Volume 8, Issue 3
  • ISSN 2210-4119
  • E-ISSN: 2210-4127
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



This paper contributes to the growing line of research that takes a multimodal approach in the study of interpreter-mediated dialogues. Drawing on insights from Conversation Analysis and multimodal analysis, we investigate how extended multi-unit turns unfold with interventions of an interpreter and, more specifically, what is the role of gaze in this process. The analysis is based on videos of interpreter-mediated dialogues (Dutch-Russian) recorded with mobile eye-tracking glasses. We argue that the interpreter’s gaze direction contributes both to the local management of turn-taking (next-speaker selection) and to sequence organization. More specifically, we show how interpreter’s gaze orientation bears on the negotiation of possible and how it contributes to the smooth continuation of the projected extended multi-unit turn.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Angelelli, Claudia
    2000 “Interpretation as a Communicative Event: A Look through Hymes’ Lenses.” Translators’ Journal45(4): 580–592.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Auer, Peter
    2005 “Projection in interaction and projection in grammar.” Text25(1): 7–36. 10.1515/text.2005.25.1.7
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2005.25.1.7 [Google Scholar]
  3. 2017 “Gaze, addressee selection and turn-taking in three-party interaction.” InLiSt (60): 1–32.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Baraldi, Claudio and Laura Gavioli
    2012 “Introduction: Understanding coordination in interpreter-mediated interaction.” InCoordinating Participation in Dialogue Interpreting, ed. byClaudio Baraldi and Laura Gavioli, 1–21. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.102
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.102 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bavelas, B. Janet, Linda Coates, and Trudy Johnson
    2002 “Listener responses as a collaborative process: The role of gaze.” Journal of Communication52(3): 566–580. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.2002.tb02562.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02562.x [Google Scholar]
  6. Bolden, Galina
    2000 “Toward understanding practices of medical interpreting: interpreters’ involvement in history taking.” Discourse Studies2(4): 387–419. 10.1177/1461445600002004001
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445600002004001 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bot, Hanneke
    2005Dialogue Interpreting in Mental Health. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Brône, Geert, Bert Oben, Annelies Jehoul, Jelena Vranjes and Kurt Feyaerts
    2017 “Eye gaze and viewpoint in multimodal interaction management.” Cognitive Linguistics28(3): 449–484. 10.1515/cog‑2016‑0119
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2016-0119 [Google Scholar]
  9. Clayman, Steven E.
    2013 “Turn-Constructional Units and the Transition-Relevance-Place.” InThe Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. byJack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 150–166. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth and Tsuyoshi Ono
    2007 “‘Incrementing’ in conversation. A comparison of practices in English, German and Japanese.” Pragmatics17(4): 513–552. 10.1075/prag.17.4.02cou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.17.4.02cou [Google Scholar]
  11. Davidson, Brad
    2002 “A model for the construction of conversational common ground in interpreted discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics34: 1273–1300. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00025‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00025-5 [Google Scholar]
  12. Davitti, Elena
    2013 “Dialogue Interpreting as Intercultural Mediation: Interpreter’s use of upgrading moves in parent-teacher meetings.” Interpreting15(2): 168–199. 10.1075/intp.15.2.02dav
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.15.2.02dav [Google Scholar]
  13. Davitti, Elena and Sergio Pasquandrea
    2017 “Embodied participation: What multimodal analysis can tell us about interpreter-mediated encounters in pedagogical settings.” Journal of Pragmatics107: 105–128. 10.1016/j.pragma.2016.04.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.04.008 [Google Scholar]
  14. Duncan, Starkey
    1972 “Some signals and rules for taking speaking turns in conversations.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology23 (2): 283–292. 10.1037/h0033031
    https://doi.org/10.1037/h0033031 [Google Scholar]
  15. Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta
    1997 “Degree of Interpreter Responsibility in the Interaction Process in Community Interpreting.” InCritical Link: Interpreters in the Community, ed. bySilvana E. Carr, 147–164. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.19.17eng
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.19.17eng [Google Scholar]
