1887
image of Blended origo — Deixis in virtual reality
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Studies on communication in Social Virtual Reality (SVR) have shown that the immersive qualities of VR — the , and a through increasingly realistic motion tracking and avatars — have an impact on verbal communicative interactions in the new medium. Misunderstandings and moments of linguistic creativity are observable, and many of them revolve around ambivalent locations, doubled ‘bodies’, and issues while coordinating attention, i.e.: they concern deixis. This paper presents the results of a qualitative analysis of deictic terms in verbal interactions in SVR. It demonstrates that the unusual communicative circumstances in immersive VR directly affect a speaker’s , the deictic zero-point of orientation in space and time. This paper concludes that the term may serve as an analytical concept to understand deixis while SVR users communicatively interact in two ‘realities’ simultaneously.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/prag.22059.sen
2025-01-16
2025-02-12
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Auer, Peter, and Anja Stukenbrock
    2022 “Deictic Reference in Space.” InPragmatics of Space, edited byAndreas H. Jucker, and Heiko Hausendorf, –. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110693713‑002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110693713-002 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bakardjieva, Maria
    2003 “Virtual Togetherness: An Everyday-Life Perspective.” Media, Culture & Society (): –. 10.1177/0163443703025003001
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443703025003001 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bell, Alice, Astrid Ensslin, Isabelle Van der Bom, and Jen Smith
    2018 “Immersion in Digital Fiction.” International Journal of Literary Linguistics (). 10.15462/ijll.v7i1.105
    https://doi.org/10.15462/ijll.v7i1.105 [Google Scholar]
  4. Berger, Manuel, Andreas H. Jucker, and Miriam A. Locher
    2016 “Interaction and Space in the Virtual World of Second Life.” Journal of Pragmatics (August): –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2016.05.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.05.009 [Google Scholar]
  5. Buckland, Warren
    2003 “Orientation in Film Space. A Cognitive Semiotic Approach.” Recherches En Communication (March): -. 10.14428/rec.v19i19.48433
    https://doi.org/10.14428/rec.v19i19.48433 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bühler, Karl
    2011 [1934]Theory of Language: The Representational Function of Language. Translated byDonald Fraser Goodwin, and Achim Eschbach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.164
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.164 [Google Scholar]
  7. Clark, Herbert H.
    1996Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620539
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620539 [Google Scholar]
  8. Clark, Herbert H., and Meredyth A. Krych
    2004 “Speaking While Monitoring Addressees for Understanding.” Journal of Memory and Language (): –. 10.1016/j.jml.2003.08.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2003.08.004 [Google Scholar]
  9. Dancygier, Barbara
    2008 “Personal Pronouns, Blending, and Narrative Viewpoint.” InLanguage in the Context of Use, edited byAndrea Tyler, Kim Yiyoung, and Mari Takada, –. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110199123.1.167
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199123.1.167 [Google Scholar]
  10. Dancygier, Barbara, and Eve Sweetser
    eds. 2012Viewpoint in Language: A Multimodal Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139084727
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139084727 [Google Scholar]
  11. Diessel, Holger
    2012a “Bühler’s Two-Field Theory of Pointing and Naming and the Deictic Origins of Grammatical Morphemes.” InGrammaticalization and Language Change: New Reflections, edited byKristin Davidse, Tine Breban, Lieselotte Brems, and Tanja Mortelmans. Studies in Language Companion Series, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.130.02die
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.130.02die [Google Scholar]
  12. 2012b “Deixis and Demonstratives.” InHandbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft / Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science (HSK) 33/3, edited byClaudia Maienborn, Klaus von Heusinger, and Paul Portner, –. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110253382.2407
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110253382.2407 [Google Scholar]
  13. Ehlich, Konrad
    1978 “Deixis und Anapher.” InEssays on Deixis, edited byGisa Rauh, –. Tübingen: Narr.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 1993 “HIAT: A Transcription System for Discourse Data.” InTalking Data: Transcription and Coding in Discourse Research, edited byJane Anne Edwards, and Martin D. Lampert, –. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 2013 “Nonverbal Communication in a Functional Pragmatic Perspective.” InHandbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft / Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science (HSK) 38/1, edited byCornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva Ladewig, David McNeill, and Sedinha Tessendorf, –. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110261318.648
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110261318.648 [Google Scholar]
  16. Fauconnier, Gilles, and Mark Turner
    1998 “Conceptual Integration Networks.” Cognitive Science (): –. 10.1207/s15516709cog2202_1
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2202_1 [Google Scholar]
  17. 2003The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Fillmore, Charles J.
