Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (26)
- Part of a Book (14)
- Book (2)
- Working Paper (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (43)
Keywords
- Konversationsanalyse (22)
- Interaktion (21)
- Deutsch (17)
- Multimodalität (7)
- conversation analysis (7)
- Gesprochene Sprache (6)
- Interaktionsanalyse (5)
- Theaterprobe (5)
- Kommunikation (4)
- Theater (4)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (43) (remove)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (25)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (17)
- Verlags-Lektorat (1)
Publisher
- de Gruyter (6)
- Taylor & Francis (4)
- Elsevier (3)
- Springer Nature (3)
- Verlag für Gesprächsforschung (3)
- Benjamins (2)
- De Gruyter (2)
- Frontiers Media SA (2)
- Springer (2)
- Buske (1)
Zur Einführung
(2017)
Wissen im Gespräch
(2018)
Dieser Artikel gibt einen Überblick darüber, wie grundlegend Wissen als Voraussetzung, Gegenstand und Produkt von Verständigungsprozessen für die Organisation von Gesprächen ist. Zunächst wird ein kognitivistischer Zugang zu Wissen mit einem sozialkonstruktivistischen kontrastiert. Es werden zum einen kommunikative Gattungen, die auf die Kommunikation von Wissen spezialisiert sind, dargestellt; zum anderen wird gezeigt, wie Wissen auch dann die Gestaltung der Interaktion bestimmt, wenn der primäre Gesprächszweck nicht in Wissensvermittlung besteht. Vier Dimensionen werden angesprochen: a) Das mit dem Adressaten geteilte Wissen (common ground) ist Grundlage des Adressatenzuschnitts von Äußerungen (recipient design); b) geteiltes Wissen wird in Verständigungsprozessen konstituiert; c) der relative epistemische Status der Gesprächspartner zueinander wird durch Praktiken des epistemic stance-taking verdeutlicht und bestimmt selbst die Interpretation von Äußerungsformaten; d) epistemischer Status, soziale Identität und Beziehungskonstitution sind eng miteinander durch moralische Anspruchs- und Erwartungsstrukturen verknüpft.
Wie ein Event zum Event wird
(2000)
Research on multimodal interaction has shown that simultaneity of embodied behavior and talk is constitutive for social action. In this study, we demonstrate different temporal relationships between verbal and embodied actions. We focus on uses of German darf/kann ich? (“may/can I?”) in which speakers initiate, or even complete the embodied action that is addressed by the turn before the recipient’s response. We argue that through such embodied conduct, the speaker bodily enacts high agency, which is at odds with the low deontic stance they express through their darf/kann ich?-TCUs. In doing so, speakers presuppose that the intersubjective permissibility of the action is highly probable or even certain. Moreover, we demonstrate how the speaker’s embodied action, joint perceptual salience of referents, and the projectability of the action addressed with darf/kann ich? allow for a lean syntactic design of darf/kann ich?-TCUs (i.e., pronominalization, object omission, and main verb omission). Our findings underscore the reflexive relationship between lean syntax, sequential organization and multimodal conduct.
Recipient design is a key constituent of intersubjectivity in interaction. Recipient design of turns is informed by prior knowledge about and shared experience with recipients. Designing turns in order to be maximally effective for the particular recipient(s) is crucial for accomplishing intersubjectively coordinated action. This paper reports on a specific pragmatic structure of recipient design, i.e. counter-factual recipient design, and how it impinges on intersubjectivity in interaction. Based on an analysis of video-recordings data from driving school lessons in German, two kinds of counterfactual recipient design of instructors' requests are distinguished: pedagogic and egocentric turn-design. Counterfactual, pedagogic turn-design is used strategically to diagnose student skills and to create opportunities for corrective instructions. Egocentric turn-design rests on private, non-shared knowledge of the instructor. Egocentrically designed turns imply expectations of how to comply with requests which cannot be recovered by the student and which lead to a breakdown of intersubjective cooperation. This paper identifies practices, sources and interactional consequences of these two kinds of counterfactual recipient design. In addition, the study enhances our understanding of recipient design in at least three ways. It shows that recipient design does not only concern referential and descriptive practices, but also the indexing intelligible projections of next actions; it highlights the productive, other-positioning effects of recipient design; it argues that recipient design should be analyzed in terms of temporally extended interactional trajectories, linking turn-constructional practices to interactional histories and consecutive trajectories of joint action.
