Open Hand Prone as a resource in multimodal claims to interruption

Kamunen, Antti

doi:10.1075/gest.17002.kam

Cited by 9 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One of the key findings from this research is that speakers and signers engage their whole body to coordinate their conversations and interactions, especially in relation to turn-taking (e.g., Baker 1977;Schegloff 1984;Heath 2004;Hayashi 2005;Iwasaki 2009;Deppermann 2013;McCleary & Leite 2013;Mondada 2013). In this way, visible bodily actions help speakers maintain the orderliness of conversation in spoken language contexts (Mondada 2007;Streeck 2009a;Kamunen 2018) and signed language contexts (e.g., Coates & Sutton-Spence 2001;McCleary & Leite 2013;Girard-Groeber 2015;de Vos et al 2015). In addition, such actions can be polyfunctional, expressing either multiple pragmatic meanings or combined with referential meanings (e.g., Johnston 1992;Jokinen 2009;Streeck 2009a;Healy 2012;Lepeut 2018;submitted;Gabarró-López 2020; see also Goodwin 1986).…”

Section: "Pragmatic" Meanings Of Various Manual and Non-manual Actionmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…It is expected that signers may also engage other types of interactional meanings either through finger pointing or other types of bodily actions. These possibly include, for example, to 'move aside topics,' which has been described by Streeck (2009a), or to 'interrupt' ongoing discourse, which was observed by Kamunen (2018). It is hoped that future work on more spoken and signed language interaction in different contexts will reveal how communities of speakers and signers use bodily actions for interactional purposes and how language is shaped by this use.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Some interactional functions of finger pointing in signed language conversations

Ferrara

2020

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interlocutors participating in conversation collaborate with each other to coordinate their actions and talk. Research on spoken language conversations has shown that speakers use bodily gestures, in addition to speech, to regulate their interaction. The current study expands on this research by investigating how signed language users finger point to express interactional meanings. Studies of pointing in signed languages have largely focused on referential functions, as signers frequently point to refer to themselves and others, as well as visible and invisible referents. However, this study demonstrates how signers also finger point to deliver information, cite previous contributions, seek responses, manage turns, and give feedback. These interactional meanings are important, just as identifying discourse referents is important. Language theory should be able to accommodate this complexity of language in conversation, which involves an interplay between different types of semiosis (description, depiction, indexicality) in an inclusive, systematic way.

show abstract

Section: "Pragmatic" Meanings Of Various Manual and Non-manual Actionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Some interactional functions of finger pointing in signed language conversations

Ferrara

2020

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Extract 4b rejoins the sequence at line 010 where Pam initiates talk for the first time. (Kamunen, 2018). Pam begins to form a question 'are we talking about' but self-repairs to a statement, 'we're not talking about Harry'.…”

Section: Correctionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Correction and turn completion as collaborative repair strategies in conversations following Wernicke’s aphasia

Beeke

Capindale

Cockayne

2020

Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explores repair practices deployed by the interlocutor of a speaker with Wernicke's aphasia, their relationship to types of aphasic difficulty, and how mutual understanding and the progression of talk is maintained. A 75 year-old woman with Wernicke's aphasia of 16 months duration and her friend video recorded 36 minutes of conversation at home. Using conversation analytic methods two patterns of other-repair by the non-aphasic interlocutor were identified. The first practice was turn completion, which occurred in the context of selfinitiated word search by the person with aphasia. The second was correction in the context of trouble with reference to person or place, manifested as an erroneous word, mis-selection of a gendered pronoun, or use of a pronoun where a person's name was expected. This correction was mainly overt, completed via a short side sequence dealing with the repair, although a few examples were embedded, where a word or phrase was replaced with a corrected form without overtly drawing attention to the correction. None of the examples included an account for the error. Unlike in typical talk, the person with aphasia did not repeat or use the corrected form in subsequent talk. For this dyad, correction and completion function as interactionally acceptable collaborative repair strategies, maintaining progressivity and a focus on topic development rather than on repair itself. There is no evidence that other-correction is dispreferred, which accords with recent findings for typical interaction but differs from other studies of aphasic talk. Correction should not be dismissed out of hand as a negative interactional practice when talking to someone with Wernicke's aphasia.

show abstract

“…There are three articles we categorised as having the data archived. Cibulka (2013) uses TalkBank (MacWhinney, 2007, Gawne (2018) uses Syuba data archived open access with PARADISEC, 6 and finally Kamunen (2018) uses the Oulu Video Corpus of English and Finnish and the Oulu Corpus of US British Television Interviews, available to the local research community and others on request. Other articles referenced corpora, or collections of materials, but did not make it clear to the reader where these materials were archived, or if they were available and which parts of the corpora were analysed.…”

Section: Codementioning

confidence: 99%

“…We (2018) and Kamunen (2018) also used codes that resolved back to the specific point in the specific recording that is under discussion.…”

Section: Codementioning

confidence: 99%

Data transparency and citation in the journal Gesture

Gawne

Krajcik

Andreassen

et al. 2019

GEST

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Data is central to scholarly research, but the nature and location of data used is often under-reported in research publications. Greater transparency and citation of data have positive effects for the culture of research. This article presents the results of a survey of data citation in six years of articles published in the journal Gesture (12.1–17.2). Gesture researchers draw on a broad range of data types, but the source and location of data are often not disclosed in publications. There is also still a strong research focus on only a small range of the world’s languages and their linguistic diversity. Published papers rarely cite back to the primary data, unless it is already published. We discuss both the implications of these findings and the ways that scholars in the field of gesture studies can build a positive culture around open data.

show abstract

Open Hand Prone as a resource in multimodal claims to interruption

Cited by 9 publications

References 40 publications

Some interactional functions of finger pointing in signed language conversations

Some interactional functions of finger pointing in signed language conversations

Correction and turn completion as collaborative repair strategies in conversations following Wernicke’s aphasia

Data transparency and citation in the journal Gesture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About