Volume 26, Issue 4
  • ISSN 1018-2101
  • E-ISSN: 2406-4238


Recent years have seen a growing body of research concerned with objects in interaction and the numerous interactional methods and functions of creating a shared vision of some non-present scene. This multimodal Conversation Analytic study of second language interaction uncovers a combination of these two foci, showing the ways in which people use objects to create a shared vision of these objects may be used in the future. This frequently used practice of ‘pre-enactment’ is uncovered from a corpus of video recorded lesson planning discussions between English ‘native’ and ‘non-native speaker’ teachers who ‘team-teach’ together in Japanese schools. To these discussions, participants bring various objects that will be used in upcoming collaborative classes, such as clocks, word cards, and other printouts. By shifting from describing to demonstrating how such objects may be used, an authentic and pervasive image of a possible future is created. This has many functions, such as informing the current planning talk and providing a platform for other important actions to take place, such as suggesting alternatives or making requests. By examining this manipulation of objects, this study considers the ways people switch between the present and a possible future in planning talk. As such, this study adds an important layer of understanding to practices utilized in future-oriented interaction, particularly those involving people who do not share a first language.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Barnes, Rebecca , and Duncan Moss
    (2007) Communicating a feeling: The social organization of ‘private thoughts’. Discourse Studies9: 123–148. doi: 10.1177/1461445607075339
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445607075339 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bauman, Richard
    (1986) Story, performance and event: Contextual studies of oralnarrative. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511620935
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620935 [Google Scholar]
  3. Brown, Penelope , and Stephen Levinson
    (1987) Politeness: Some universals in language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Buttny, Richard
    (1997) Reported speech in talking race on campus. Human Communication Research23: 477–506. doi: 10.1111/j.1468‑2958.1997.tb00407.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1997.tb00407.x [Google Scholar]
  5. Carley, Harry
    (2013) Team teaching styles utilized in Japan: Do they really work?Journal of International Education Research9.3: 247–252.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth
    (1999) Coherent voicing: On prosody in conversational reported speech. In W. Bublitz , U. Lenk , and E. Ventola (eds.), Coherence in Spoken and Written Discourse: How To Create It and How To Describe It. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp.11–32. doi: 10.1075/pbns.63.05cou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.63.05cou [Google Scholar]
  7. Edwards, Derek
    (2003) Analyzing racial discourse: The discursive psychology of mind-world relationships. In H. van den Berg , M. Wetherell , and H. Houtkoop-Steenstra (eds.), Analyzing Race Talk: multidisciplinary perspectives on the research Interview. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp.331–48.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Fukuda, Steve , Mark Fennelly , and Robert Luxton
    (2013) Differences in beliefs between language teachers and elementary school teachers. [鳴門教育大 学小学校英語教育センター紀要 ] Naruto University of Education’s Elementary School English Education Centre Review4: 7–16.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Good, Jeffrey
    (2015) Reported and enacted actions: Moving beyond reported speech and related concepts. Discourse Studies17.6: 663–681. doi: 10.1177/1461445615602349
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445615602349 [Google Scholar]
  10. Goodwin, Charles
    (2003) Embedded context. Research on Language and Social Interaction36.4: 323–350. doi: 10.1207/S15327973RLSI3604_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3604_2 [Google Scholar]
  11. (2007) Participation, stance and affect in the organization of activities. Discourse Studies18.1: 53–73.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Grice, Paul
    (1975) Logic and conversation. In P. Cole , and J. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics: Speech acts. New York: Academic Press, vol.3, pp.41–58.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Günthner, Susanne
    (1997) The contextualization of affect in reported dialogues. In S. Niemeier , and R. Dirven (eds.), The Language of Emotions: Conceptualization,expression, and theoretical foundation. Oxford: Blackwell, pp.247–277. doi: 10.1075/z.85.19gun
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.85.19gun [Google Scholar]
  14. Hindmarsh, Jon , and Christian Heath
    (2000) Sharing the tools of the trade: The interactional constitution of workplace objects. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography29.5: 523–562. doi: 10.1177/089124100129023990
    https://doi.org/10.1177/089124100129023990 [Google Scholar]
  15. Holt, Elizabeth
    (1996) Reporting on talk: The use of direct reported speech in conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction29.3: 219–245. doi: 10.1207/s15327973rlsi2903_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi2903_2 [Google Scholar]
  16. (2000) Reporting and reacting: Concurrent responses to reported speech. Research on Language and Social Interaction33.4: 425–454. doi: 10.1207/S15327973RLSI3304_04
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3304_04 [Google Scholar]
  17. (2007) ‘I’m eyeing your chop up mind’: Reporting and enacting. In E. Holt , and R. Clift (eds.), Reporting on Talk: Reported Speech in Interaction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp.47–80.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. (2009) Reported speech. In S. D’hondt , J. Östman , and J. Verschueren (eds.), The Pragmatics of Interaction: Handbook of Pragmatics Highlights. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp.190–205. doi: 10.1075/hoph.4
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hoph.4 [Google Scholar]
  19. Holt, Elizabeth , and Rebecca Clift