    1975Santa Cruz Lectures on Deixis 1971. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Freeman, Guo, and Divine Maloney
    2021 “Body, Avatar, and Me: The Presentation and Perception of Self in Social Virtual Reality.” Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction (): –. 10.1145/3432938
    https://doi.org/10.1145/3432938 [Google Scholar]
  20. Fricke, Ellen
    2002 “Origo, Pointing, and Speech: The Impact of Co-Speech Gestures on Linguistic Deixis Theory.” Gesture (): –. 10.1075/gest.2.2.05fri
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.2.2.05fri [Google Scholar]
  21. 2003 “Origo, Pointing, and Conceptualization — What Gestures Reveal about the Nature of the Origo in Face-to-Face Interaction.” InDeictic Conceptualisation of Space, Time, and Person, edited byFriedrich Lenz, –. Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 112. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.112.06fri
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.112.06fri [Google Scholar]
  22. 2007Origo, Geste und Raum Lokaldeixis im Deutschen. Berlin: De Gruyter. nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:101:1-2016112311497. 10.1515/9783110897746
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110897746 [Google Scholar]
  23. 2014 “Deixis, Gesture, and Embodiment from a Linguistic Point of View.” InHandbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft / Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science (HSK) 38/2, edited byCornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva Ladewig, David McNeill, and Jana Bressem, –. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110302028.1803
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110302028.1803 [Google Scholar]
  24. 2022 “The Pragmatics of Gesture and Space.” InPragmatics of Space, edited byAndreas H. Jucker, and Heiko Hausendorf, –. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110693713‑012
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110693713-012 [Google Scholar]
  25. Hahn, Kornelia, and Martin Stempfhuber
    eds. 2015Präsenzen 2.0: Körperinszenierung in Medienkulturen. Wiesbaden: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑658‑04365‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-04365-0 [Google Scholar]
  26. Hanks, William F.
    2009 “Fieldwork on Deixis.” Journal of Pragmatics (): –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.003 [Google Scholar]
  27. Hanna, Joy E., and Susan E. Brennan
    2007 “Speakers’ Eye Gaze Disambiguates Referring Expressions Early during Face-to-Face Conversation.” Journal of Memory and Language (): –. 10.1016/j.jml.2007.01.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.01.008 [Google Scholar]
  28. Hartmann, Tilo, and Matthias Hofer
    2022 “I Know It Is Not Real (and That Matters) Media Awareness vs. Presence in a Parallel Processing Account of the VR Experience.” Frontiers in Virtual Reality (April). 10.3389/frvir.2022.694048
    https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2022.694048 [Google Scholar]
  29. Hausendorf, Heiko
    2003 “Deixis and Speech Situation Revisited: The Mechanism of Perceived Perception.” InDeictic Conceptualisation of Space, Time, and Person, edited byFriedrich Lenz, –. Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 112. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.112.13hau
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.112.13hau [Google Scholar]
  30. Hindmarsh, Jon, Christian Heath, and Mike Fraser
    2006 “(Im)Materiality, Virtual Reality and Interaction: Grounding the ‘Virtual’ in Studies of Technology in Action.” The Sociological Review (): –. 10.1111/j.1467‑954X.2006.00672.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2006.00672.x [Google Scholar]
  31. Kameyama, Shinichi
    2009 “Persondeixis, Objektdeixis.” InHandbuch der deutschen Wortarten, edited byLudger Hoffmann, –. Berlin: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Kecskés, Istvan
    2010 “The Paradox of Communication: Socio-Cognitive Approach to Pragmatics.” Pragmatics and Society (): –. 10.1075/ps.1.1.04kec
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.1.1.04kec [Google Scholar]
  33. Kecskés, István
    2014Intercultural Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Kecskés, István, and Fenghui Zhang
    2009 “Activating, Seeking, and Creating Common Ground: A Socio-Cognitive Approach.” Pragmatics & Cognition (): –. 10.1075/pc.17.2.06kec
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.17.2.06kec [Google Scholar]
  35. Kilteni, Konstantina, Raphaela Groten, and Mel Slater
    2012 “The Sense of Embodiment in Virtual Reality.” Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments (): –. 10.1162/PRES_a_00124
    https://doi.org/10.1162/PRES_a_00124 [Google Scholar]
  36. Klein, Wolfgang
    1978 “Wo ist hier? Präliminarien zu einer Untersuchung der lokalen Deixis.” Linguistische Berichte: –.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Krishnaswamy, Nikhil, and James Pustejovsky
    2018 “Deictic Adaptation in a Virtual Environment.” InSpatial Cognition XI, edited bySarah Creem-Regehr, Johannes Schöning, and Alexander Klippel: –. Cham: Springer International. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑96385‑3_13
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96385-3_13 [Google Scholar]
  38. Lenz, Friedrich
    ed. 2003Deictic Conceptualisation of Space, Time, and Person. Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 112. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.112
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.112 [Google Scholar]
