Yet the two cases differ in the speakers’ co-occurring embodied conduct. In both cases, it is delivered with low volume and final falling intonation. In Extracts 1 and 2, chais pas occurs in identical positions, following lack of recipient uptake after a sequence-initial action (here: a guess see the ‘Analysis’ section). Consider the following excerpts (see page 4 for the provenance of the data): The analytic focus is on the occurrence of the construction in sequence-initial actions, and more precisely in turn-continuation after these actions, where only the variant chais pas (“dunno”) is found. Based on an understanding of grammar as a set of emergent and adaptive resources that are instrumental in participants’ dealing with the unfolding of social interaction in real time (Auer, 2009 Hopper, 2011 Ochs, Schegloff, & Thompson, 1996 Pekarek Doehler, De Stefani, & Horlacher, 2015), this study sets out to explore the interactional purposes that speakers accomplish by using chais pas (“dunno”) (a variant of French je sais pas ) and how these purposes build on recurrent multimodal packages. By systematic ways, I mean the recurrent occurrence of grammar-position-body constellations for specifiable interactional purposes (see Goodwin, 2007 Streeck, 2009, on multimodal action packages see also Goodwin, 2013). In this article I am interested in the in-principle possibility of grammar, position within turn and sequence, and co-occurring embodied conduct to be interrelated in systematic ways. Therefore, a fine-grained understanding of action formation and ascription calls for close scrutiny of how grammar, placement, and co-occurring embodied conduct interface in the course of the real-time production of turns and actions (Keevallik, 2013, 2018 Mondada, 2014). Based on this intertwinedness of multiple (semiotic) resources, participants produce and understand actions in accountable ways within situated social interaction: “the resources of the language, the body, the environment of the interaction, and position in the interaction fashioned into conformations designed to be, and to be recognizable by recipients as, particular actions” (Schegloff, 2007, p. These workings are complexly intertwined with participants’ embodied conduct (Goodwin, 1979). 63), that is, the workings of grammatical constructions can be differentiated by reference to position in turn and sequence. Linguistic resources are “positionally sensitive” (Schegloff, 1996, p. Language is one among a range of resources that participants draw upon for the collaborative organization of social interaction (Goodwin, 1979 Ochs, Schegloff, & Thompson, 1996 Sacks, 1992). ![]() Data are in French with English translations. ![]() The findings add to our understanding of how grammar and the body interface in the course of the real-time production of turns and actions and provide evidence for the online malleability of action projection. ![]() Collection-based analysis shows that these uses differ in their embodied delivery, implementing distinct interactional workings with distinct sequential consequentialities. Two interactional workings are documented in this precise sequential location: Speakers use chais pas either for withdrawing their just-produced sequence-initial action, thereby canceling the relevance of a response or, on the contrary, for pursuing response while relaxing the preference for a precise type of response. This article examines speakers’ use of French chais pas (“dunno”) when they find that their sequence-initial turn has not been responded to by their recipient (roughly: Speaker A: Maybe they’re doing a master’s degree Speaker B: Speaker A: Dunno).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |