Difference between revisions of "Pfander-Couper-Kuhlen2019"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Stefan Pfänder; Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen; |Title=Turn-sharing revisited: An exploration of simultaneous speech in interactions between c...") |
(No difference)
|
Revision as of 05:21, 12 June 2019
Pfander-Couper-Kuhlen2019 | |
---|---|
BibType | ARTICLE |
Key | Pfänder-Couper-Kuhlen2019 |
Author(s) | Stefan Pfänder, Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen |
Title | Turn-sharing revisited: An exploration of simultaneous speech in interactions between couples |
Editor(s) | |
Tag(s) | EMCA, Turn sharing, Simultaneous speech, Affective stance, Epistemic claim, Embodied practices |
Publisher | |
Year | 2019 |
Language | English |
City | |
Month | |
Journal | Journal of Pragmatics |
Volume | 147 |
Number | |
Pages | 22-48 |
URL | Link |
DOI | 10.1016/j.pragma.2019.05.010 |
ISBN | |
Organization | |
Institution | |
School | |
Type | |
Edition | |
Series | |
Howpublished | |
Book title | |
Chapter |
Abstract
This paper investigates one particular type of simultaneous speech, namely turn- sharing, in the Freiburg Sofa Talks, a corpus of video-recorded dyadic conversations between partners, friends, and siblings who are recollecting events they have experi- enced together in the past. The focus is on interactions in German and French. In turn- sharing, participants aim at saying the same thing at the same time, using these mo- ments to convey something to each other, and occasionally to a third party in the room. We identify two different types of turn-sharing, choral performance and chiming in, which are brought off by different micro-practices with verbal, prosodic, and bodily resources. Each type achieves something different interactionally, either displaying a shared affective stance towards something in an alternative world or embodying an epistemic claim to know as much as the main speaker. We conclude that choral per- formance and chiming in are two sedimented formats for turn-sharing that are ach- ieved with different practices using semiotic resources that are comparable, if not identical, across languages.
Notes