Difference between revisions of "Cekaite2015"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(BibTeX auto import 2015-05-12 02:15:01)
 
m
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{BibEntry
 
{{BibEntry
 +
|BibType=ARTICLE
 +
|Author(s)=Asta Cekaite;
 +
|Title=The Coordination of Talk and Touch in Adults’ Directives to Children: Touch and Social Control
 +
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Multiactivity; Touch; Directives; Children;
 
|Key=Cekaite2015
 
|Key=Cekaite2015
|Key=Cekaite2015
 
|Title=The Coordination of Talk and Touch in Adults’ Directives to Children: Touch and Social Control
 
|Author(s)=Asta Cekaite;
 
|Tag(s)=EMCA
 
|BibType=ARTICLE
 
 
|Year=2015
 
|Year=2015
 
|Journal=Research on Language and Social Interaction
 
|Journal=Research on Language and Social Interaction

Revision as of 03:52, 19 July 2015

Cekaite2015
BibType ARTICLE
Key Cekaite2015
Author(s) Asta Cekaite
Title The Coordination of Talk and Touch in Adults’ Directives to Children: Touch and Social Control
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, Multiactivity, Touch, Directives, Children
Publisher
Year 2015
Language
City
Month
Journal Research on Language and Social Interaction
Volume 48
Number 2
Pages 152–175
URL Link
DOI 10.1080/08351813.2015.1025501
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

Adults sometimes accompany the directives they issue to children about their actions and movements with bodily contact (for example, shoving, guiding, or pushing). This article explores the interactional uses and meanings of such combinations of spoken directive and bodily contact that involves touch in data from families and primary educational settings in Sweden. The focus is on how the timing and coordination of haptics (communicative acts of touch), speech, and contextual factors produce communicative meanings. Findings reveal how touch and talk are synchronized to achieve the child’s compliance to directives. Laminated (that is, multimodal) directives combine concurrent use of imperatives with adults’ own haptic acts, signaling and enforcing the onset and/or trajectory of the required movement. They constitute the prevalent pattern of use, as compared to the use of control touch without accompanying verbalization. Haptic control formats are usually responsive to the child recipient’s noncompliant responses. The data are in Swedish with English translation.

Notes