  16. Ford, Cecilia E.
    2004 “Contingency and units in interaction.” Discourse Studies6(1): 27–52. 10.1177/1461445604039438
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445604039438 [Google Scholar]
  17. Ford, Cecilia E., Barbara Fox, and Sandra A. Thompson
    1996 “Practices in the construction of turns: The TCU revisted.” Pragmatics6(3): 427–454. 10.1075/prag.6.3.07for
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.6.3.07for [Google Scholar]
  18. Frischen, Alexandra, Andrew P. Bayliss, and Steven P. Tipper
    2007 “Gaze Cueing of Attention: Visual Attention, Social Cognition, and Individual Differences.” Psychological Bulletin133(4): 694–724. 10.1037/0033‑2909.133.4.694
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.694 [Google Scholar]
  19. Goodwin, Charles
    1979 “The Interactive Construction of a Sentence in Natural Conversation.” InEveryday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. byGeorge Psathas, 97–121. New York: Irvington Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. 1981Conversational Organization. Interaction between Speakers and Hearers. New York/ London: Academic.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 2013 “The co-operative, transformative organization of human action and knowledge.” Journal of Pragmatics46: 8–23. 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.09.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.09.003 [Google Scholar]
  22. Hayashi, Makoto
    2013 “Turn Allocation and Turn Sharing.” InThe Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. byJack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 167–190. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Houtkoop, Hanneke and Mazeland, Harrie
    1985 “Turns and discourse units in everyday conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics9: 595–619.10.1016/0378‑2166(85)90055‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(85)90055-4 [Google Scholar]
  24. Kendon, Adam
    1967 “Some functions of gaze-direction in social interaction.” Acta Psychologica26: 22–63. 10.1016/0001‑6918(67)90005‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(67)90005-4 [Google Scholar]
  25. Lang, Ranier
    1978 “Behavioral aspects of liaison interpreters in Papua New Guinea: some preliminary observations.” InLanguage Interpretation and Communication, ed. byDavid Gerver and Wallace H. Sinaiko, 231–244. New York/ London: Plenum Press. 10.1007/978‑1‑4615‑9077‑4_21
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-9077-4_21 [Google Scholar]
  26. Lerner, Gene H.
    1991 “On the Syntax of Sentences in Progress.” Language in Society20: 441–458. 10.1017/S0047404500016572
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500016572 [Google Scholar]
  27. 2003 “Selecting next speaker: The context-sensitive operation of a context-free organization.” Language in Society32: 177–201. 10.1017/S004740450332202X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S004740450332202X [Google Scholar]
  28. Levinson, Stephen C.
    2012 “Action formation and ascription.” InThe Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. byJack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 103–131. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781118325001.ch6
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118325001.ch6 [Google Scholar]
  29. Levinson, Stephen C. and Francisco Torreira
    2015 “Timing in turn-taking and its implications for processing models of language.” InTurn-taking in Human Communicative Interaction, ed. byJudith Holler, Kobin H. Kendrick, Marisa Casillas and Stephen C. Levinson, 10–27. Lausanne: Frontiers Media.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Llewellyn-Jones, Peter and Robert G. Lee
    2014Redefining the Role of the Community Interpreter: The Concept of role-space. Lincoln: SLI Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Li, Shuangyu
    2015 “Nine Types of Turn-taking in Interpreter-mediated GP Consultations.” Applied Linguistics Review6(1): 73–96. 10.1515/applirev‑2015‑0004
    https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2015-0004 [Google Scholar]
  32. Licoppe, Christian
    . Forthcoming. “The interpreter as a sequential coordinator in courtroom interaction. ’Chunking’ and the management of turn shifts in extended answers in consecutively interpreted asylum hearings with remote participants.” Interpreting.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Licoppe, Christian, Maud Verdier, and Clair-Antoine Veyrier
    2018 “Voice, control and turn-taking in multi-lingual, consecutively interpreted courtroom proceedings with video links. InRemote Interpreting, ed. byRobert Skinner, Jemina Napier and Sabina Braun, 299–322. Washington (DC): Gallaudet University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Mandelbaum, Jenny
    2013 “Storytelling in Conversation.” InThe Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. byJack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 492–509. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Mason, Ian
