Volume 34, Issue 3
  • ISSN 1018-2101
  • E-ISSN: 2406-4238
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



The paper explores the social interaction that takes place during the initial phases of videoconferences. The focus is on the problem of absent participants, which is often considered a reason for delaying the official beginning of the meeting. One of the resources that the participants have is to reach the absent participant by cellphone. We observed a recurrent pattern of action whereby one of the participants disengages from the video meeting to reach the missing person by phone. This negotiation process moves through four steps: (1) the detection of the problem, (2) the offer to call the missing person by one participant, (3) the acceptance of this offer by the moderator, and (4) the temporary absence of the participant from the video meeting to make the phone call. Our data concern videoconferencing in the context of international teacher training in German as a foreign language (LEELU project, https://www.leelu.eu/english/).


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Aoki, Paul M., Margaret H. Szymanski, and Allison Woodruff
    2006 “Media Spaces in the Mobile World.” CSCW: 1–5.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Arminen, Ilkka, and Minna Leinonen
    2006 “Mobile Phone Call Openings: Tailoring Answers to Personalized Summonses.” Discourse Studies8 (3): 339–368. 10.1177/1461445606061791
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445606061791 [Google Scholar]
  3. Arminen, Ilkka, Christian Licoppe, and Anna Spagnolli
    2016 “Respecifying Mediated Interaction.” Research on Language and Social Interaction49 (4): 290–309. 10.1080/08351813.2016.1234614
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2016.1234614 [Google Scholar]
  4. Asmuß, Birte
    2002Strukturelle Dissensmarkierungen in interkultureller Kommunikation. Analysen deutsch-dänischer Verhandlungen [Structural markers of disagreement in intercultural communication. Analysis of German-Danish business meetings]. Tübingen, Germany: Niemeyer. 10.1515/9783110960884
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110960884 [Google Scholar]
  5. Asmuß, Brite
    2015 “Multimodal Perspectives on Meeting Interaction.” InThe Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science, ed. byJoseph A. Allen, Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock, and Steven G. Rogelberg, 277–304. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781107589735.013
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107589735.013 [Google Scholar]
  6. Asmuß, Birte, and Jan Svennevig
    2009 “Meeting Talk: An Introduction.” Journal of Business Communication46 (1): 3–22. 10.1177/0021943608326761
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943608326761 [Google Scholar]
  7. Asmuß, Birte
    2007 “What Do People Expect from Public Services? Requests in Public Service Encounters.” Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication Studies381: 66–83.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Atkinson, Mick A., Edward C. Cuff, and John R. E. Lee
    1978 “The Recommencement of a Meeting as a Member’s Accomplishment.” InStudies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction, ed. byJim Schenkein, 133–153. New York: Academic Press. 10.1016/B978‑0‑12‑623550‑0.50012‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-623550-0.50012-4 [Google Scholar]
  9. Beers Fägersten, Kristy, Elin Holmsten, and Una Cunningham
    2010 “Multimodal Communication and Meta-Modal Discourse.” InHandbook of Research on Discourse Behavior and Digital Communication: Language Structures and Social Interaction, ed. byRotimi Taiwo, 145–163. Hershey PA: Information Science Publishing. 10.4018/978‑1‑61520‑773‑2.ch009
    https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-61520-773-2.ch009 [Google Scholar]
  10. Boden, Deirdre
    1994The Business of Talk. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Bruxelles, Sylvie, Luca Greco, and Lorenza Mondada
    2009 “Pratiques de transition: ressources multimodales pour la structuration de l’activité.” InMéthodologies d’analyse de situations coopératives de conception: corpus MOSAIC, ed. byFrançoise Détienne, and Véroniche Traverso, 221–301. Nancy: Presses universitaires de Nancy.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Caspi, Aviv
