Using conversation analysis to study prosodic problems in a child with language impairment

Samuelsson, Christina

doi:10.1177/0265659008098661

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In other words, they have to establish the mutual belief that the hearer understands the speaker well enough for current purposes, usually, by forming an adjacency pair. In conversations, as opposed to read speech, participants engage in natural interactions and utilize certain interactive features including response tokens to achieve mutual understanding (Samuelsson, 2009).…”

Section: Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Talking Back with Meaning: A Pragmatic Analysis of Response Tokens in Ghanaian English Discourse

Lomotey¹

2021

theijhss

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionWe generally do one of two things in any interactional process; we either speak to others in turn, or listen to them. To listen to others means that we pay attention to what they say. However, being listeners does not mean that we remain completely silent throughout the interaction. While we listen, we may make appropriate responses to speakers' utterances. In this instance, Huq and Amir (2015) argue that we make use of brief responses instead of lengthy, elaborate turns to maintain an interactive listening behaviour. While these brief responses are mostly verbal, there are instances in which they can also be non-verbal in nature. McCarthy (2003, p. 2) observes that listeners tend to use 'small words' to communicate to their speakers that it is not only they (the speakers) who are involved in the conversation, but they, as listeners, also actively engage in the talk. In short, the listener's role is seen as not an entirely passive one, but rather, an active one, similarly to the role of the speaker. With such an active role, the listener can become the speaker or give some signals to show his/her involvement in the conversation. This, s/he does, to help keep the smooth continuation of the interaction and to ensure 'communicative economy' (McCarthy, 2003).Listeners are able to coordinate with speakers to sustain interactions in a way that makes researchers interested in conversation analysis sometimes wonder how they (listeners) seem to know and follow the intricate rules of responding to everyday talk. This wonder is what compels Ward and Tsukahara (2000) to comment that '… there is the mystery of how 'coordination' is achieved when two people are talking together; their utterances seldom interfere with each other, despite the lack of any fixed protocol for who may speak when ' (p. 1178). With the act of listening and responding to the speaker, Gumperz (1982) notes that Gricean pragmatics is based on an analysis which is sentence-based and is 'concerned with (shared) presuppositions in the interpretations of intent' (p. 17). In Gumperz's opinion, the intention of the speaker and its interpretation by the listener is an important part of the communicative event which cannot be ignored. He claims that 'we assume such interpretation is a function of (a) listeners' linguistic knowledge, (b) contextual presuppositions informed by certain cues, and (c) background information brought to bear on the interpretation (p. 17). Based on these assumptions, he considers contextualization cues as what help in the negotiation and interpretation of conversational cooperation between speakers and listeners. Consequently, one way by which these contextualization cues function is to serve as a guide for monitoring the progress of the talk.It is therefore important to recognize that the listener is a significant pivot within the interactional process, and like Gumperz, this recognition is supported by researchers such as Heritage (1984), Jefferson (1984), Sacks (1992), and Schegloff (1982. These researchers, rather than...

show abstract

Section: Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Talking Back with Meaning: A Pragmatic Analysis of Response Tokens in Ghanaian English Discourse

Lomotey¹

2021

theijhss

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In other words, they have to establish the mutual belief that the hearer understands the speaker well enough for current purposes, usually, by forming an adjacency pair. In conversations, as opposed to read speech, participants engage in natural interactions and utilize certain prosodic features including intonation and speech rate to achieve mutual understanding (Samuelsson, 2009). Since this investigation centred on the use of intonation in discourse in typical Ghanaian English, no constructed dialogues are used.…”

Section: Data Instruments and Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prominence and Meaning Selection in Ghanaian English Discourse: Towards a Categorization of the New Englishes

Lomotey

2021

EJLLL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

All models of intonation recognize that speakers in any communication context select prominence based on their communicative intents. Consequently, every prominent syllable bears a specific communicative function. However, while prominence selection appears fixed in inner circle Englishes, the same cannot be said of outer (OC) and expanding circle (EC) Englishes. Results from research clearly suggest that it is not always possible for OC and EC speakers to select prominence to indicate meaning selection. This study reports findings on the selection of prominence in Ghanaian English in relation to Brazil’s Discourse Intonation model. Data consisting of 6 hours of English conversations from 100 Ghanaians were analyzed using Brazil’s model. Results show that just as in other OC English varieties, Ghanaians assign prominence to individual syllables with communicative intent, although their selections may not always coincide with the functions proposed in Brazil’s model. Based on these results, it is argued that rather than being viewed as deficiencies, phonological choices such as prominence selection should be regarded as common to OC Englishes. The study, therefore, argues for an adoption of a model that describes the intonation of outer circle Englishes in relation to their contexts and not on a native speaker model. Article visualizations:<img src="/-counters-/edu_01/0856/a.php" alt="Hit counter" />

show abstract

Atypical Interaction: An Introduction

Wilkinson

Rae

Rasmussen³

2020

Atypical Interaction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using conversation analysis to study prosodic problems in a child with language impairment

Cited by 5 publications

References 27 publications

Talking Back with Meaning: A Pragmatic Analysis of Response Tokens in Ghanaian English Discourse

Talking Back with Meaning: A Pragmatic Analysis of Response Tokens in Ghanaian English Discourse

Prominence and Meaning Selection in Ghanaian English Discourse: Towards a Categorization of the New Englishes

Atypical Interaction: An Introduction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About