    2012 “Gaze, positioning and identity in interpreter-mediated dialogues.” InCoordinating Participation in Dialogue Interpreting, ed. byClaudio Baraldi and Laura Gavioli, 177–199. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.102.08mas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.102.08mas [Google Scholar]
  36. Merlino, Sara
    2014 “Traduction orale et organisation de la parole: la gestion multimodale des transitions.” InCorps en interaction: participation, spatialité, mobilité, ed. byLorenza Mondada, 65–105. Lyon: ENS Editions.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Mondada, Lorenza
    2007 “Multimodal resources for turn-taking: pointing and emergence of next speakers.” Discourse Studies9(2): 194–225. 10.1177/1461445607075346
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445607075346 [Google Scholar]
  38. 2018 “Multiple Temporalities of Language and Body in Interaction: Challenges for Transcribing Multimodality.” Research on Language and Social Interaction51(1): 85–106. 10.1080/08351813.2018.1413878
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2018.1413878 [Google Scholar]
  39. Pasquandrea, Sergio
    2011 “Managing multiple actions through multimodality: Doctors’ involvement in interpreter-mediated interactions.” Language in Society40 (4): 455–481. 10.1017/S0047404511000479
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404511000479 [Google Scholar]
  40. Rossano, Federico
    2012 Gaze behavior in face-to-face interaction. PhD Thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
  41. Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson
    1974 “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation.” Language50: 696–735. 10.1353/lan.1974.0010
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1974.0010 [Google Scholar]
  42. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    1982 “Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of ‘uh huh’ and other things that come between sentences.” InAnalyzing Discourse: Text and Talk, ed. byDeborah Tannen, 71–93. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. 1996 “Turn Organization: One Intersection of Grammar and Interaction.” Interaction and Grammar52–133. 10.1017/CBO9780511620874.002
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620874.002 [Google Scholar]
  44. 2000 “Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation.” Language in Society29: 1–63. 10.1017/S0047404500001019
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500001019 [Google Scholar]
  45. Schmitt, Reinhold
    2005 “Zur multimodalen Struktur von turn-taking.“ Gesprächsforschung6: 17–61.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Selting, Margaret
    2000 “The construction of units in conversational talk.” Language in Society29: 477–517. 10.1017/S0047404500004012
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500004012 [Google Scholar]
  47. Sidnell, Jack and Tanya Stivers
    (eds) 2013The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Chichester: Blackwell-Wiley. 10.1002/9781118325001
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118325001 [Google Scholar]
  48. Stivers, Tanya
    2008 “Stance, Alignment and Affiliation during Storytelling: When Nodding is a Token of Affiliation.” Research on Language and Social Interaction41 (1): 31–57. 10.1080/08351810701691123
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810701691123 [Google Scholar]
  49. 2013 “Sequence organization.” InThe Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Oxford, ed. byJack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 191–209. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Stivers, Tanya and Federico Rossano
    2010 “Mobilizing Response.” Research on Language and Social Interaction43 (1): 3–31. 10.1080/08351810903471258
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810903471258 [Google Scholar]
  51. Streeck, Jürgen
    2014 “Mutual gaze and recognition. Revisiting Kendon’s “Gaze direction in two-person conversation””. InFrom Gesture in Conversation to Visible Action as Utterance: Essays in honor of Adam Kendon, ed. byMandana Seyfeddinpur and Marianne Gullberg, 35–56. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.188.03str
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.188.03str [Google Scholar]
  52. Vranjes, Jelena, Hanneke, Bot, Kurt Feyaerts and Geert Brône
    . Forthcoming. “Displaying recipiency in an interpreter-mediated dialogue: an eye-tracking study.” InEye-tracking in Interaction. Studies on the Role of Eye Gaze in Dialogue ed. by Brône Geert and Bert Oben. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ais.10.12vra
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ais.10.12vra [Google Scholar]
  53. Wadensjö, Cecilia
    1998Interpreting as interaction. London and New York: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Wittenburg, Peter, Hennie Brugman, Albert Russel, Alex Klassmann, and Han Sloetjes
    2006 “ELAN: a Professional Framework for Multimodality Research.” InProceedings of LREC 2006, Fifth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, 1556–1559. ELRA (European Language Resources Association).
    [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