Multimodal Gestalts in Reformulating Practices in Language Cafés
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v5i2.130873Keywords:
reformulations, highlighting, L1-L2 interaction, conversations-for-learning, CA-SLAAbstract
This study focuses on the multimodal gestalts (Mondada, 2014) in unsolicited other-reformulations produced by L1 speaking volunteers in language cafés where visitors practice Swedish with volunteers from the local community. The unsolicited other-reformulations in our collection: (a) act as clarifications of what was said before, and (b) highlight (Goodwin, 2018; Majlesi, 2022/this issue) lexical items used in the prior turn, thereby orienting to them as learnables (Majlesi & Broth, 2012). Our findings suggest that multimodal gestalts in other-reformulations make parts of the original turn more visible and transparent for L2 speakers, and therefore make such parts salient for language learning.
References
Antaki, C. (2008). Formulations in psychotherapy. In A. Peräkylä, C. Antaki, S. Vehviläinen, & I. Leudar (Eds.), Conversation analysis and psychotherapy (pp. 107–123). Cambridge University Press.
Anward, J. (2004). Lexeme recycled. How categories emerge from interaction. Logos and Language, 4(2), 31–46.
Barnes, R. K. (2007). Formulations and the facilitation of common agreement in meetings talk. Text and Talk, 27(3), 273–296.
Barraja-Rohan, A.-M. (2015). “I told you”: storytelling development of a Japanese learning English as a second language. In T. Cadierno & S.W. Eskildsen (Eds.), Usage-based perspectives on second language learning (pp. 271–304). De Gruyter Mouton.
Bilmes, J. (2011). Occasioned semantics: A systematic approach to meaning in talk. Human Studies, 34, 129–153.
Cazden, C. B. (1986). Classroom discourse. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 432–463). Macmillan.
Deppermann, A. (2011). The study of formulations as a key to an interactional semantics. Human Studies, 34, 115-128.
De Stefani, E. (2022/this issue). On Gestalts and Their Analytical Corollaries: A Commentary to the Special Issue. Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v5i2.130875
Eskildsen, S. W. (2018). “We’re learning a lot of new words”: Encountering new L2 vocabulary outside of class. Modern Language Journal, 102, (Supplement 2018), 46–63.
Garfinkel, H., & Sacks, H. (1970). On formal structures of practical actions. In J. McKinney & E. Tyriakian (Eds.), Theoretical sociology (pp. 338-366). Appleton Century Crofts.
Goffman, 1972. Encounters. Two studies in the sociology of interaction. Penguin University Books.
Goodwin, C. (2013). The co-operative, transformative organization of human action and knowledge. Journal of Pragmatics, 46(1), 8–23.
Goodwin, C. (2018). Co-operative action. Cambridge University Press.
Greer, T., & Leyland, C. (2018). Naming an activity: Arriving at recognitionals in team-teacher planning talk. Journal of Pragmatics, 126, 52–67. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2017.11.009
Haddington, P., Keisanen, T., Mondada, L. & Nevile, M. (2014). Multiactivity in social interaction. Beyond multitasking. John Benjamins.
Hellermann, J., Eskildsen, S.W., Pekarek Doehler, S., & Piirainen-Marsh, A. (2019). Conversation analytic research on learning-in-action: The complex ecology of second language interactin “in the wild”. Springer.
Heritage, J., & Watson, D. R. (1979). Formulations as conversational objects. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language (pp. 123–162). Irvington.
Hutchby, I. (2005). ‘‘Active listening’’: Formulations and the elicitation of feelings talk in child counselling. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 38(3), 303–329.
Jansson, G., & Kunitz, S. (2020). Språkkaféet som arena för språkträning. Delmi Policy Brief 2020:8.
Jefferson, G. (1972). Side sequences. In D. Sudnow (Ed.), Studies in social interaction (pp. 294–338). Free Press.
Jefferson, G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13–31). John Benjamins.
Kasper, G., & Monfaredi, E. (2021). Storytelling as instructional practice in Persian language classrooms. In J. Wong & H.Z. Waring (Eds.), Storytelling in multilingual interaction (pp. 119–161). Routledge.
Kasper, G., & Ross, S. J. (2007). Multiple questions in oral proficiency interviews. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 2045–2070. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2007.07.011
Kasper, G., & Kim, Y. (2015). Conversation-for-learning: Institutional talk beyond the classroom. In N. Markee (Ed.), The handbook of classroom discourse and interaction (pp. 390–408). Wiley-Blackwell.
Kaur, J. (2011). Raising explicitness through self-repair in English as a lingua franca. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 2704–2715. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.012
Kendon, A. (1975). Gesticulation, speech, and the gesture theory of language origin. Sign Language Studies, 9, 349¬¬–373.