Im vorliegenden Artikel wird eine gemeinschaftliche Folgekommunikation über den Film "Angel Heart" anhand einer Diskussion einer Gruppe von Jugendlichen untersucht. Die Gruppenmitglieder (Sandra, Sonja, Andi und Michel) waren zum Zeitpunkt der Aufnahme 16 Jahre alt und verbrachten regelmäßig gemeinsam ihre Freizeit. Die Diskussion fand im Anschluss an die Rezeption des Films statt. Sie wurde vom Autor des vorliegenden Textes initiiert und geleitet, wobei versucht wurde, den Interessen der Jugendlichen und der sich zwischen ihnen entspinnenden Gesprächsdynamik zu folgen. Die Gruppendiskussion wurde konversationsanalytisch ausgewertet.
Aus psychologischer Sicht wird Verstehen als ein kognitiver Prozess begriffen. Im Gegensatz dazu stellt der Aufsatz einen konversationsanalytischen Zugang zu Verstehen dar. Es wird rekonstruiert, wie Verstehen in Gesprächen durch verschiedene Verfahren der Verstehensdokumentation verdeutlicht und durch wechselseitig aufeinander bezogene Reaktionen ausgehandelt wird. Anhand von sechs Gesprächssequenzen wird eine linguistische Typologie von Verstehensdokumentationen in der Interaktion vorgestellt. Auf Basis der Fallanalysen werden grundlegende Eigenschaften von Verstehensdokumentationen sowie Aufgaben, die die Interaktionsteilnehmer bei der Produktion von und bei der Reaktion auf Verstehensdokumentationen bearbeiten, rekonstruiert. Dazu gehören: Identifikation des Bezugs von Verstehensdokumentationen, Interpretation des Verstehensgegenstands, Sicherung der Verständlichkeit und Legitimität (accountability) der Verstehensdokumentation, Herstellung des Bezugs der Verstehensdokumentation zu den praktischen Zwecken der laufenden Interaktion, Aushandlung intersubjektiven Verständnisses, rhetorische Nutzung von Verstehensdokumentationen und ihr indikativer Bezug auf Beteiligungsrollen und sozialstrukturelle Rahmen der Interaktion.
In psychotherapy, therapists often formulate interpretations of clients' prior talk which are ‘unilateral’ in the sense that therapists index that they are themselves the author of an interpretive inference which may not be acceptable to the client. Based on 100 German-language recordings of brief psychodynamic psychotherapy (4 clients with 25 sessions each), we describe a multimodal practice of constructing extended multi-unit turns of delivering therapeutic interpretations. The practice includes gaze aversion until the main point of the interpretation is reached, perceptive and cognitive formulae, epistemic hedges, inserted accounts, parenthesis, self-repair, and self-reformulations. These design-features work together to index that the therapist produces an interpretation that can be heard as being tentative. The design of the therapists' turns reflexively indexes the expectation that the client might resist the interpretation; at the same time they are constructed to avoid resistance and to invite the client's self-exploration into new directions, often with a focus on emotions.
Der Beitrag plädiert für eine Untersuchung der gesprochenen Sprache als integralem Bestandteil multimodaler Interaktionspraktiken. Das leibliche Handeln bildet die Infrastruktur für die Verwendung von Sprache, es schafft Bedingungen, Möglichkeiten und Motivationen für die Verwendung spezifischer sprachlicher Strukturen; umgekehrt wird es seinerseits durch sprachliches Handeln organisiert. Zunächst werden in dem Beitrag grundlegende Eigenschaften multimodaler Interaktion dargestellt: die Vielfalt der leiblichen Handlungsressourcen und ihre Koordination, Sequenzialität und Simultaneität von Aktivitäten, multimodale Beteiligung an der Interaktion, der Stellenwert von Raum, Objekten, Multiaktivität und Bewegung. Ebenso wird kurz auf die methodischen Grundlagen der Untersuchung eingegangen: Videoaufnahme und multimodale Transkription. An drei sprachlichen Phänomenbereichen wird dann exemplarisch gezeigt, wie sprachliche Praktiken durch ihr Zusammenspiel mit anderen leiblichen Ressourcen der Kommunikation geprägt sind. Im Einzelnen geht es um die Disambiguierung sprachlicher Praktiken durch ihre Koordination mit anderen Ressourcen, die Erweiterung sprachlicher Strukturen, die aufgrund von Rezipientenreaktionen simultan zur Turn-Produktion stattfindet, und die Verwendungen minimaler Referenzformen, die sich auf die multimodale Ko-Orientierung der Beteiligten stützt.
