1887
Volume 28, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1387-6740
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9935
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

While overlap represents one of the major mainstays of conversation-analytic research, the phenomenon of overlap involving backchannels in TCU-initial position has largely gone unnoticed. This study addresses this gap focusing on backchannels occurring in overlap in storytelling interaction. The investigation combines both quantitative and qualitative methods and is based on small but representative samples drawn from the audio files available for the Narrative Corpus. The primary discovery of this study is that TCU-initial backchannel overlaps typically occur at points where the storytelling’s progressivity is decelerated, either due to delays in the backchannel’s production or to the teller interrupting the telling’s linearity to insert background information, upgrade references, or slip in digressions. An alternative environment for the occurrence of TCU-initial backchannel overlap is around the story climax. Data are in British English.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ni.17060.ruh
2018-10-19
2019-10-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aijmer, K.
    (1989) Themes and tails: the discourse functions of dislocated elements. Nordic Journal of Linguistics, 12, 137–54.10.1017/S033258650000202X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S033258650000202X [Google Scholar]
  2. Albert, S., de Ruiter, L. E. & de Ruiter, J. P.
    (2015) CABNC: the Jeffersonian transcription of the Spoken British National Corpus. https://saulalbert.github.io/CABNC/
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bavelas, J. B., Coates, L. & Johnson, T.
    (2000) Listeners as co-narrators. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 941–952.10.1037/0022‑3514.79.6.941
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.941 [Google Scholar]
  4. (2002) Listener responses as a collaborative process: The role of gaze. Journal of Communication, 52, 566–580.10.1111/j.1460‑2466.2002.tb02562.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02562.x [Google Scholar]
  5. Boersma, P. and Weenink, D.
    (2012) Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. www.praat.org/
  6. Carter, R. and M. McCarthy
    (1997) Exploring spoken English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Clancy, P. M., Thompson, S. A., Suzuki, R., & Tao, H.
    (1996) The conversational use of reactive tokens in English, Japanese and Mandarin. Journal of Pragmatics, 26, 355–387.10.1016/0378‑2166(95)00036‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)00036-4 [Google Scholar]
  8. Clayman, S. E.
    (2013) Turn-constructional units and the transition-relevance place. InJ. Sidnell and T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of Conversation Analysis (pp.150–166). Malden/MA and Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Coates, J.
    (1991) Women’s cooperative talk: a new kind of conversational duet. InC. Uhlig and R. Zimmermann (Eds.), Proceedings of the Anglistentag 1990, Marburg. Tübingen: Max Niemayer.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Coleman, J., Baghai-Ravary, L., Pybus, J., & Grau, S.
    (2012) Audio BNC: the audio edition of the Spoken British National Corpus. Phonetics Laboratory, University of Oxford. www.phon.ox.ac.uk/AudioBNC
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Crowdy, S.
    (1994) ‘Spoken corpus transcription’. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 9(1), 25–8.10.1093/llc/9.1.25
    https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/9.1.25 [Google Scholar]
  12. Dingemanse, M., Rossi, G., & Floyd, S.
    (2017) Place reference in story beginnings: A cross-linguistic study of narrative and interactional affordances. Language in Society, 46(2), 129–158. doi: 10.1017/S0047404516001019
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404516001019 [Google Scholar]
  13. Gardner, R.
    (1998) Between speaking and listening: The vocalization of understandings. Applied Linguistics, 19(2), 204–224.10.1093/applin/19.2.204
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/19.2.204 [Google Scholar]
  14. Goodwin, C.
    (1984) Notes on story structure and the organization of participation. InJ. M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp.225–246). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. (1986) Between and within alternative sequential treatments of continuers and assessments. Human Studies, 9, 205–217.10.1007/BF00148127
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00148127 [Google Scholar]
  16. Goodwin, C., & Heritage, J.
    (1990) Conversation analysis. Annual Review of Anthropology, 19, 283–307.10.1146/annurev.an.19.100190.001435
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.19.100190.001435 [Google Scholar]
  17. Gries, S. Th
    (2009) Statistics for linguistics with R. A practical introduction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110216042
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110216042 [Google Scholar]
  18. Heldner, M., & Edlund, J.
    (2010) Pauses, gaps and overlaps in conversations. Journal of Phonetics, 38, 555–568. doi: 10.1016/j.wocn.2010.08.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2010.08.002 [Google Scholar]
  19. Hoey, E.
    (2017) Sequence recompletion: A practice for managing lapses in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 109, 47–63.10.1016/j.pragma.2016.12.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.12.008 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hoffmann, S., Evert, S., Smith, N., Lee, D., & Berglund Prytz, Y.
