Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (13) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (13)
Keywords
- Sprecherwechsel (13) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (7)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (6)
- Postprint (2)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (8)
- Peer-Review (5)
Publisher
- Benjamins (2)
- ENS Éditions (1)
- European Language Resources Association (ELRA) (1)
- Hueber (1)
- Metzler (1)
- Narr (1)
- Niemeyer (1)
- Paderborn University (1)
- Peter Lang (1)
- Saxa (1)
Meta-communicative practices are generally reflexive in a fairly obvious sense: Inasmuch as speakers use them to talk about or comment on earlier/subsequent talk, they use language self-reflexively. In this paper, we explore a practice that is reflexive not only in this meta-communicative sense but also in a sequential-interactional one: Prefacing a conversational turn with I was gonna say. We show that the I was gonna say-preface furnishes the following general semantic-pragmatic affordances: (1) It retroactively relates the speaker’s subsequent talk to preceding talk from a co-participant, (2) it embodies a claim to prior, now-preempted, communicative intent with regard to what their co-participant has (just) said/done, (3) it therefore displays its speaker’s orientation to the relevance or the appropriate placement of the action(s) done in their own subsequent talk at an earlier moment in the interaction, and (4) it reflexively re-invokes, or retrieves, this earlier moment as the relevant sequential context for their action(s). We then go on to illustrate how speakers draw on these sequentially reflexive affordances for managing recurrent interactional contingencies in specific sequential environments. The paper ends with a discussion of the role that reflexivity plays in and for the deployment of this practice.
In this paper, we address two problems in indexing and querying spoken language corpora with overlapping speaker contributions. First, we look into how token distance and token precedence can be measured when multiple primary data streams are available and when transcriptions happen to be tokenized, but are not synchronized with the sound at the level of individual tokens. We propose and experiment with a speaker based search mode that enables any speaker’s transcription tier to be the basic tokenization layer whereby the contributions of other speakers are mapped to this given tier. Secondly, we address two distinct methods of how speaker overlaps can be captured in the TEI based ISO Standard for Spoken Language Transcriptions (ISO 24624:2016) and how they can be queried by MTAS – an open source Lucene-based search engine for querying text with multilevel annotations. We illustrate the problems, introduce possible solutions and discuss their benefits and drawbacks.
In this chapter, I will focus on the phenomenon of drop out, i.e., withdrawal from the turn due to overlapping talk, in order to reflect on the link between “unfinished” turns and participation framework. With the help of a sequential and multimodal analysis inspired by the conversation analytical approach, I will show that dropping out from a turn is strongly linked to the availability displayed by potential recipients of a turn-at-talk. Although conversation analysis has described in detail the systematics of overlapping talk, especially of its onset (Jefferson 1973, 1983, 1986) and its resolution (Scheg-loff 2000; Jefferson 2004), the phenomenon of withdrawal from a turn due to simultaneous talk has not been investigated in detail. While it seems to bedifficult to describe this interactional practice by referring exclusively to syntactic features (incompleteness of the turn), I suggest looking at turn withdrawal from a multimodal perspective (e.g. Goodwin 1980, 1981; Mondada2007a; Schmitt 2005), taking into account visible resources like gaze or gesture. The problem of continuing or stopping a turn-in-progress in overlapping talk can be closely linked to the participation framework (Goodwin and Goodwin 2004), as speakers do visibly take into account their recipient’s availability and coordinate their turn construction with the dynamic changes of the participation framework and the interactional space.
This paper aims at contributing to the analysis of overlaps in turns-at-talk from both a sequential and a multimodal perspective. Overlaps have been studied within Conversation Analysis by focusing mainly on verbal and vocal resources; taking into account multimodal resources such as gesture, bodily posture, and gaze contributes to a better understanding of participants’ orientations to the sequential organization of overlapping talk and their management of speakership. First, we introduce the way in which overlaps have been studied in Conversation Analysis, mainly by Jefferson (1973, 1983, 2004) and Schegloff (2000); then we propose possible implications of their multimodal analysis. In order to demonstrate that speakers systematically orient to the overlap onset and resolution we analyze the multimodal conduct of overlapped speakers. Findings show methodical variations in trajectories of overlap resolution: speakers’ gestures in overlap display themselves as maintaining or withdrawing their turn, thereby exhibiting the speakership achieved and negotiated during overlap.