  39. Levinson, Stephen C.
    1983Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813313
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813313 [Google Scholar]
  40. 2006 “Deixis.” InThe Handbook of Pragmatics, edited byLaurence R. Horn, and Gregory L. Ward. Malden: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470756959.ch5
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756959.ch5 [Google Scholar]
  41. Liang, Mei-Ya
    2021 “Pragmatic Socialization through Gameplay Directives: Multimodal Conversation Analysis of Avatar-Embodied Interactions.” Journal of Pragmatics (January): –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2020.09.028
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.09.028 [Google Scholar]
  42. Licoppe, Christian
    2015 “Contested Norms of Presence.” InPräsenzen 2.0, edited byKornelia Hahn, and Martin Stempfhuber, –. Wiesbaden: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑658‑04365‑0_6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-04365-0_6 [Google Scholar]
  43. 2017 “Showing Objects in Skype Video-Mediated Conversations: From Showing Gestures to Showing Sequences.” Journal of Pragmatics (March): –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.01.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.01.007 [Google Scholar]
  44. Liddell, Scott K.
    2000 “Blended Spaces and Deixis in Sign Language Discourse.” InLanguage and Gesture, edited byDavid McNeill, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620850.021
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620850.021 [Google Scholar]
  45. Lombard, Matthew, and Theresa Ditton
    1997 “At the Heart of It All: The Concept of Presence.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (). 10.1111/j.1083‑6101.1997.tb00072.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1997.tb00072.x [Google Scholar]
  46. Lyons, John
    1977 “Deixis, Space and Time.” InSemantics. Volume 2, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620614.008
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620614.008 [Google Scholar]
  47. Meyer, Nathalie, and Andreas H. Jucker
    2022 “Co-Presence and Beyond: Spatial Configurations of Communication in Virtual Environments.” InPragmatics of Space, edited byAndreas H. Jucker, and Heiko Hausendorf, –. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110693713‑018
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110693713-018 [Google Scholar]
  48. Müller, Cornelia, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva Ladewig, David McNeill, and Sedinha Tessendorf
    eds. 2014Body — Language — Communication: An International Handbook on Multimodality in Human Interaction. Berlin: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Olbertz-Siitonen, Margarethe, Arja Piirainen-Marsh, and Marko Siitonen
    2021 “Constructing Co-Presence through Shared VR Gameplay.” Journal für Medienlinguistik (): –. 10.21248/jfml.2021.31
    https://doi.org/10.21248/jfml.2021.31 [Google Scholar]
  50. Peeters, David
    2019 “Virtual Reality: A Game-Changing Method for the Language Sciences.” Psychonomic Bulletin & Review (): –. 10.3758/s13423‑019‑01571‑3
    https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01571-3 [Google Scholar]
  51. Poggi, Isabella
    2013 “Mind, Hands, Face, and Body: A Sketch of a Goal and Belief View of Multimodal Communication.” InHandbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft / Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science (HSK) 38/1, edited byCornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva Ladewig, David McNeill, and Sedinha Tessendorf, –. Berlin: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110261318.627
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110261318.627 [Google Scholar]
  52. Rosenbaun, Laura, Sheizaf Rafaeli, and Dennis Kurzon
    2016 “Blurring the Boundaries between Domestic and Digital Spheres: Competing Engagements in Public Google Hangouts.” Pragmatics, –. 10.1075/prag.26.2.05ros
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.26.2.05ros [Google Scholar]
  53. Saker, Michael, and Jordan Frith
    2019 “From Hybrid Space to Dislocated Space: Mobile Virtual Reality and a Third Stage of Mobile Media Theory.” New Media & Society (): –. 10.1177/1461444818792407
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818792407 [Google Scholar]
  54. 2020 “Coextensive Space: Virtual Reality and the Developing Relationship between the Body, the Digital and Physical Space.” Media, Culture & Society (): –. 10.1177/0163443720932498
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443720932498 [Google Scholar]
  55. Saredakis, Dimitrios, Ancret Szpak, Brandon Birckhead, Hannah A. D. Keage, Albert Rizzo, and Tobias Loetscher
    2020 “Factors Associated with Virtual Reality Sickness in Head-Mounted Displays: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience (March): . 10.3389/fnhum.2020.00096
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2020.00096 [Google Scholar]
  56. Schlickau, Stephan
