Co-animation and the Multimodal Management of Contextualisation Problems when Jointly ‘Doing Being’ Others
Keywords:animation, co-animation, doing being, multimodality, participant problems
In everyday interaction, participants speak on their own behalf but may temporarily speak as or on behalf of a figure (i.e. past or fictional self, others or objects). This practice of ‘animation’ can be continued or extended by co-participants in responsive position, resulting in co-animation (Cantarutti, 2020) of the same figure. Animation relies on the successful ascription of roles, participation framework shifts and projected stances to either the here-and-now of interaction or the there-and-then of animated content. In turn, the recognition of a response as a co-animation requires the creation of similarity between animated contributions. Through a multimodal interactional linguistic analysis of 89 cases of co-animation, this paper discusses how participants jointly solve these interactional contextualisation ‘problems’ smoothly through multimodal gestalts of lexico-grammatical, prosodic and gestural detail.
Auer, P. (1996). On the prosody and syntax of turn-continuations. Prosody in Conversation, 57–100.
Auer, P., Couper-Kuhlen, E., & Müller, F. (1999). Language in Time: The Rhythm and Tempo of Spoken Interaction. Oxford University Press.
Blackwell, N. L., Perlman, M., & Fox Tree, J. E. (2015). Quotation as a multimodal construction. Journal of Pragmatics, 81(Supplement C), 1–7.
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2016). Praat: doing phonetics by computer [Computer program], Version 6.0. 14.
Bolden, G. (2004). The quote and beyond: defining boundaries of reported speech in conversational Russian. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(6), 1071–1118.
Brugman, H., Russel, A., (2004). Annotating Multi-media/Multi-modal Resources with ELAN. In: Proceedings of LREC 2004, Fourth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation.
Buchstaller, I. (2013). Quotatives: New Trends and Sociolinguistic Implications. John Wiley & Sons.
Cantarutti, M. N. (2018). MCY Corpus of English Interaction [Dataset]. University of York.
Cantarutti, M. N. (2020). The Multimodal and Sequential Design of Co-Animation as a Practice for Association in English Interaction [PhD, University of York]. http://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/id/eprint/27344
Cantarutti, M.N. (in press). Co-animation in Troubles Talk. Research on Language and Social Interaction. Manuscript accepted.
Clark, H. H., & Gerrig, R. J. (1990). Quotations as Demonstrations. Language, 66(4), 764–805.
Clift, R. (2006). Indexing stance: Reported speech as an interactional evidential1. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 10(5), 569–595.
Couper-Kuhlen, E. (1996). The prosody of repetition: On quoting and mimicry. In E. Couper-Kuhlen & M. Selting (Eds.), Prosody in conversation: Interactional studies (pp. 366105). Cambridge University Press.
Couper-Kuhlen, E. (1998), Coherent Voicing. On Prosody in Conversational Reported Speech. InLiSt - Interaction and Linguistic Structures, vol. 1
Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2007). Assessing and accounting. In E. Holt & R. Clift (Eds.), Reporting Talk: Reported Speech in Interaction (Vol. 24, p. 81).
Couper-Kuhlen, E., & Ono, T. (2010). “Incrementing” in conversation. A comparison of practices in English, German, and Japanese. Pragmatics, 17(4), 513–552
Couper-Kuhlen, E., & Selting, M. (2001). Introducing interactional linguistics. Studies in Interactional Linguistics, 122.
Deppermann, A. (2011). The Study of Formulations as a Key to an Interactional Semantics. Human Studies, 34(2), 115–128.
Deppermann, A., & Streeck, J. (2018). Time in Embodied Interaction: Synchronicity and sequentiality of multimodal resources. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Drew, P. (1987). Po-faced receipts of teases. Linguistics and Philosophy, 25(1).
Fox, B. A., & Robles, J. (2010). It’s like mmm: Enactments with it's like. Discourse Studies, 12(6), 715–738.
Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of Talk. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Goodwin, C. (2007). Interactive footing. In Holt, Elizabeth, & Clift, R. Reporting Talk: Reported Speech in Interaction. (pp.16-46). Cambridge University Press
Goodwin, M. H. (1990). He-said-she-said: Talk as Social Organization Among Black Children. Indiana University Press.