Kunitz, S. (2018). Collaborative attention work on gender agreement in Italian as a foreign language. The Modern Language Journal, 102, (Supplement 2018), 64–81.
Kunitz, S., & Jansson, G. (2021). Story recipiency in a language café: Integration work at the micro-level of interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 173, 28–47.
Lee, J. (2016). Teacher entries into second turn positions: IRFs in collaborative teaching. Journal of Pragmatics, 95, 1–15.
Levinson, S.C. (2013). Action formation and ascription. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 103–130). Wiley Blackwell.
Majlesi, A. R. (2015). Matching gestures. Teachers’ repetitions of students’ gestures in second language classrooms. Journal of Pragmatics, 76, 30–45.
Majlesi, A. R. (2018). Instructed vision: Navigating grammatical rules by using landmarks for linguistic structures in corrective feedback sequences. The Modern Language Journal, 102, (Supplement 2018), 11–29.
Majlesi, A. R. (2022/this issue). Gestural Matching and Contingent Teaching: Highlighting Learnables in Table-talk at Language Cafés. Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v5i2.130871
Majlesi, A. R., & Broth, M. (2012). Emergent learnables in second language classroom interaction. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1, 193–207.
Markee, N., & Kunitz, S. (2015). CA-for-SLA studies of classroom interaction: Quo vadis? In N. Markee (Ed.), Handbook of classroom discourse and interaction (pp. 425–440). Wiley.
Meyer, C. (2017). The cultural organization of intercorporeality. Interaction, emotion, and senses among the Wolof of Northwestern signal. In C. Meyer, J. Streeck, & J. S. Jordan (Eds.), Intercorporealtiy: Emerging socialities in interaction (pp. 143–171). Oxford University Press.
Mondada, L. (2014a). The local constitution of multimodal resources for social interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 65, 137–156.
Mondada, L. (2014b). Bodies in action: Multimodal analysis of walking and talking. Language and Dialogue, 4(3), 357–403.
Mondada, L. (2016). Challenges of multimodality: Language and the body in social interaction. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 20(3), 336–366.
Piirainen-Marsh, A., Lilja, N., & Eskildsen, S. W. (2022/this issue). Bodily Practices in Action Formation and Ascription in Multilingual Interaction: Introduction to the Special Issue. Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v5i2.130866
Sacks, H., & Schegloff, E. (1979). Two preferences in the organization of reference to persons in conversation and their interaction. In Psathas, G. (Ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology (pp. 15–21). Irvington.
Schegloff, E.A. (1968). Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist, 70(6), 1075–1095.
Schegloff, E.A. (1972). Notes on a conversational practice: Formulating place. In D. Sudnow (Ed.), Studies in social interaction (pp. 75–119). Free Press.
Schegloff, E.A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge University Press.
Sert, O. (2013). ‘Epistemic status check’ as an interactional phenomenon in instructed learning settings. Journal of Pragmatics, 45(1), 13–28.
Stevanovic, M. (2013). Deontic rights in interaction: A conversation analytic study on
authority and cooperation. [Doctoral dissertation, University of Helsinki]. HELDA.
Stivers, T. (2008). Stance, alignment and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41(1), 31–57.
Stoewer, K., & Musk, N. (2019). Impromptu vocabulary work in English mother tongue instruction. Classroom Discourse, 10(2), 123–150.
Streeck, J., Goodwin, C., & LeBaron, C. (Eds.). (2011). Embodied interaction: Language and body in the material world. Cambridge University Press.
Svennevig, J. (2010). Pre-empting reference problems in conversation. Language in Society, 39, 173–202.
Svennevig, J. (2013). Reformulation of questions with candidate answers. International Journal of Bilingualism, 17(2), 189–204.
Svennevig, J. (2018). Decomposing turns to enhance understanding by L2 speakers. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 51(4), 398–416.
Traverso, V. (2017). Formulations, reformulations et traductions dans l'interaction: Le cas de consultations médicales avec des migrants. Revue française de linguistique appliquée, XXII(2), 147–164.
Waring, H.Z. (2012). “Any questions?”: Investigating understanding-checks in the language classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 46(4), 722–752.
Weiste, E., & Peräkylä, A. (2013). A comparative conversation analytic study of formulations in psychoanalysis and cognitive psychotherapy. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 46(4), 299–321.
Wong, J., & Waring, H.Z. (Eds.) (2021). Storytelling in multilingual interaction: A conversation analysis perspective. Routledge.
Zemel, A. & Koschmann, T. (2014). ‘Put your finger right in here’: Learnability and instructed experience. Discourse Studies, 16(2), 163–183.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 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.