    2020 “Punctuality and Coordination Failures in the Remote Workplace.” Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3659642or10.2139/ssrn.3659642
  13. Craven, Alexandra, and Jonathan Potter
    2010 “Directives: Entitlement and Contingency in Action.” Discourse Studies12 (4): 419–442. 10.1177/1461445610370126
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445610370126 [Google Scholar]
  14. Dawidowicz, Marta, Karen Schramm, Roberta Abbate, Doris Abitzsch, Ilona Feld-Knapp, Katrin Hofmann, Sabine Hoffmann, Gabriella Perge, and Ewout van der Knaap
    2019 “Erfahrungsbasiertheit, kollegiale Kooperation und videobasierte Reflexion als Prinzipien des LEELULehrerInnenbildungsprojekts.” https://leelu.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/164/2019/08/Konzeptpapier-zur-Lehrerbildungsmaßnahme-im-LEELU-Projekt-Endfassung-2019.pdf
  15. Deppermann, Arnulf, Reinhold Schmitt, and Lorenza Mondada
    2010 “Agenda and Emergence: Contingent and Planned Activities in a Meeting.” Journal of Pragmatics42 (6): 1700–1718. 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.10.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.10.006 [Google Scholar]
  16. Drew, Paul, and Kobin H. Kendrick
    2018 “Searching for Trouble: Recruiting Assistance through Embodied Action.” Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality1 (1). 10.7146/si.v1i1.105496
    https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v1i1.105496 [Google Scholar]
  17. Due, Brian L., and Christian Licoppe
    2020 “Video-Mediated Interaction (VMI): Introduction to a Special Issue on the Multimodal Accomplishment of VMI Institutional Activities.” Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies in Human Sociality3 (3): 1–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. 2021 “Video-Mediated Interaction (VMI).” Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality3 (3). 10.7146/si.v3i3.123836
    https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v3i3.123836 [Google Scholar]
  19. Egbert, Maria
    1997 “Schisming: The Collaborative Transformation from a Single Conversation to Multiple Conversations.” Research on Language and Social Interaction30 (1): 1–51. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi3001_1
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi3001_1 [Google Scholar]
  20. González-Martínez, Esther, and Marcelo Giglio
    2020 “Introduire les points soumis à discussion lors d’une réunion. Une analyse conversationnelle longitudinale.” Travaux Neuchâtelois de Linguistique721: 31–61. 10.26034/tranel.2020.2898
    https://doi.org/10.26034/tranel.2020.2898 [Google Scholar]
  21. Goffman, Erving
    1963Behavior in Public Places. New York, The Free Press of Glencoe.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Harper, Richard, Rod Watson, and Christian Licoppe
    2017 “Interpersonal Video Communication as a Site of Human Sociality. A Special Issue of Pragmatics.” Pragmatics27 (3): 319–350.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Heritage, John
    1984 “A Change-of-State Token and Aspects of its Sequential Placemen.” InStructures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. byJ. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 299–345, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. House, Juliane, and Gabriele Kasper
    1981 “Politeness Markers in English and German.” InConversational Routine. Explorations in Standardized Communication Situations and Prepatterned Speech, ed. byFlorian Coulmas, Vol.21, 157–185. The Hague, Paris, New York: Mouton Publishers. 10.1515/9783110809145.157
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110809145.157 [Google Scholar]
  25. Ilomäki, Sakari, and Johanna Ruusuvuori
    2020 “From Appearings to Disengagements: Openings and Closings in Video-Mediated Tele-Homecare Encounters.” Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality3 (3). 10.7146/si.v3i3.122711
    https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v3i3.122711 [Google Scholar]
  26. Keisanen, Tiina., Mirka Rauniomaa, and Pentti Haddington
    2014 “Suspending Action.” InMultiactivity in Social Interaction: Beyond Multitasking, ed. byPentti Haddington, Tiina Keisanen, Lorenza Mondada, and Maurice Nevile, 109–33. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/z.187.04kei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.187.04kei [Google Scholar]
