Writing in interaction
  • ISSN 2210-4119
  • E-ISSN: 2210-4127
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


Prior conversation analytic studies have shown that writing is a multifaceted activity, one that is accomplished in different participation configurations and through different practices of text production. A key factor that organises writing is whether participants jointly produce one text or write their own texts individually. While this choice is sometimes institutionally regulated (e.g. when counsellors take notes only for themselves), in some settings participants can manage the ‘jointness’ of writing. This article explores such management by examining how students seek and gain access to another student’s writing during individual writing tasks. The multimodal analysis focuses on sequences where students consult or share task answer formulations with each other, showing some routine ways — verbal and embodied — of negotiating such access. The focal sequences are a site of moral negotiation about where the borderline between individual and social lies, which manifests itself through different ways of seeking and granting (or blocking) access.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Breen, M
    1989 “The Evaluation Cycle for Language Learning Tasks.” InThe Second Language Curriculum, ed. by Robert Johnson , 187–206. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524520.014
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524520.014 [Google Scholar]
  2. Cromdal, Jakob
    2004 “Building Bilingual Oppositions: Code-Switching in Children’s Disputes.” Language in Society33 (1): 33–58. doi: 10.1017/S0047404504031021
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404504031021 [Google Scholar]
  3. 2005 “Bilingual Order in Collaborative Word Processing: On Creating an English Text in Swedish.” Journal of Pragmatics37 (3): 329–53. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2004.10.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.10.006 [Google Scholar]
  4. Davidson, Christina
    2007a “Independent Writing in Current Approaches to Writing Instruction: What Have We Overlooked?” English Teaching: Practice and Critique6 (1): 11–24.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. 2007b “Routine Encounters During Independent Writing: Explicating Taken-for-Granted Interaction.” Language and Education21 (6): 473–86. doi: 10.2167/le699.0
    https://doi.org/10.2167/le699.0 [Google Scholar]
  6. 2015 “‘Don’t Tell Him Just Help Him’: Restricted Interactional Activity during a Classroom Writing Lesson.” InProducing and Managing Restricted Activities: Avoidance and Withholding in Institutional Interaction, ed. by Fabienne H.G. Chevalier and John Moore , 181–204. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.255.06dav
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.255.06dav [Google Scholar]
  7. Deppermann, Arnulf
    2013 “Multimodal Interaction from a Conversation Analytic Perspective.” Journal of Pragmatics46 (1): 1–7. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.11.014
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.11.014 [Google Scholar]
  8. Eriksson, Ann-Marie , and Åsa Mäkitalo
    2013 “Referencing as Practice: Learning to Write and Reason with Other People’s Texts in Environmental Engineering Education.”Learning, Culture and Social Interaction2 (3): 171–83. doi: 10.1016/j.lcsi.2013.05.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2013.05.002 [Google Scholar]
  9. 2015 “Supervision at the Outline Stage: Introducing and Encountering Issues of Sustainable Development through Academic Writing Assignments.” Text & Talk35 (2): 123–53.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Goodwin, Charles
    2000 “Action and Embodiment within Situated Human Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics32: 1489–1522. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(99)00096‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00096-X [Google Scholar]
  11. Haddington, Pentti , Tiina Keisanen , Lorenza Mondada , and Maurice Nevile
    (eds) 2014Multiactivity in Social Interaction: Beyond Multitasking. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/z.187
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.187 [Google Scholar]
  12. Hakulinen, Auli , Maria Vilkuna , Riitta Korhonen , Vesa Koivisto , Tarja Riitta Heinonen , and Irja Alho
    2004Iso suomen kielioppi [Big Finnish Grammar]. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Jakonen, Teppo
    2015 “Handling Knowledge: Using Classroom Materials to Construct and Interpret Information Requests.” Journal of Pragmatics89 (November): 100–112. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.10.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.10.001 [Google Scholar]
  14. Jefferson, Gail
    2004 “Glossary of Transcript Symbols with an Introduction.” InConversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation, ed. by Gene H Lerner , 13–31. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.125.02jef
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.125.02jef [Google Scholar]
  15. Kibler, Amanda
    2010 “Writing through Two Languages: First Language Expertise in a Language Minority Classroom.” Journal of Second Language Writing19 (3): 121–42. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2010.04.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2010.04.001 [Google Scholar]
  16. 2011 “Understanding the ‘mmhm’: Dilemmas in Talk between Teachers and Adolescent Emergent Bilingual Students.” Linguistics and Education22 (3): 213–32. doi: 10.1016/j.linged.2010.11.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2010.11.002 [Google Scholar]
  17. Komter, Martha
    2006 “From Talk to Text: The Interactional Construction of a Police Record.” Research on Language and Social Interaction39 (3): 201–28. doi: 10.1207/s15327973rlsi3903_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi3903_2 [Google Scholar]
  18. 2012 “The Career of a Suspect’s Statement: Talk, Text, Context.” Discourse Studies14 (6): 731–52. doi: 10.1177/1461445612457486
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445612457486 [Google Scholar]
  19. Koole, Tom
    2007 “Parallel Activities in the Classroom.” Language and Education21 (6): 487–501. doi: 10.2167/le713.0
    https://doi.org/10.2167/le713.0 [Google Scholar]
  20. Koshik, Irene
    2002 “Designedly Incomplete Utterances: A Pedagogical Practice for Eliciting Knowledge Displays in Error Correction Sequences.” Research on Language and Social Interaction35 (3): 277–309. doi: 10.1207/S15327973RLSI3503_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3503_2 [Google Scholar]
