 696–735.10.1353/lan.1974.0010
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1974.0010 [Google Scholar]
  17. Schegloff, Emanuel A. and Harvey Sacks
    1973 “Opening up Closings.” Semiotica7: 289–327.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Schegloff, Emanuel A. , Gail Jefferson , and Harvey Sacks
    1977 “The Preference for Self-Correction in the Organization of Repair in Conversation.” Language53 (2): 361–382.10.1353/lan.1977.0041
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1977.0041 [Google Scholar]
  19. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    2007Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511791208
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208 [Google Scholar]
  20. Suchman, Lucy
    1985Plans and Situated Actions: The Problem of Human Machine Communication. Xerox Corporation Palo Alto Research Center, Palo Alto, California.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

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