- Home
- e-Journals
- Interactional Linguistics
- Previous Issues
- Volume 1, Issue 2, 2021
Interactional Linguistics - Volume 1, Issue 2, 2021
Volume 1, Issue 2, 2021
-
Gaze selects the next speaker in answers to questions pronominally addressed to more than one co-participant
Author(s): Peter Auerpp.: 154–182 (29)More LessAbstractLike many other languages, but unlike modern (standard) English, German has a distinct second person plural pronoun (ihr, ‘you guys’), contrasting with the second person singular pronoun (du). The second person plural pronoun addresses a turn to more than one, and possibly all co-present participants. This paper investigates turn-taking after such multiply addressed turns, taking as an example information-seeking questions, i.e., a sequential context in which a specific next action is relevant in the adjacent position. It might appear that in such a context, self-selection applies (Schegloff 1992: 122); more than one co-participant is addressed, but none selected as next speaker. In this paper, I show on the basis of spontaneous interactions recorded with mobile eye-tracking equipment that this is not the case and that TCU-final gaze is employed to select the next speaker. The participant not being gazed at TCU-finally is addressed, but not selected as the answerer in next position and may provide an answer in a sequential position after the first answer. The article demonstrates that gaze is an efficient way to allocate turns in the absence of verbal cues and thus contributes to our understanding of turn-taking from a multimodal perspective.
-
Positionally-sensitive action-ascription
Author(s): Arnulf Deppermann and Alexandra Gubinapp.: 183–215 (33)More LessAbstractSchegloff (1996) has argued that grammars are “positionally-sensitive”, implying that the situated use and understanding of linguistic formats depends on their sequential position. Analyzing the German format Kannst du X? (corresponding to English Can you X?) based on 82 instances from a large corpus of talk-in-interaction (FOLK), this paper shows how different action-ascriptions to turns using the same format depend on various orders of context. We show that not only sequential position, but also epistemic status, interactional histories, multimodal conduct, and linguistic devices co-occurring in the same turn are decisive for the action implemented by the format. The range of actions performed with Kannst du X? and their close interpretive interrelationship suggest that they should not be viewed as a fixed inventory of context-dependent interpretations of the format. Rather, the format provides for a root-interpretation that can be adapted to local contextual contingencies, yielding situated action-ascriptions that depend on constraints created by contexts of use.
-
Early collaborations
Author(s): Lyle Lustigmanpp.: 216–240 (25)More LessAbstractThe present study examines the development of ‘but’-introduced clauses in adult-toddler conversations, distinguishing between autonomous productions (I wanna stay but we need to go) and adult-child co-constructed uses (Adult: we’re going home, Child: but I wanna stay). Analyses covered all adult and child aval ‘but’ uses in three longitudinal Hebrew corpora (age-range: 1;5–3;3), showing that: (1) both adults and children mostly use aval ‘but’ in co-construction rather than autonomously; (2) adults begin co-constructing ‘but’-clauses with children months before the children start using ‘but’, mostly by elaborating on single-word child productions before adding the ‘but’-clause (Child: cup, Adult: that’s a cup, but you don’t like juice); (3) as children start combining more clauses, adults gradually conjoin more ‘but’-clauses directly with the children’s productions, without elaboration (Child: let’s go. Adult: but first put on your shoes). These patterns suggest that the main function of ‘but’-clauses in adult-child discourse is co-constructing ideas contributed by two (or more) interlocutors. Such co-constructions are initially scaffolded by the adults, until the children are able to contribute full-fledged propositions to co-constructions. These findings provide further evidence of the role of adult-child interaction in introducing and familiarizing children with new linguistic structures, and advancing their developing grammar.
-
Parental lip-smacks during infant mealtimes
Author(s): Sally Wiggins and Leelo Keevallikpp.: 241–272 (32)More LessAbstractThe lip-smack is a communicative sound object that has received very little research attention, with most work examining their occurrence in nonhuman primate interaction. The current paper aims to dissect the social potential of lip-smacks in human interaction. The analysis examines a corpus of 391 lip-smack particles produced by English-speaking parents while feeding their infants. A multimodal interaction analysis details the main features: (1) rhythmical production in a series, (2) facial-embodied aspects, and (3) temporal organisation. Lip-smacks occurred in prosodically grouped chains of mostly 3 or 5 particles, with accompanying facial expressions, and were co-ordinated with the infants’ chewing. They highlight the mechanics of chewing while framing eating as a pleasant interactional event.
The paper contributes not only to the distinctly social functions of a sound object hitherto ignored in linguistics but also to research on interactional exchanges in early childhood and their potential connection to the sociality of nonhuman primates.
Volumes & issues
Most Read This Month

-
-
The emancipation of gestures
Author(s): Jürgen Streeck
-
-
-
Language over time
Author(s): Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen
-
- More Less