    2009Neue Medien in der Sprach- und Kulturvermittlung: Pragmatik, Didaktik, Interkulturelle Kommunikation. Hildesheimer Schriften zur Interkulturellen Kommunikation, Bd. 1. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Schmid, Hans-Jörg
    ed. 2012Cognitive Pragmatics. Handbooks of Pragmatics, 4. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110214215
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214215 [Google Scholar]
  58. Senkbeil, Karsten
    2021 “Developing Methodology and Applications for Virtual Reality in the Humanities.” Stiftung Universität Hildesheim. 10.25528/063
    https://doi.org/10.25528/063 [Google Scholar]
  59. 2024 “Communication in Hybrid Presence — Methods and Applications for Social Virtual Reality in the Humanities.” InVirtual Reality in den Geisteswissenschaften. Konzepte, Methoden und interkulturelle Anwendungen, edited byKarsten Senkbeil, and Timo Ahlers, –. Hildesheimer Schriften zur Interkulturellen Kommunikation, Bd. 12. Berlin: Peter Lang. 10.3726/b22222
    https://doi.org/10.3726/b22222 [Google Scholar]
  60. Senkbeil, Karsten, Timo Ahlers, Milica Lazovic, and Kathrin Schweiger
    2020 “Tandemlernen in Social-Virtual-Reality: Immersiv-Spielebasierter DaF-Erwerb von Mündlichen Sprachkompetenzen.” Zeitschrift für Interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht (): –.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Senkbeil, Karsten, Gillian Martin, and Breffni O’Rourke
    2022 “SpEakWise VR: Exploring the Use of Social Virtual Reality in Telecollaborative Foreign Language Learning Between Learners of English and German.” InIntelligent CALL, Granular Systems and Learner Data: Short Papers from EUROCALL 2022, edited byBirna Arnbjörnsdóttir, Branislav Bédi, Linda Bradley, Kolbrún Friðriksdóttir, Hólmfríður Garðarsdóttir, Sylvie Thouësny, and Matthew James Whelpton. –. Research-publishing.net. 10.14705/rpnet.2022.61.1483
    https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2022.61.1483 [Google Scholar]
  62. Stukenbrock, Anja
    2014 “Pointing to an ‘Empty’ Space: Deixis am Phantasma in Face-to-Face Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics (December): –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.08.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.08.001 [Google Scholar]
  63. 2020 “Deixis, Meta-Perceptive Gaze Practices, and the Interactional Achievement of Joint Attention.” Frontiers in Psychology (September): . 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01779
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01779 [Google Scholar]
  64. Turner, Mark
    2019 “Blending in Language and Communication.” InCognitive Linguistics, edited byEwa Dąbrowska, and Dagmar Divjak, –. Berlin: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. van Krieken, Kobie, José Sanders, and Hans Hoeken
    2016 “Blended Viewpoints, Mediated Witnesses: A Cognitive Linguistic Approach to News Narratives.” InViewpoint and the Fabric of Meaning, edited byBarbara Dancygier, Wei-lun Lu, and Arie Verhagen, –. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110365467‑007
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110365467-007 [Google Scholar]
  66. van Krieken, Kobie, José Sanders, and Eve Sweetser
    2019 “Linguistic and Cognitive Representation of Time and Viewpoint in Narrative Discourse.” Cognitive Linguistics (): –. 10.1515/cog‑2018‑0107
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2018-0107 [Google Scholar]
  67. Wirth, Werner, Tilo Hartmann, Saskia Böcking,
    2007 “A Process Model of the Formation of Spatial Presence Experiences.” Media Psychology (): –. 10.1080/15213260701283079
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15213260701283079 [Google Scholar]
  68. Yee, Nick, and Jeremy Bailenson
    2007 “The Proteus Effect: The Effect of Transformed Self-Representation on Behavior.” Human Communication Research (): –. 10.1111/j.1468‑2958.2007.00299.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00299.x [Google Scholar]
  69. Zhao, Shanyang
    2003 “‘Being There’ and the Role of Presence Technology.” InBeing There: Concepts, Effects and Measurement of User Presence in Synthetic Environments, edited byGiuseppe Riva, Fabrizio Davide, and Wijnand Ijsselsteijn, –. Amsterdam: Ios Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. 2005 “The Digital Self: Through the Looking Glass of Telecopresent Others.” Symbolic Interaction (): –. 10.1525/si.2005.28.3.387
    https://doi.org/10.1525/si.2005.28.3.387 [Google Scholar]
  71. Zlatev, Jordan
    2013 “Levels of Embodiment and Communication.” InBody — Language — Communication. An International Handbook on Multimodality in Human Interaction, Vol. 1, edited byCornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva Ladewig, David McNeill, and Sedinha Teßendorf, –. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110261318.533
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110261318.533 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/prag.22059.sen
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/prag.22059.sen
Loading

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