  27. Kendrick, Kobin H.
    2021 “The ‘Other’ Side of Recruitment: Methods of Assistance in Social Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics1781: 68–82. 10.1016/j.pragma.2021.02.015
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.02.015 [Google Scholar]
  28. Kendrick, Kobin H., and Paul Drew
    2014 “The Putative Preference for Offers over Requests.” InRequesting in Social Interaction, ed. byPaul Drew, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 87–114. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/slsi.26.04ken
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slsi.26.04ken [Google Scholar]
  29. 2016 “Recruitment: Offers, Requests, and the Organization of Assistance in Interaction.” Research on Language and Social Interaction49 (1): 1–19. 10.1080/08351813.2016.1126436
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2016.1126436 [Google Scholar]
  30. Lehmann-Willenbrock, Nale, and Joseph A. Allen
    2020 “Well, Now What Do We Do? Wait…: A Group Process Analysis of Meeting Lateness.” International Journal of Business Communication57 (3): 302–326. 10.1177/2329488417696725
    https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488417696725 [Google Scholar]
  31. Licoppe, Christian, and Sylvaine Tuncer
    2014 “Attending to a Summons and Putting Other Activities ‘On Hold’.” InMultiactivity in Social Interaction: Beyond Multitasking, ed. byPentti Haddington, Tiina Keisanen, Lorenza Mondada, and Maurice Nevile, 167–190. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/z.187.06lic
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.187.06lic [Google Scholar]
  32. Licoppe, Christian, and Julian Morel
    2012 “Video-in-Interaction: “Talking Heads” and the Multimodal Organization of Mobile and Skype Video Calls.” Research on Language and Social Interaction45 (2): 399–429. 10.1080/08351813.2012.724996
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.724996 [Google Scholar]
  33. Licoppe, Christian
    2017a “Showing Objects in Skype Video-Mediated Conversations: From Showing Gestures to Showing Sequences.” Journal of Pragmatics1101: 63–82. 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.01.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.01.007 [Google Scholar]
  34. 2017b “Skype Appearances, Multiple Greetings and ‘Coucou’. The Sequential Organization of Video-Mediated Conversation Openings.” Pragmatics27 (3): 351–386.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Lindstrøm, Anna
    2005 “Language as Social Action. A Study of How Senior Citizens Request Assistance with Practical Tasks in the Swedish Home Help Service.” InSyntax and Lexis in Conversation. Studies on the Use of Linguistic Resources in Talk-in-Interaction, ed. byAuli Hakulinen, and Margret Selting, 209–230. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: Benjamins. 10.1075/sidag.17.11lin
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.17.11lin [Google Scholar]
  36. Markman, Kris M.
    2009 “ʽSo What Shall We Talk Aboutʼ: Openings and Closings in Chat-Based Virtual Meetings.” The Journal of Business Communication46 (1): 150–170. 10.1177/0021943608325751
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943608325751 [Google Scholar]
  37. Mehus, Siri
    2005 “The Micro-Organization of Taking a Break: Transitions Between Task and Non-Task Activities at Work.” Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Symposium about Language and Society, Austin, April 16–18, Texas, Linguistic Forum481: 125–137.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Mlynář, Jakub, Esther González-Martínez, and Denis Lalanne
    2018 “Situated Organization of Video-Mediated Interaction: A Review of Ethnomethodological and Conversation Analytic Studies.” Interacting with Computers30 (2): 73–84. 10.1093/iwc/iwx019
    https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwx019 [Google Scholar]
  39. Mondada, Lorenza
    2009 “Emergent Focused Interactions in Public Places: A Systematic Analysis of the Multimodal Achievement of a Common Interactional Space.” Journal of Pragmatics411: 1977–97. 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.019
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.019 [Google Scholar]
  40. 2006 “Participants’ Online Analysis and Multimodal Practices: Projecting the End of the Turn and the Closing of the Sequence.” Discourse Studies8 (1): 117–129. 10.1177/1461445606059561
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445606059561 [Google Scholar]
  41. 2011 “The Interactional Production of Multiple Spatialities Within a Participatory Democracy Meeting.” Social Semiotics21 (2): 289–316. 10.1080/10350330.2011.548650
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2011.548650 [Google Scholar]
  42. 2004 “Ways of ‘Doing Being Plurilingual’ in International Work Meetings.” InSecond Language Conversation, ed. byRod Gardner, and Johannes Wagner, 27–60. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Mondada, Lorenza, and Reinhold Schmitt
    2010 “Zur Multimodalität von Situationseröffnungen.” InSituationseröffnungen. Zur multimodalen Herstellung fokussierter Interaktion, ed. byLorenza Mondada, and Reinhold Schmitt. Tübingen: Narr Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Mondada, Lorenza
    2010 “Eröffnungen und Prä-Eröffnungen in medienvermittelter Interaktion: das Beispiel Videokonferenzen.” InSituationseröffnungen. Zur multimodalen Herstellung fokussierter Interaktion, ed. byLorenza Mondada, and Reinhold Schmitt, 277–334. Tübingen: Narr Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Muñoz, Arantxa Santos
