Recipient Design by Gestures
How Depictive Gestures Embody Actions in Cooking Instructions
Keywords:instruction, depiction, depictive gesture, recipient design, second language
This paper investigates how depictive gestures, i.e., hand movements that depict actions, scenes or objects, are configured and used for accomplishing instructions. By drawing on video recordings of second language interactions in cooking classes for newcomers in Finland, we focus on instructions that project a certain type of complying bodily action as the relevant next action. We demonstrate that the instructions are designed to be sensitive not only to the contingencies of the material ecology of the kitchen but also to the epistemic and linguistic asymmetries between the participants. The analysis shows how depictive gestures contribute to the forward-feeding function of cooking instructions by visualizing how the instructed action should be appropriately carried out. The findings contribute to the accumulating understanding of how embodied resources further intersubjectivity in second language interactions (Eskildsen & Wagner, 2015; Greer, 2019; Lilja & Piirainen-Marsh, 2019).
Arnold, L. (2012). Dialogic embodied action: using gesture to organize sequence and participation in instructional interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(3), 269–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.699256
Clark, H. (2016). Depicting as a Method of Communication. Psychological Review, 123(3), 324-347. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000026
Couper-Kuhlen, E. & M. Etelämäki (2015). Nominated actions and their targetted agents in Finnish conversational directives. Journal of Pragmatics, 78, 7–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.12.010
Curl, T. S., & Drew, P. (2008). Contingency and action: A comparison of two forms of requesting. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41(2), 129–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810802028613
Debreslioska, S. & Gullberg, M. (2020). The semantic content of gestures varies with information status, definiteness and clause structure. Journal of Pragmatics, 168, 36¬ - 52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.06.005
Deppermann, A. (2018). Editorial: Instructions in driving lessons. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 28, (2), 221 - 225. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12206
De Stefani, E. (2018). Formulating direction: Navigational instructions in driving lessons. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 28(2), 283–303. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12197
Drew, P. (2013). Turn Design. In T. Stivers & J. Sidnell (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 131-149). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
Enfield, N. J. (2009). The Anatomy of Meaning: Speech, Gesture, and Composite Utterances. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Eskildsen, S. W. & Wagner, J. (2015). Embodied L2 construction learning. Language Learning, 65, 419–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12106
Eskildsen, S. & Wagner, J. (2018). From Trouble in the Talk to New Resources: The Interplay of Bodily and Linguistic Resources in the Talk of a Speaker of English as a Second Language. In S. Pekarek Doehler, J. Wagner & E. González-Martínez (eds.), Longitudinal Studies on the Organization of Social Interaction (pp. 143–171). London, Palgrave Macmillan.
Etelämäki, M. & Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2017). In the face of resistance: A Finnish practice for insisting on imperatively formatted directives. In M-L. Sorjonen, L. Raevaara and E. Couper-Kuhlen (eds.), Imperative Turns at Talk: The design of directives in action, 215–240. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Evnitskaya, N. & Berger, E. (2017). Learners’ multimodal displays of willingness to participate in classroom interaction in the L2 and CLIL contexts. Classroom Discourse 8 (1), 71–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2016.1272062
Frick, M., & Palola, E. (2022/this issue). Deontic Autonomy in Family Interaction: Directive Actions and the Multimodal Organization of Going to the Bathroom. Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v5i2.130870
Garfinkel, H. (2002). Instructions and instructed actions. In H. Garfinkel (Ed.), Ethomethodology's program (pp. 197–218). Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
Goodwin, M. H. (1990). He‐said‐she‐said. Talk as social organization among black children. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Goodwin, C. (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 32 (10), 1489–1522. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00096-X
Goodwin, C. (2007). Environmentally coupled gestures. In S. D. Duncan, J. Cassel & E. T. Levy (eds.), Gesture and the Dynamic Dimension of Language: Essays in Honor of David McNeill (pp. 195–212). Amsterdam / Philadelphia, John Benjamins.
Gullberg, M (2006). Some reasons for studying gesture and second language acquisition (Hommage a Adam Kendon). International Review of Applied Linguistics, 44, 103-124. https://doi.org/10.1515/IRAL.2006.004
Greer, T. (2019) Noticing words in the wild. In J. Hellermann, S. Eskildsen, & S. Pekarek Doehler & A. Piirainen Marsh (Eds.). Conversation analytic research on learning-in-action: The complex ecology of L2 interaction in the wild (pp. 131-158). Dordrecht: Springer.
Hsu, H., Brône, G. & K. Feyaerts (2021). When gesture “takes over”: Speech-embedded nonverbal depictions in multimodal interaction. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.552533
Jakonen, T. & Morton, T. (2015). Epistemic Search Sequences in Peer Interaction in a Content-based Language Classroom. Applied Linguistics 36(1), 73–94. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt031
Jokipohja, A-K. (2022). Kieltä kokkauksen lomassa – Aloittelevien suomen kielen käyttäjien sanastokysymykset. In N. Lilja, L. Eilola, A. Jokipohja & T. Tapaninen (eds). Aikuisten maahanmuuttajien kielellinen arki – suomen kielen oppimisen mahdollisuudet aja mahdottomuudet. Tampere: Vastapaino.