In theater as a bodily-spatial art form, much emphasis is placed on the way actors perform movements in space as an important multimodal resource for creating meaning. In theater rehearsals, movements are created in series of directors' instructions and actors' implementations. Directors' instructions on how to conduct a movement often draw on embodied demonstrations in contrast to verbal descriptions. For instance, to instruct an actress to act like a school girl a director can use depictive (he demonstrates the expected behavior) instead of descriptive (“can you act like a school girl”) means. Drawing on a corpus of 400 h video recordings of rehearsal interactions in three German professional theater productions, from which we selected 265 cases, we examine ways to instruct movement-based actions in theater rehearsals. Using a multimodally extended ethnomethodological-conversation analytical approach, we focus on the multimodal details that constitute demonstrations as complex action types. For the present article, we have chosen nine instances, through which we aim to illuminate (1) The difference in using embodied demonstrations versus verbal descriptions to instruct; (2) typical ways directors combine verbal descriptions with embodied demonstrations in their instructions. First, we ask what constitutes a demonstration and what it achieves in comparison to verbal descriptions. Using a typical case, we illustrate four characteristics of demonstrations that all of the cases we studied share. Demonstrations (1) are embedded in instructional activities; (2) show and do not tell; (3) are responded to by emulating what was shown; (4) are rhetorically shaped to convey the instruction's focus. However, none of the 265 demonstrations we investigated were produced without verbal descriptions. In a second step we therefore ask in which typical ways verbal descriptions accompany embodied demonstrations when directors instruct actors how to play a scene. We distinguish four basic types. Verbal descriptions can be used (1) to build the demonstration itself; (2) to delineate a demonstration verbally within an instruction; (3) to indicate positive (what should be done) and negative (what should be avoided) versions of demonstrations; (4) as an independent means to describe the instruction's focus in addition to the demonstration. Our study contributes to research on how embodied resources are used to create meaning and how they combine with and depend on verbal resources.
Rejecting the validity of inferred attributions of incompetence in German talk-in-interaction
(2024)
This paper deals with pragmatic inference from the perspective of Conversation Analysis. In particular, we examine a specific variety of inferences - the attribution of incompetence which Self constructs on the basis of Other's prior action, hearable as positioning Self as incompetent (e.g., instructions, offers of assistance, advice); this attribution of incompetence concerns Self's execution of some practical task. This inference is indexed in Self's response, which highlights Self's expertise, or competence concerning the task at hand. We focus on two recurrent types of such responses in our data: (i) accounting for competence through formulations of prior experience with carrying out a practical action and (ii) explicit claims of competence for accomplishing this action. We analyze the interactional environments in which these responses occur, the ways in which the two practices index Self's understanding of being positioned as incompetent and the interactional work they do. Finally, we discuss how through rejecting and inferred attribution of incompetence, Self implicitly seeks to restore their face and defend their autonomy as an agent, yet, without entering an explicit identity-negotiation. Findings rest on the analysis of 20 cases found in video-recordings of naturally occurring talk-in-interaction in German from the corpus FOLK.
According to Positioning Theory, participants in narrative interaction can position themselves on a representational level concerning the autobiographical, told self, and a performative level concerning the interactive and emotional self of the tellers. The performative self is usually much harder to pin down, because it is a non-propositional, enacted self. In contrast to everyday interaction, psychotherapists regularly topicalize the performative self explicitly. In our paper, we study how therapists respond to clients' narratives by interpretations of the client's conduct, shifting from the autobiographical identity of the told self, which is the focus of the client's story, to the present performative self of the client. Drawing on video recordings from three psychodynamic therapies (tiefenpsychologisch fundierte Psychotherapie) with 25 sessions each, we will analyze in detail five extracts of therapists' shifts from the representational to the performative self. We highlight four findings:
• Whereas, clients' narratives often serve to support identity claims in terms of personal psychological and moral characteristics, therapists rather tend to focus on clients' feelings, motives, current behavior, and ways of interacting.
• In response to clients' stories, therapists first show empathy and confirm clients' accounts, before shifting to clients' performative self.
• Therapists ground the shift to clients' performative self by references to clients' observable behavior.
• Therapists do not simply expect affiliation with their views on clients' performative self. Rather, they use such shifts to promote the clients' self-exploration. Yet, if clients resist to explore their selves in more detail, therapists more explicitly ascribe motives and feelings that clients do not seem to be aware of. The shift in positioning levels thus seems to have a preparatory function for engendering therapeutic insights.