    2016 “Attending Multi-Party Videoconference Meetings: The Initial Problem.” Language@Internet131, article 3.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Nielsen, Mie Femø
    2013 “ʽStepping Stonesʼ in Opening and Closing Department Meetings.” The Journal of Business Communication50 (1): 34–67. 10.1177/0021943612465182
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943612465182 [Google Scholar]
  47. Oittinen, Tuire, and Arja Piirainen-Marsh
    2015 “Openings in Technology-Mediated Business Meetings.” Journal of Pragmatics851: 47–66. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.06.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.06.001 [Google Scholar]
  48. Oittinen, Tuire
    2018 “Multimodal Accomplishment of Alignment and Affiliation in the Local Space of Distant Meetings.” Culture and Organization24 (1): 31–53. 10.1080/14759551.2017.1386189
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14759551.2017.1386189 [Google Scholar]
  49. Oloff, Florence
    2019 “Some Systematic Aspects of Self-Initiated Mobile Device Use in Face-to-Face Encounters.” Journal für Medienlinguistik2 (2): 195–235. 10.21248/jfml.2019.21
    https://doi.org/10.21248/jfml.2019.21 [Google Scholar]
  50. Raclaw, Joshua, and Cecilia E. Ford
    2015 “Meetings as Interactional Achievements: A Conversation Analytic Perspective.” InThe Science of Meetings at Work: The Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science, ed. byJoseph A. Allen, Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock, and Steven G. Rogelberg. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781107589735.012
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107589735.012 [Google Scholar]
  51. Rasmussen Hougaard, Gitte
    2008 “Membership Categorization in International Business Phonecalls: The Importance of ‘Being International’.” Journal of Pragmatics40 (2): 307–332. 10.1016/j.pragma.2007.08.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.08.011 [Google Scholar]
  52. Relieu, Marc
    2009 “ʽMobile Phone Workʼ: Disengaging and Engaging Mobile Phone Activities with Concurrent Activities.” InThe Reconstruction of Space and Time: Mobile Communication Practices, ed. byRich Ling, and Scott W. Campbell, 215–229. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Rosenbaun, Laura, Sheizaf Rafaeli, and Dennis Kurzon
    2016 “Blurring the Boundaries between Domestic and Digital Spheres: Competing Engagements in Public Google Hangouts.” Pragmatics261: 291–314.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Ruhleder, Karen, and Brigitte Jordan
    2001 “Co-Constructing Non-Mutual Realities: Delay-Generated Trouble.” Computer Supported Cooperative Work101: 113–138. 10.1023/A:1011243905593
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011243905593 [Google Scholar]
  55. Oshima, Sae, and Birte Asmuß
    2018 “Mediated Business: Living the Organizational Surroundings – Introduction.” Culture and Organization24:1: 1–10. 10.1080/14759551.2017.1387965
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14759551.2017.1387965 [Google Scholar]
  56. Schmitt, Reinhold
    2006 “Interaction in Work Meetings.” Revue française de linguistique appliquée11 (2): 69–84. 10.3917/rfla.112.0069
    https://doi.org/10.3917/rfla.112.0069 [Google Scholar]
  57. Rogelberg, Steven G., Clifton W. Scott, Brett Agypt, Jason Williams, John E. Kello, Tracy McCausland, and Jessi L. Olien
    2014 “Lateness to Meetings: Examination of an Unexplored Temporal Phenomenon.” European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology23 (2): 323–341. 10.1080/1359432X.2012.745988
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2012.745988 [Google Scholar]
  58. Sutinen, Marike
    2014 “Negotiating Favourable Conditions for Resuming Suspended Activities.” InMultiactivity in Social Interaction: Beyond Multitasking, ed. byPentti Haddington, Tiina Keisanen, Lorenza Mondada, and Maurice Nevile, 137–165. John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/z.187.05sut
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.187.05sut [Google Scholar]
  59. Svennevig, Jan
    2012 “Interaction in Workplace Meetings.” Discourse Studies14 (1): 3–10. 10.1177/1461445611427203
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445611427203 [Google Scholar]
  60. 2008 “Exploring Leadership Conversations.” Management Communication Quartely21 (4): 529–536. 10.1177/0893318907313717
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318907313717 [Google Scholar]
  61. Svenning, Jan, and John E. Ruchinskas
    1984 “Organizational Teleconferencing.” InThe New Media. The New Media: Communication, Research, and Technology, ed. byRonald E. Rice, 217–248. Beverly Hills/CA: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Szymanski, Margaret H.
    1999 “Re-Engaging and Dis-Engaging Talk in Activity.” Language in Society28 (1): 1–23. 10.1017/S0047404599001013
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404599001013 [Google Scholar]
  63. Veyrier, Claire Antoine
    2015 “Multiactivité et multimodalité dans les réunions à distance.” Reseaux (6): 11–37.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Wasson, Christina
    2006 “Being in Two Spaces at Once: Virtual Meetings and Their Representation.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology16 (1): 103–130. 10.1525/jlin.2006.16.1.103
    https://doi.org/10.1525/jlin.2006.16.1.103 [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