Keevallik, L. (2010). Bodily quoting in dance correction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 43(4), 401–426. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2010.518065
Keevallik, L. (2018). What does embodied interaction tell us about grammar? Research on Language and Social Interaction, 51, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2018.1413887
Kendon, A. (2004). Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge University Press.
Kääntä, L., & Piirainen-Marsh, A. (2013). Manual Guiding in Peer Group Interaction: A Resource for Organizing a Practical Classroom Task. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 46 (4), 322-343. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2013.839094
Kääntä, L., Kasper, G. & Piirainen-Marsh, A. (2018). Explaining Hook’s law: definitional practices in a CLIL Physics classroom. Applied Linguistics, 39 (5), 694-717. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amw025
Levinson, S. C. (2013). Action formation and ascription. In T. Stivers & J. Sidnell (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 103–130). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
Laitinen 1995. Nollapersoona. Virittäjä 99, 337–358.
Laurier, E. (2014). The graphic transcript. Poaching comic book grammar for inscribing the visual, spatial and temporal aspects of action. Geography Compass, 8(4), 235–248. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12123
Lilja, N. (2014). Partial repetitions as other-initiations of repair in second language talk: re-establishing understanding and doing learning. Journal of Pragmatics, 71, 98–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.07.011
Lilja, N. & A. Piirainen-Marsh (2019). How hand gestures contribute to action ascription. Research on Language and Social Interaction. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2019.1657275
Lindwall, O. & A. Ekström (2012). Instruction-in-Interaction: The Teaching and Learning of a Manual Skill. Human Studies, 35(1), 27-49. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10746-012-9213-5
Lindwall, O., G. Lymer and C. Greiffenhagen (2015). The Sequential Analysis of Instruction. In Markee, Numa (ed.), The Handbook of Classroom Discourse and Interaction, 142-157. Oxford: Wiley.
Mazeland, H. (2013). Grammar in Conversation. In T. Stivers & J. Sidnell (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 475–491). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
Mondada, L. (2014a). Cooking instructions and the shaping of things in the kitchen. In M. Nevile, P. Haddington, T. Heinemann and M. Rauniomaa (eds.), Interacting with Objects, 199–226. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Mondada, L. (2014b). The local constitution of multimodal resources for social interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 65, 137–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.04.004
Mondada, L. (2016). Challenges of multimodality. Language and the body in social interaction. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 20(3), 336–366. https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.1_12177
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2018.1413878
Mondada, L. (n.d.) Conventions for multimodal transcription. https://www.lorenzamondada.net/resources
Mori, J. & Hayashi, M. (2006). The achievement of intersubjectivity through embodied completions: A study of interactions between first and second language speakers. Applied Linguistics 27, 195–219. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml014
Mortensen, K. (2016). The body as a resource for other-initiation of repair: Cupping the hand behind the ear. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 49(1), 34–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2016.1126450
Olsher, D. (2004). Talk and gesture: the embodied completion of sequential actions in spoken interaction. In Gardner, R. & J. Wagner (eds.), Second Language Conversations (pp. 221–245). London: Continuum.
Raevaara, L. (2017). Adjusting the design of directives to the activity environment: Imperatives in Finnish cooking club interaction. In M-L. Sorjonen, L. Raevaara and E. Couper-Kuhlen (eds.), Imperative Turns at Talk: The design of directives in action, 381–410. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Rauniomaa, M. (2017). Assigning roles and responsibilities: Finnish imperatively formatted directive actions in a mobile instructional setting. In M-L. Sorjonen, L. Raevaara and E. Couper-Kuhlen (eds.), Imperative Turns at Talk. The design of directives in action, 325-355. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Rouhikoski, A. (2021). Direktiivien variaatio. Pyynnöt, neuvot ja ohjeet asiakaspalvelutilanteessa. Helsingin yliopisto.
Sacks, Harvey (1995) Lectures on Conversation. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Schegloff, E. A. (1984) On some gestures' relation to talk. In M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds.) Structures of Social Action. Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 266–295.
Schegloff, E. A. (2007) Sequence Organization in Interaction. A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sorjonen, M-L, Raevaara, L. & E. Couper-Kuhlen (2017) (eds.), Imperative Turns at Talk: The design of directives in action. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Stevanovic, M. (2017). Managing compliance in violin instruction: The case of the Finnish clitic particles -pA and -pAs in imperatives and hortatives. In M-L. Sorjonen, L. Raevaara and E. Couper-Kuhlen (eds.), Imperative Turns at Talk: The design of directives in action, 357–380. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Stevanovic, M. & Peräkylä, A. (2012). Deontic authority in interaction: The right to announce, propose, and decide. Research on Language and Social Interaction 44, 843–862. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.699260
Streeck, J. (2009). Gesturecraft: The manu-facture of meaning. John Benjamin.
Stukenbrock, A. (2014). Take the words out of my mouth: Verbal instructions as embodied practices. Journal of Pragmatics, 65, 80–ExExE102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.08.017
VISK= Hakulinen, Auli & Vilkuna, Maria & Korhonen, Riitta & Koivisto, Vesa & Heinonen, Tarja Riitta & Alho, Irja (2008) Iso suomen kielioppi. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.
How to Cite
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.