Gorisch, J., Wells, B., Brown, G. (2012). Pitch contour matching and interactional alignment across turns: An acoustic investigation. Language and Speech 55.1, S. 57-76
Guardiola, M., & Bertrand, R. (2013). Interactional convergence in conversational storytelling: when reported speech is a cue of alignment and/or affiliation. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 705.
Günthner, S. (1997). The contextualization of affect in reported dialogues. In S. Niemeier & R. Dirven (Eds.), The Language of Emotions: Conceptualization, expression, and theoretical foundation. John Benjamins Publishing.
Günthner, S. (1999). Polyphony and the “layering of voices” in reported dialogues: An analysis of the use of prosodic devices in everyday reported speech. Journal of Pragmatics, 31(5), 685–708.
Hayashi, M. (2005). Joint turn construction through language and the body: Notes on embodiment in coordinated participation in situated activities. Semiotica, 2005(156). https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.2005.2005.156.21
Kendon, A. (1990). Conducting Interaction: Patterns of Behavior in Focused Encounters. CUP Archive.
Kendon, A. (2004). Gesture: Visible Action as Utterance. Cambridge University Press.
Klewitz, G., & Couper-Kuhlen, E. (1999). Quote--unquote? The role of prosody in the contextualization of reported speech sequences. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA), 9(4), 459–485.
Ladd, R. (1978). Stylized intonation. Language, 54(3), 517–540.
Laver, J. (1980). The Phonetic Description of Voice Quality. Cambridge University Press.
Lampert, M. (2013). Say, be like, quote (unquote), and the air-quotes: interactive quotatives and their multimodal implications: The “new”quotatives remind us of the vocal, verbal, and gestural dimensions of speech. English Today, 29(4), 45–56.
Lampert, M. (2018). “Speaking” Quotation Marks: Toward a Multimodal Analysis of Quoting Verbatim in English. Peter Lang.
Lerner, G. H. (1996a). On the“ semi-permeable” character of grammatical units in conversation: Conditional entry into the turn space of another speaker. Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics, 13, 238–276.
Lerner, G. H. (1996b). Finding “face” in the preference structures of talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59(4), 303.
Lerner, G. H. (2004). Collaborative turn sequences. In G. H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation (pp. 225–256). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Levinson, S. C. (1988). Putting linguistics on a proper footing: Explorations in Goffman’s participation framework. Polity Press.
Local, J., & Kelly, J. (1989). Doing Phonology: observing, recording, interpreting. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Local, J., & Walker, G. (2005). Methodological imperatives for investigating the phonetic organization and phonological structures of spontaneous speech. Phonetica, 62(2-4), 120–130.
Loehr, D. (2007). Aspects of rhythm in gesture and speech. Gesture, 7(2), 179–214.
Mandel, D., & Ehmer, O. (2019). Fuzzy boundaries in quotations. [Conference Presentation]. IIEMCA 2019: International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis Conference, Mannheim.
Mathis, T., & Yule, G. (1994). Zero quotatives. Discourse Processes, 18(1), 63–76.
McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and Mind: What Gestures Reveal about Thought. University of Chicago Press.
Mondada, L. (2018). Multiple Temporalities of Language and Body in Interaction: Challenges for Transcribing Multimodality. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 51(1), 85–106.
Müller, F. E. (1991). Metrical emphasis: Rhythmic scansions in Italian conversation. Arbeitspapier des KONTRI-Projektes, Universität Konstanz, Konstanz (1991)
Niemelä, M. (2010). The reporting space in conversational storytelling: Orchestrating all semiotic channels for taking a stance. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(12), 3258–3270.
Niemelä, M. (2011). Resonance in storytelling: Verbal, prosodic and embodied practices of stance taking. University of Oulu.
Nolan, F. (2003). Intonational equivalence: an experimental evaluation of pitch scales.