  21. 2003 “Wh-Questions Used as Challenges.” Discourse Studies5 (1): 51–77. doi: 10.1177/14614456030050010301
    https://doi.org/10.1177/14614456030050010301 [Google Scholar]
  22. Kunitz, Silvia
    2013 “Group Planning among L2 Learners of Italian: A Conversation Analytic Perspective.” Doctoral dissertation. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
  23. 2015 “Scriptlines as Emergent Artifacts in Collaborative Group Planning.” Journal of Pragmatics76: 135–49. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.10.012
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.10.012 [Google Scholar]
  24. Lerner, Gene H
    1995 “Turn Design and the Organization of Participation in Instructional Activities.” Discourse Processes19: 111–31. doi: 10.1080/01638539109544907
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539109544907 [Google Scholar]
  25. Majlesi, Ali Reza
    2014 “Finger Dialogue: The Embodied Accomplishment of Learnables in Instructing Grammar on a Worksheet.” Journal of Pragmatics64 (April): 35–51. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.01.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.01.003 [Google Scholar]
  26. Markee, Numa , and Silvia Kunitz
    2013 “Doing Planning and Task Performance in Second Language Acquisition: An Ethnomethodological Respecification.” Language Learning63 (4): 629–64. doi: 10.1111/lang.12019
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12019 [Google Scholar]
  27. Mchoul, Alexander
    1978 “The Organization of Turns at Formal Talk in the Classroom.” Language in Society7 (2): 183–213. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500005522
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500005522 [Google Scholar]
  28. Mehan, Hugh
    1979 “‘What Time Is It, Denise?’: Asking Known Information Questions in Classroom Discourse.” Theory Into Practice18 (4): 285–94. doi: 10.1080/00405847909542846
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00405847909542846 [Google Scholar]
  29. Mondada, Lorenza
    2007 “Multimodal Resources for Turn-Taking: Pointing and the Emergence of Possible next Speakers.” Discourse Studies9 (2): 194–225. doi: 10.1177/1461445607075346
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445607075346 [Google Scholar]
  30. 2014 “The Local Constitution of Multimodal Resources for Social Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics65: 137–56. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.04.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.04.004 [Google Scholar]
  31. Mortensen, K
    2013 “Writing Aloud: Some Interactional Functions of the Public Display of Emergent Writing.” Conference proceedings for Participatory Innovation Conference 2013 Lahti, Finland , 119–25.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Musk, Nigel
    2014 “Avoiding the Target Language with the Help of Google: Managing Language Choices in Gathering Information for EFL Project Work.” TESOL Quarterly48 (1): 110–35. doi: 10.1002/tesq.102
    https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.102 [Google Scholar]
  33. Nissi, Riikka
    2015 “From Entry Proposals to a Joint Statement: Practices of Shared Text Production in Multiparty Meeting Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics79: 1–21. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.01.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.01.002 [Google Scholar]
  34. Pälli, Pekka , and Esa Lehtinen
    2014 “Making Objectives Common in Performance Appraisal Interviews.” Language & Communication39 (2014) Elsevier Ltd: 92–108. doi: 10.1016/j.langcom.2014.09.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2014.09.002 [Google Scholar]
  35. Park, Innhwa
    2012 “Asking Different Types of Polar Questions: The Interplay between Turn, Sequence, and Context in Writing Conferences.” Discourse Studies14 (5): 613–33. doi: 10.1177/1461445612454077
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445612454077 [Google Scholar]
  36. 2015 “Requests: Knowledge and Entitlement in Writing Tutoring.” Language & Communication43: 1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.langcom.2015.03.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2015.03.003 [Google Scholar]
  37. Stevanovic, Melisa , and Anssi Peräkylä
    2012 “Deontic Authority in Interaction: The Right to Announce, Propose, and Decide.” Research on Language and Social Interaction45 (3): 297–321. doi: 10.1080/08351813.2012.699260
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.699260 [Google Scholar]
  38. Svinhufvud, Kimmo
    . This issue. “Nodding and Note-Taking.”
    [Google Scholar]
  39. 2013 “Papers, Documents, and the Opening of an Academic Supervision Encounter”33 (1): 139–66.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Szymanski, Margaret H
    1999 “Re-Engaging and Dis-Engaging Talk in Activity.” Language in Society28 (1): 1–23. doi: 10.1017/S0047404599001013
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404599001013 [Google Scholar]
  41. 2003 “Producing Text through Talk: Question-Answering Activity in Classroom Peer Groups.” Linguistics and Education13 (4): 533–63. doi: 10.1016/S0898‑5898(03)00003‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0898-5898(03)00003-2 [Google Scholar]
  42. Tholander, Michael , and Karin Aronsson
    2003 “Doing Subteaching in School Group Work: Positionings, Resistance and Participation Frameworks.” Language and Education17 (3): 208–34. doi: 10.1080/09500780308666849
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09500780308666849 [Google Scholar]
  43. Waring, Hansun Zhang
    2005 “Peer Tutoring in a Graduate Writing Centre: Identity, Expertise, and Advice Resisting.” Applied Linguistics26 (2): 141–68. doi: 10.1093/applin/amh041
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amh041 [Google Scholar]
  44. Wilkinson, Ray , Steven Bloch , and Michael Clarke
    2011 “On the Use of Graphic Organisers in Interaction by People with Communication Disorders.” InEmbodied Interaction: Language and Body in the Material World, ed. by Jürgen Streeck , Charles Goodwin , and Curtis Lebaron , 152–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Young, Richard F. , and Elizabeth R. Miller
    2004 “Learning as Changing Participation: Discourse Roles in ESL Writing Conferences.” Modern Language Journal88 (4): 519–35. doi: 10.1111/j.0026‑7902.2004.t01‑16‑.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0026-7902.2004.t01-16-.x [Google Scholar]
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): classroom; multimodality; social interaction; writing tasks
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