Schegloff (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.
This paper attempts a critique of the notion of 'dialogue' in dialogue theory as espoused by Linell, Markova, and others building on Bakhtin’s writings. According to them, human communication, culture, language, and even cognition are dialogical in nature. This implies that these domains work by principles of other-orientation and interaction. In our paper, we reject accepting other-orientation as an a priori condition of every semiotic action. Instead, we claim that in order to be an empirically useful concept for the social sciences, it must be shown if and how observable action is other-oriented. This leads us to the following questions: how can we methodically account for other-orientation of semiotic action? Does other-orientation always imply interaction? Is every human expression oriented towards others? How does the other, as s/he is represented in semiotic action, relate to the properties which the other can be seen to exhibit as indexed by their observable behavior? We study these questions by asking how the orientation towards others becomes evident in different forms of communication. For this concern, we introduce ‘recipient design’, ‘positioning’ and ‘intersubjectivity’ as concepts which allow us to inquire how semiotic action both takes the other into account and, reflexively, shapes him/her as an addressee having certain properties. We then specifically focus on actions and situations in which other-orientation is particularly problematic, such as interactions with children, animals, machines, or communication with unknown recipients via mass media. These borderline cases are scrutinized in order to delineate both limits and constitutive properties of other-orientation. We show that there are varieties of meaningful actions which do not exhibit an orientation towards the other, which do not rest on (the possibility of) interaction with the other or which even disregard what their producer can be taken to know about the other. Available knowledge about the other may be ignored in order to reach interactional goals, e. g. in strategical interactions or for concerns of socialization. If semiotic action is otherorientated, its design depends on how the other is available to and matters for their producer. Other-orientation may build on shared biographical experiences with the other, knowledge about the other as an individual and close attention to their situated conduct. However, other-orientation may also rest on (stereo-)typification with respect to institutional roles or group membership. In any case, others as they are represented in semiotic action can never be just others-as-such, but only othersas-perceived-by-the-actor. We conclude that the strong emphasis which dialogue theories put on otherorientation obscures that other-orientation is neither universal in semiotic action, that it must be distinguished from an interactive relationship, and that the ways in which the other figures in semiotic actions is not homogeneous in any of its most general properties. Instead, there is a huge variation in the ways in which the other can be taken into account. Therefore close scrutiny of how the other precisely figures in a certain kind of semiotic action is needed in order to lend the concept of ‘other-orientation’ empirical substance and a definite sense.
Overtaking as an interactional achievement : video analyses of participants' practices in traffic
(2018)
In this article we pursue a systematic and extensive study of overtaking in traffic as an interactional event. Our focus is on the accountable organisation and accomplishment of overtaking by road users in real-world traffic situations. Data and analysis are drawn from multiple research groups studying driving from an ethnomethodological and conversation analytic perspective. Building on multimodal and sequential analyses of video recordings of overtaking events, the article describes the shared practices which overtakers and overtaken parties use in displaying, recognizing and coordinating their manoeuvres. It examines the three sequential phases of an overtaking event: preparation and projection; the overtaking proper; the re-alignment post-phase including retrospective accounts and assessments. We identify how during each of these phases drivers and passengers organize intra-vehicle and inter-vehicle practices: driving and non-driving related talk between vehicle- occupants, the emerging spatiotemporal ecology of the road, and the driving actions of other road users. The data is derived from a two camera set-up recording the road ahead and car interior. The recordings are from three settings: daily commuting, driving lessons, race-car coaching. The events occur on a variety of road types (motorways, country roads, city streets, a race track, etc.), in six languages (English, Finnish, French, German, Italian, and Swedish) and in seven countries (Australia, Finland, France, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, and the UK). From an exceptionally diverse collection of video data, the study of which is made possible thanks to the innovative collaboration of multiple researchers, the article exhibits the range of practical challenges and communicative skills involved in overtaking.
How do people communicate in mobile settings of interaction? How does mobility affect the way we speak? How does mobility exert influence on the manner in which talk itself is consequential for how we move in space? Recently, questions of this sort have attracted increasing attention in the human and social sciences. This Special Issue contributes to the emerging body of studies on mobility and talk by inspecting an ordinary and ubiquitous phenomenon in which communication among mobile participants is paramount: participation in traffic. This editorial presents previous work on mobility in natural settings, as carried out by interactionally oriented researchers. It also shows how the investigation into traffic participation adds new perspectives to research on language and communication.