Cette contribution s’intéresse aux co-constructions d’un tour de parole en interaction, plus spécifiquement, à la manière dont la complétion d’un énoncé de la part d’un co-participant est ensuite réceptionnée par le locuteur dont le tour a été complété. Malgré l’intérêt certain porté par l’analyse conversationnelle et la linguistique interactionnelle à la co-énonciation, l’évaluation de cette pratique par le premier locuteur n’a pas fait l’objet d’analyses approfondies. Dans ce qui suit, nous nous focalisons plus particulièrement sur les pratiques interactionnelles qui permettent aux participants de valider une co-construction. Ce travail est issu du projet ANR SPIM (« L’imitation dans la parole »), dans le cadre duquel nous nous sommes interrogée sur la fonction de l’hétéro-répétition (le fait de répéter un énoncé d’un autre locuteur ou une partie de celui-ci, opposée à l’auto- répétition) dans des séquences de co-construction d’un tour de parole.
Cette contribution s'intéresse aux co-constructions d'un tour de parole en interaction, plus spécifiquement, à la manière dont la complétion d'un énoncé de la part d'un co-participant est ensuite réceptionnée par le locuteur dont le tour a été complété. Malgré l'intérét certain porté par l'analyse conversationnelle et la linguistique interactionnelle à la co-énonciation, l'évaluation de cette pratique par le premier locuteur n’a pas fait l’objet d’analyses approfondies. Dans ce qui suit, nous nous focalisons plus particulièrement sur les pratiques interactionnelles qui permettent aux participants de valider une co-construction. Ce travail est issu du projet ANR SPIM (« L'imitation dans la parole »), dans le cadre duquel nous nous sommes interrogée sur la fonction de l'hétéro-répétition (le fait de répéter un énoncé d'un autre locuteur ou une partie de celui-ci, opposée à l'auto-répétition) dans des séquences de co-construction d'un tour de parole. Dans la partie analytique, nous contrastons deux possibilités de validation d'une complétion collaborative, à savoir l'acquiescement simple (« oui ») et l'hétéro-répétition simple. Sur la base d’enregistrements vidéo de conversations naturelles, nous montrons que ces deux pratiques ne valident pas la complétion collaborative de la même manière, mais qu'elles permettent aux locuteurs d’évaluer finement le caractère plus ou moins adéquat des éléments co-construits.
Since Lerner coined the notion of delayed completion in 1989, this recurrent social practice of continuing one’s speaking turn while disregarding an intermediate co-participant’s utterance has not been investigated with regard to embodied displays and actions. A sequential approach to videotaped mundane conversations in German will explain the occurrence and use of delayed completions. First, especially in multi-party and multi-activity settings, delayed completions can result from reduced monitoring and coordinating activities. Second, recipients can use intra-turn response slots for more extended responsive actions than the current speaker initially projected, leading to delayed completion sequences. Finally, delayed completions are used for blocking possibly misaligned co-participant actions. The investigation of visible action illustrates that delayed completions are a basic practice for retrospectively managing co-participant response slots.
Looking at gestures as a means for communication, they can serve conversational participants at several levels. As co-speech gestures, they can add information to the verbally expressed content and they can serve to manage turn-taking. In order to look closer at the interplay between these resources in face-to face conversation, we annotated hand gestures, syntactic completion points and the related turn-organisation, and measured the timing of gesture strokes and their lexical/phrasal referent. In a case study on German, we observe the trend that speakers vary less in gesturelexis on- and offsets when keeping the turn after syntactic completions than at speaker changes, backchannel or other locations of a conversation. This indicates that timing properties of non-verbal cues interact with verbal cues to manage turn-taking.