Parties, persons, and one-at-a-time: conversation analysis and ELF

Abstract

Drawing on an analysis of ELF data, this article deals with the characteristics and complexities of turn-taking in interactions involving three or more participants. Sacks et al.'s (1974) often quoted framework for turn-taking in conversations, which can still be regarded canonical reading in the conversation analytic literature, serves as a starting point for this investigation. The aim of this paper is to scrutinize the applicability of the turn-taking model for group interactions. A key concept in this regard is the notion of a party: the conversation analytic model for turn-taking posits that turn-taking does not take place between individual speakers, but between parties (hence the term multi-party conversation) which can potentially consist of several speakers (cf. Schegloff 1995: 32-33). In group interactions it is thus possible that overlap occurs among co-incumbents of the same party. This kind of simultaneous speech, however, has not yet been subject of systematic empirical analysis. The present paper offers a preliminary account of this aspect of turn-taking in multi-participant interaction by discussing data extracts from an ELF workplace meeting of seven speakers and suggests possible avenues for further research on the phenomenon.Zusammenfassung: Anhand einer Analyse von ELF Daten beschäftigt sich dieser Artikel mit den spezifischen Charakteristika und Komplexitäten die sich für Turntaking ergeben, sobald drei oder mehr TeilnehmerInnen an einem Gespräch beteiligt sind. Ausgangspunkt hierfür ist Sacks, Schegloff und Jeffersons (1974) Modell des Turn-taking in Konversationen, das bis heute einen oft zitierten Referenzpunkt in der linguistischen Forschung zu gesprochener Sprache darstellt JELF 2015; 4(2): Brought to you by | University of Sussex Library Authenticated Download Date | 9/30/15 5:02 AM und mit Recht als ein Standardwerk der konversationsanalytischen Literatur bezeichnet werden kann. Ziel dieses Artikels ist, die Anwendbarkeit des Modells auf Gruppengespräche zu diskutieren. Eine Schlüsselrolle kommt dabei dem Konzept der "party" zu: Die Konversationsanalyse geht generell davon aus, dass Turn-taking nicht zwischen Individuen stattfindet, sondern zwischen "parties", die potentiell auch mehrere SprecherInnen umfassen können (vgl. Schegloff 1995: 32-33). In Gruppengesprächen kann es daher zu Simultansequenzen zwischen den einzelnen SprecherInnen einer "party" kommen. Diese Art des Simultansprechens war bislang allerdings noch nicht Gegenstand systematischer empirischer Untersuchung. Anhand von Datenbeispielen aus einer Arbeitsbesprechung mit sieben SprecherInnen, die ELF als Verkehrssprache nutzen, soll in diesem Artikel die Komplexität von Turn-taking in Gruppengesprächen illustriert, die Anwendbarkeit des Konzeptes von "party" in der Analyse diskutiert und mögliche Wege für zukünftige Forschung auf dem Gebiet aufgezeigt werden.

Vocal Turn-Taking in Meerkat Group Calling Sessions

“…The majority of research on turn-taking in animals and humans has focused on dyadic, or in some cases triadic [5,9,10], interactions. However, as vocal interactions in nature often occur in multi-participant settings, it remains unclear to what extent turn-taking patterns can persist in larger groups [10,11] and what mechanisms underlie such coordination. Multi-participant turn-taking might rely on pre-set order, creating a rigid participation framework.…”

“…As few previous studies have attempted to examine anti-synchronized calling within a group [9,11], it is unclear if there is an upper limit on the number of active participants in a vocal interaction governed by the principles discussed above. In humans, turn-taking in unsupervised group discussions was found to be challenging [10]. Additionally, in humans, factors such as turn allocation, gestures, and seniority [10,29] likely play a central role.…”

“…In humans, turn-taking in unsupervised group discussions was found to be challenging [10]. Additionally, in humans, factors such as turn allocation, gestures, and seniority [10,29] likely play a central role. It has been stated that the basic organizational rules for spontaneous turn-taking ''favor'' only small groups of three or fewer participants and that larger groups require sequence organization [8] or segmentation [30].…”