    (2008) Corpus linguistics with BNCweb – A practical guide. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Holmes, J., Stubbe, M.
    (1997) Good listeners: Gender differences in New Zealand conversation. Women and Language, 20(2): 7–14.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Hömke, P., Holler, J., & Levinson, S. C.
    (2017) Eye blinking as addressee feedback in face-to-face conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 50(1), 54–70. doi: 10.1080/08351813.2017.1262143
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2017.1262143 [Google Scholar]
  23. Jefferson, G.
    (1973) A case of precision timing in ordinary conversation: Overlapped tag-positioned address terms in closing sequences. Semiotics, 9, 47–96.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. (1978) Sequential aspects of storytelling in conversation. InJ. Schenkein (ed.), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction (pp.219–248). New York: Academic Press.10.1016/B978‑0‑12‑623550‑0.50016‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-623550-0.50016-1 [Google Scholar]
  25. (1979) A technique for inviting laughter and its subsequent acceptance declination. InG. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language – Studies in ethnomethodology (pp.79–95). New York: Irvington Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. (1986) Notes on ‘latency’ in overlap onset’. Human Studies, 9, 153–183.10.1007/BF00148125
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00148125 [Google Scholar]
  27. Kjellmer, G.
    (2009) Where do we backchannel?International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 14(1): 81–112.10.1075/ijcl.14.1.05kje
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.14.1.05kje [Google Scholar]
  28. Labov, W.
    (1972) Language in the inner city. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Levinson, S. C.
    (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511813313
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813313 [Google Scholar]
  30. Levinson, S. C., & Torreira, F.
    (2015) Timing in turn-taking and its implications for processing models of language. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 731. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00731
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00731 [Google Scholar]
  31. Mayes, P.
    (1990) Quotation in spoken English. Studies in Language14: 325–36310.1075/sl.14.2.04may
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.14.2.04may [Google Scholar]
  32. McCarthy, M.
    (2003) Talking back: ‘Small’ interactional response tokens in everyday conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 36(1): 33–63.10.1207/S15327973RLSI3601_3
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3601_3 [Google Scholar]
  33. Norwine, A. C., & Murphy, O. J.
    (1938) Characteristic time intervals in telephonic conversation. The Bell System Technical Journal, 17, 281–291.10.1002/j.1538‑7305.1938.tb00432.x
    https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-7305.1938.tb00432.x [Google Scholar]
  34. Ochs, E., & Capps, L.
    (2001) Living narrative. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. O’Keefe, A., & Adolphs, S.
    (2008) Response tokens in British and Irish discourse. Corpus, context and variational pragmatics. InK. P. Schneider and A. Barron (Eds.), Variational pragmatics (pp.69–98). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.178.05ok
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.178.05ok [Google Scholar]
  36. Peters, P., & Wong, D.
    (2015) Turn management and backchannels. InK. Aijmer and C. Rühlemann (Eds.), Corpus pragmatics. A handbook (pp.408–429). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139057493.022
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139057493.022 [Google Scholar]
  37. Robinson, J. D.
    (2007) The role of numbers and statistics within conversation analysis. Communication Methods and Measures, 1(1): 65–75.10.1080/19312450709336663
    https://doi.org/10.1080/19312450709336663 [Google Scholar]
  38. Rühlemann, C., & O’Donnell, M. B.
    (2012) Towards a corpus of conversational narrative. Construction and annotation of the Narrative Corpus. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 8(2), 313–350.10.1515/cllt‑2012‑0015
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2012-0015 [Google Scholar]
  39. Rühlemann, C.
    (2013) Narrative in English conversation: A corpus analysis of storytelling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139026987
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139026987 [Google Scholar]
  40. Rühlemann, C., Bagoutdinov, A., & O’Donnell, M. B.
    (2015) Modest XPath and XQuery for corpora: Exploiting deep XML annotation. ICAME Journal, 39: 47–84.10.1515/icame‑2015‑0003
    https://doi.org/10.1515/icame-2015-0003 [Google Scholar]
  41. Rühlemann, C., & Gries, S. Th
    (2015) Turn order and turn distribution in multi-party storytelling. Journal of Pragmatics, 87: 171–191.10.1016/j.pragma.2015.08.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.08.003 [Google Scholar]
  42. Rühlemann, C., & Hilpert, M.
    (2017) Colloquialization in journalistic writing: Investigating inserts in TIME magazine with a focus on well. Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 18(1), 102–135. doi: 10.1075/jhp.18.1.05ruh
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.18.1.05ruh [Google Scholar]
  43. Rühlemann, C.
    (2017) Integrating corpus-linguistic and conversation-analytic transcription in XML. The case of backchannels and overlap in storytelling interaction. Corpus Pragmatics. 1(3), 201–232. doi: 10.1007/s41701‑017‑0018‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s41701-017-0018-7 [Google Scholar]
  44. Sacks, H.
    (1992) Lectures on conversation. Vols. I and II. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G.