    (2007) Reporting talk: Reported speech in interaction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Jucker, Andreas , and Sarah Smith
    (1998) And people just you know like “wow”: Discourse markers and negotiating strategies. In A. Jucker , and Y. Ziv (eds.), Discourse Markers: Descriptions and Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp.171–201. doi: 10.1075/pbns.57.10juc
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.57.10juc [Google Scholar]
  21. Kasper, Gabriele , and Matthew Prior
    (2015) Analyzing storytelling in TESOL interview research. TESOL Quarterly49.2: 226–255. doi: 10.1002/tesq.169
    https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.169 [Google Scholar]
  22. Klewitz, Gabriele , and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen
    (1999) Quote-Unquote? The role of prosody in the contextualization of reported speech sequences. Journal of Pragmatics4: 459–485. doi: 10.1075/prag.9.4.03kle
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.9.4.03kle [Google Scholar]
  23. Lynch, Michael
    (1985) Discipline and the material form of images: An analysis of scientific visibility. Social Studies of Science15.1: 37–66. doi: 10.1177/030631285015001002
    https://doi.org/10.1177/030631285015001002 [Google Scholar]
  24. Markee, Numa , and Silvia Kunitz
    (2013) Doing planning and task performance in second language acquisition: An ethnomethodological respecification. Language Learning63.4: 629–664. doi: 10.1111/lang.12019
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12019 [Google Scholar]
  25. Mondada, Lorenza
    (2012) Video analysis and the temporality of inscriptions within social interaction: The case of architects at work. Qualitative Research12.3: 304–333. doi: 10.1177/1468794112438149
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112438149 [Google Scholar]
  26. Mori, Junko
    (1999) Negotiating Agreement and Disagreement in Japanese: Connective Expressions and Turn Constructions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/sidag.8
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.8 [Google Scholar]
  27. Murphy, Keith
    (2004) Imagination as joint activity: The case of architectural interaction. Mind, Culture, and Activity11.4: 267–278. doi: 10.1207/s15327884mca1104_3
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327884mca1104_3 [Google Scholar]
  28. (2011) Building stories: The embodied narration of what might come to pass. In J. Streek , C. Goodwin , and C. LeBaron (eds.), Embodied Interaction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp.243–253.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Nevile, Maurice , Pentti Haddington , Trine Hinemann , and Mirka Rauniomaa
    (2014) Interacting with Objects: Language, materiality, and social activity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/z.186
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.186 [Google Scholar]
  30. Nielson, Mie
    (2012) Using artifacts in brainstorming sessions to secure participation and decouple sequentiality. Discourse Studies14.1: 87–109. doi: 10.1177/1461445611427211
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445611427211 [Google Scholar]
  31. Ochs, Elinor
    (1994) Stories that step into the future. In D. Biber , and E. Finnegan (eds.), Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Register. New York: Oxford University Press, pp.106–135.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Olsher, David
    (2004) Talk and gesture: The embodied completion of sequential actions in spoken interaction. In R. Gardner , and J. Wagner (eds.), Second Language Conversations. London: Continuum, pp.221–245.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Otani, Midori , and Kazuaki Tsuido
    (2009) A pilot study on utilization of assistant language teachers in foreign language activities at elementary schools: Based on a preliminary questionnaire survey to ALTs. Memoirs, Faculty of Education, Shimane University43: 21–29.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Sakai, Shinchiro , Ron Korenaga , Yoshifumi Mizukawa , and Motoko Igarashi
    (2014) Envisioning the plan in interaction: Configuring pipes during a plumbers’ meeting. In M. Nevile , P. Haddington , T. Hinemann , and M. Rauniomaa (eds.), Interacting with Objects: Language, materiality, and social activity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp.339–356.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Sato, Masahiko
    (2012) Minimum vocabularies needed in Japanese work environment for ALTs. Akita International Exchange Center Bulletin1: 53–63.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Schmidt, Kjeld , and Ina Wagner
    (2004) Ordering systems: Coordinative practices and artifacts in architectural design and planning. Computer Supported Cooperative Work13: 349–408. doi: 10.1007/s10606‑004‑5059‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-004-5059-3 [Google Scholar]
  37. Simmons, Katie , and Amanda LeCouteur
    (2011) ‘Hypothetical active-voicing’: Therapists ‘modelling’ of clients’ future conversations in CBT interactions. Journal of Pragmatics43: 3177–3192. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.06.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.06.002 [Google Scholar]
  38. Suchman, Lucy
    (2007) Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions, 2nd expanded edition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Tagliamonte, Sali , and Alex D’Arcy
    (2004)  He’s like, she’s like: The quotative system in Canadian youth. Journal of Sociolinguistics8.4: 493–514. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9841.2004.00271.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2004.00271.x [Google Scholar]
  40. Tanaka, Hiroko
    (1999) Turn-taking in Japanese Conversation: A Study in Grammar and Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. ten Have, Paul
    (1999) Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Wooffitt, Robin
    (1992) Telling Tales of the Unexpected: The Organisation of Factual Discourse. Hertfordshire, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Yamada, Meiko
    (2014) The Role of English Teaching in Modern Japan: Diversityand multiculturalism through English language education in a globalized era. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): conversation analysis; objects; planning; shared vision; team-teachers
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