Ogden, R., Hakulinen, A., & Tainio, L. (2004). Indexing “no news” with stylization in Finnish. In Typological Studies in Language (pp. 299–334). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Ogden, R., & Hawkins, S. (2015, August 10). Entrainment as a basis for co-ordinated actions in speech. International Congress of the Phonetic Sciences. International Congress of the Phonetic Sciences.
Pomerantz, A. (1986). Extreme Case Formulations: A Way of Legitimizing Claims. Human Studies, 9(2/3), 219–229.
Reber, E. (2020). Visuo-material performances: “Literalized” quotations in prime minister’s questions. AILA Review, 33(1), 176–203.
Robles, J. S. (2015). Quotatives. In The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Romaine, S., & Lange, D. (1991). The Use of like as a Marker of Reported Speech and Thought: A Case of Grammaticalization in Progress. American Speech, 66(3), 227–279.
Rossi, G. (2011). The MPI/Rossi Corpus of English [Data set]. The Max Planck Institute.
Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on Conversation (G. Jefferson (ed.); Vols. 1 & 2). Basil Blackwell.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735.
Schegloff, E. A. (1998). Body Torque. Social Research, 65(3), 535–596.
Selting, M., Auer, P., Barth-Weingarten, D., Bergmann, J., Bergmann, P., Birkner, K., Couper-Kuhlen, E., Deppermann, A., Gilles, P., Günthner, S., Hartung, M., Kern, F., Mertzlufft, C., Meyer, C., Morek, M., Oberzaucher, F., Peters, J., Quasthoff, U., Schütte, W., Stukenbrock, A., Uhmann, S., (2011), "A system for transcribing talk-in-interaction: GAT 2", Gesprächsforschung: Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion, vol. 12, pp. 1–51
Sidnell, J. (2006). Coordinating Gesture, Talk, and Gaze in Reenactments. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 39(4), 377–409.
Sidnell, J. (2012). Turn-Continuation by Self and by Other. Discourse Processes, 49(3-4), 314–337.
Stec, K., Huiskes, M., & Redeker, G. (2015). Multimodal analysis of quotation in oral narratives. Open Linguistics, 1(1), 291.
Stec, K., Huiskes, M., & Redeker, G. (2016). Multimodal quotation: Role shift practices in spoken narratives. Journal of Pragmatics, 104(Supplement C), 1–17.
Streeck, J. (1993). Gesture as communication I: Its coordination with gaze and speech. Communication Monographs, 60(4), 275–299.
Streeck, J. (2009). Forward-Gesturing. Discourse Processes, 46(2-3), 161–179.
Streeck, J. (2014). Mutual gaze and recognition. In From Gesture in Conversation to Visible Action as Utterance (pp. 35–56). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Stukenbrock, A. (2014). Pointing to an “empty” space: Deixis am Phantasma in face-to-face interaction. In Journal of Pragmatics, 74, 70–93.
Szczepek-Reed, B. (2006). Prosodic Orientation in English Conversation. Springer.
Tannen, D. (2007). “Oh talking voice that is so sweet”: constructing dialogue in conversation. In Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue, and Imagery in Conversational Discourse (pp. 102–132). Cambridge University Press.
Thompson, S. A., & Suzuki, R. (2014). Reenactments in conversation: Gaze and recipiency. Discourse Studies, 16(6), 816–846.
Uhmann, S. (1992). Contextualizing relevance: On some forms and functions of speech rate changes in everyday conversation. The Contextualization of Language, 297–336.
Yasui, E. (2013). Collaborative idea construction: Repetition of gestures and talk in joint brainstorming. Journal of Pragmatics, 46(1), 157–172.
Walker, G. (2004). On some interactional and phonetic properties of increments to turns in talk-in-interaction. In Typological Studies in Language (pp. 147–169). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Walker, G. (2017). Visual Representations of Acoustic Data: A Survey and Suggestions. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 1–25.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2021 Author and Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
We follow the Budapest Open Access Initiative's definition of Open Access.
The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions.
The journal allows software/spiders to automatically crawl the journal content (also known as text mining)
The journal provides article level metadata to DOAJ
The journal allows readers to read, download, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of its articles and allow readers to use them for any other lawful purpose.