    (1974) A simplest systematics for the organisation of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735.10.1353/lan.1974.0010
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1974.0010 [Google Scholar]
  46. Schegloff, E. A.
    (1982) Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of ‘uh huh’ and other things that come between sentences. InD. Tannen (Ed.), Georgetown University round table on languages and linguistics analyzing discourse: Text and talk (pp.71–93). Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. (2000) Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language in Society, 29, 1–63.10.1017/S0047404500001019
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500001019 [Google Scholar]
  48. (2007) Sequence organisation in interaction: A primer in Conversation-Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press10.1017/CBO9780511791208
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208 [Google Scholar]
  49. Stivers, T.
    (2008) Stance, alignment, and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41(1), 31–57.10.1080/08351810701691123
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810701691123 [Google Scholar]
  50. (2013) Sequence organization. InJ. Sidnell and T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of Conversation Analysis (pp.191–209). Malden/MA and Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Stivers, T., & Robinson, J. D.
    (2006) A preference for progressivity in interaction. Language in Society, 35, 367–392. doi: 10.10170S0047404506060179
    https://doi.org/10.10170S0047404506060179 [Google Scholar]
  52. Stivers, T., Enfield, N. J., Brown, P., Englert, C., Hayashi, M., Heinemann, T., Hoymann, G., Rossano, F., de Ruiter, J. P., Yoon, K. -E., & Levinson, C.
    (2009) Universals and cultural variation in turn-taking in conversation. Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences. U.S.A., 106(26): 10587–10592. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0903616106
    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0903616106 [Google Scholar]
  53. ten Bosch, L., Oostdijk, N., & Boves, L.
    (2005) On temporal aspects of turn taking in conversational dialogues. Speech Communication, 47, 80–86.10.1016/j.specom.2005.05.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2005.05.009 [Google Scholar]
  54. Tolins, J., & Fox Tree, J. E.
    (2014) Addressee backchannels steer narrative development. Journal of Pragmatics, 70, 152–164.10.1016/j.pragma.2014.06.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.06.006 [Google Scholar]
  55. Torreira, F., Bögels, S. and Levinson, S. C.
    (2015) Breathing for answering: the time course of response planning in conversation. Frontiers in Psychology. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00284
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00284 [Google Scholar]
  56. Tottie, G.
    (1991) Conversational style in British and American English: the case of backchannels. InK. Aijmer and B. Altenberg (Eds.), English Corpus Linguistics (pp.254–271). London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Walker, M. A.
    (1993) Informational redundancy and resource bounds in dialogue. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
  58. Wesseling, W., & van Son, R. J. J. H.
    (2005a) Timing of experimentally elicited minimal responses as quantitative evidence for the use of intonation in projecting trps. Interspeech, 6, 3389–3392.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. (2005b) Early preparation of experimentally elicited minimal responses. InL. Dybkjaer, & W. Minker (Eds.), Proceedings of the sixth SIGdial workshop on discourse and dialogue (pp.11–18). Lisbon, Portugal.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. White, S.
    (1989) Backchannels across cultures: A study of Americans and Japanese. Language in Society, 18(1): 59–76.10.1017/S0047404500013270
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500013270 [Google Scholar]
  61. Wong, D., & Peters, P.
    (2007) A study of backchannels in regional varieties of English, using corpus mark-up as the means of identification. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 12(4): 479–509.10.1075/ijcl.12.4.03won
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.12.4.03won [Google Scholar]
  62. Young, Richard F., & Lee, J.
    (2004) Identifying units in interaction: Reactive tokens in Korean and English conversations. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 8, 380–407.10.1111/j.1467‑9841.2004.00266.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2004.00266.x [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ni.17060.ruh
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ni.17060.ruh
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): backchannels , floor-transfer offset , overlap , progressivity , story sections , TCU and XQuery
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