Difference between revisions of "Arminen2006b"
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) m |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
|Number=3 | |Number=3 | ||
|Pages=339–368 | |Pages=339–368 | ||
− | |URL= | + | |URL=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1461445606061791 |
|DOI=10.1177/1461445606061791 | |DOI=10.1177/1461445606061791 | ||
|Abstract=Conversation analytical (CA) methodology was used to specify the new opening practices in Finnish mobile call openings, which differ systematically from Finnish landline call openings. Since the responses to a mobile call orient to the summons identifying the caller, answers have changed and diversified. A known caller is greeted. The self-identification opening that was canonical in Finnish landline calls is mainly used for answering unknown callers, while channel-opener openings involve orientation to ongoing mutual business between the speakers. Some of these changes reflect real-time coordination of the social action that the mobility of mobile phones enables. In all, the adoption of new ways of answering a call shows that people orient themselves to affordances that new technologies allow them. Mobile phone communication opens a salient new area both for the analysis of talk-ininteraction itself and also for understanding communicative behaviour in the era of ubiquitous information technology. | |Abstract=Conversation analytical (CA) methodology was used to specify the new opening practices in Finnish mobile call openings, which differ systematically from Finnish landline call openings. Since the responses to a mobile call orient to the summons identifying the caller, answers have changed and diversified. A known caller is greeted. The self-identification opening that was canonical in Finnish landline calls is mainly used for answering unknown callers, while channel-opener openings involve orientation to ongoing mutual business between the speakers. Some of these changes reflect real-time coordination of the social action that the mobility of mobile phones enables. In all, the adoption of new ways of answering a call shows that people orient themselves to affordances that new technologies allow them. Mobile phone communication opens a salient new area both for the analysis of talk-ininteraction itself and also for understanding communicative behaviour in the era of ubiquitous information technology. | ||
}} | }} |
Latest revision as of 10:31, 13 November 2019
Arminen2006b | |
---|---|
BibType | ARTICLE |
Key | Arminen2006b |
Author(s) | Ilkka Arminen, Minna Leinonen |
Title | Mobile phone call openings: tailoring answers to personalized summonses |
Editor(s) | |
Tag(s) | EMCA, Mobiles, Telephone, Opening sequences, Summons |
Publisher | |
Year | 2006 |
Language | |
City | |
Month | |
Journal | Discourse Studies |
Volume | 8 |
Number | 3 |
Pages | 339–368 |
URL | Link |
DOI | 10.1177/1461445606061791 |
ISBN | |
Organization | |
Institution | |
School | |
Type | |
Edition | |
Series | |
Howpublished | |
Book title | |
Chapter |
Abstract
Conversation analytical (CA) methodology was used to specify the new opening practices in Finnish mobile call openings, which differ systematically from Finnish landline call openings. Since the responses to a mobile call orient to the summons identifying the caller, answers have changed and diversified. A known caller is greeted. The self-identification opening that was canonical in Finnish landline calls is mainly used for answering unknown callers, while channel-opener openings involve orientation to ongoing mutual business between the speakers. Some of these changes reflect real-time coordination of the social action that the mobility of mobile phones enables. In all, the adoption of new ways of answering a call shows that people orient themselves to affordances that new technologies allow them. Mobile phone communication opens a salient new area both for the analysis of talk-ininteraction itself and also for understanding communicative behaviour in the era of ubiquitous information technology.
Notes