Doing Attending in Multi-Party Dinner Settings
Static and Dynamic Forms of Attention in French and French Sign Language
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v9i1.147722Keywords:
listener, attending, engagement, feedback, multi-party interactions, multimodality, sign languageAbstract
In social interaction research, so-called “listeners” are known for being active co-participants of the interaction through several engagement displays, labeled as feedback, backchannel, or listener responses. Enriched by our account of interactions in French and French Sign Language, we suggest using the term ‘doing attending’ so as to not restrict this practice to a single modality and highlight its functional and interactional nature. Our analyses of video-recorded interactions during family dinners held at home, further demonstrate how such multimodal displays may not always be characterized by ‘dynamic’ forms, and are deeply shaped by polyadicity as well as co-activity and material affordances, in both languages.
References
Allwood, J., Cerrato, L., Jokinen, K., Navarretta, C., & Paggio, P. (2007). The MUMIN coding scheme for the annotation of feedback, turn management and sequencing phenomena. Language Resources and Evaluation, 41(3), 273–287.
Auer, P. (2018). Gaze, addressee selection and turn-taking in three-party interaction. In G. Brône & B. Oben (Eds.), Advances in Interaction Studies (Vol. 10, pp. 197–232). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/ais.10.09aue
Bavelas, J. B., Coates, L., & Johnson, T. (2002). Listener responses as a collaborative process: The role of gaze. Journal of Communication, 52(3), 566–580.
Beukeleers, I., Brône, G., & Vermeerbergen, M. (2020). Unaddressed participants’ gaze behavior in Flemish Sign Language interactions: Planning gaze shifts after recognizing an upcoming (possible) turn completion. Journal of Pragmatics, 162, 62–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.04.001
Bosworth, R. G., & Stone, A. (2021). Rapid development of perceptual gaze control in hearing native signing Infants and children. Developmental Science, 24(4), e13086. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.13086
Boudin, A. (2022). Interdisciplinary corpus-based approach for exploring multimodal conversational feedback. Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Multimodal Interaction, 705–710.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge university press.
Chevrefils, L., Morgenstern, A., Beaupoil-Hourdel, P., Bedoin, D., Caët, S., Danet, C., Danino, C., de Pontonx, S., & Parisse, C. (2023). Coordinating eating and languaging: The choreography of speech, sign, gesture and action in family dinners. GeSpIn 2023: 8th Gesture and Speech in Interaction Conference.
Cienki, A. (2012). Usage events of spoken language and the symbolic units we (may) abstract from them. In Janusz Badio & Krzysztof Kosecki (Eds), Cognitive processes in language (pp. 149-158). Peter Lang.
Cienki, A. (2017). Utterance Construction Grammar (UCxG) and the variable multimodality of constructions. Linguistics Vanguard, 3(s1).
Coates, J., & Sutton‐Spence, R. (2001). Turn‐taking patterns in deaf conversation. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 5(4), 507–529. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9481.00162
Engberg-Pedersen, E. (2002). Gestures in signing: The presentation gesture in Danish Sign Language. In R. Schulmeister & H. Reinitzer (Eds.), Progress in sign language research: In honnor of Siegmund Prillwitz. Signum.
Fenlon, J., Schembri, A., & Sutton-Spence, R. (2013). Turn-taking and backchannel behaviour in BSL conversations.
Ferré, G., & Renaudier, S. (2017). Unimodal and bimodal backchannels in conversational english. SEMDIAL 2017, 27–37. https://hal.science/hal-01575230/
Gardner, R. (2001). When Listeners Talk. In Pbns.92. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://benjamins.com/catalog/pbns.92
Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Goodwin, C. (1981). Conversational Organization: Interaction Between Speakers and Hearers. Academic Press.
Goodwin, C. (1986). Audience diversity, participation and interpretation. Text - Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 6(3). https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1986.6.3.283
Goodwin, C. (2010). Multimodality in human interaction. Calidoscopio, 8(2).
Goodwin, C., & Goodwin, M. H. (2004). Participation. A Companion to Linguistic Anthropology, 222–224.
Haddington, P., Keisanen, T., Mondada, L., & Nevile, M. (Eds.). (2014). Multiactivity in Social Interaction: Beyond multitasking. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.187
Heldner, M., Hjalmarsson, A., & Edlund, J. (2013). Backchannel relevance spaces. Nordic Prosody XI, Tartu, Estonia, 15-17 August, 2012, 137–146.
Heylen, D., & op den Akker, R. (2007). Computing backchannel distributions in multi-party conversations. Proceedings of the Workshop on Embodied Language Processing, 17–24.
Kendon, A. (1967). Some functions of gaze-direction in social interaction. Acta Psychologica, 26, 22–63.
Kendon, A. (1990). Conducting interaction: Patterns of behavior in focused encounters. Cambridge University Press.
Kendon, A. (1995). Gestures as illocutionary and discourse structure markers in Southern Italian conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 23(3), 247–279.
Kendon, A. (2004). Gesture: Visible action as utterance (Cambridge University Press). Cambridge University Press.
Kita, S. (1993). Language and thought interface: A study of spontaneous gestures and Japanese mimetics. University of Chicago.
Lambertz, K. (2011). Back-channelling: The use of yeah and mm to portray engaged listenership. Griffith Working Papers in Pragmatics and Intercultural Communication, 4(1/2), 11–18.
Lepeut, A. (2022). When hands stop moving, interaction keeps going: A study of manual holds in the management of conversation in French-speaking and signing Belgium. Languages in Contrast.
Linell, P. (2009). Rethinking Language, Mind, and World dialogically: Interactional and Contextual Theories of Human Sense-Making. Information Age Publishing.
Loots, G., & Devise, I. (2003). An intersubjective developmental perspective on interactions between deaf and hearing mothers and their deaf infants. American Annals of the Deaf, 148(4), 295–307.
Manrique, E. (2016). Other-initiated Repair in Argentine Sign Language. Open Linguistics, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2016-0001
Manrique, E., & Enfield, N. J. (2015). Suspending the next turn as a form of repair initiation: Evidence from Argentine Sign Language. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(1326), 1–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01326
Mather, S. (1996). Initiation in visually constructed dialogue. Multicultural Aspects of Sociolinguistics in Deaf Communities, 109–131.
McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. University of Chicago press.
McKee, R., & Wallingford, S. (2011). ‘So, well, whatever’: Discourse functions of palm-up in New Zealand Sign Language. Sign Language & Linguistics, 14(2), 213–247. https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.14.2.01mck
Mesch, J. (2016). Manual backchannel responses in signers’ conversations in Swedish Sign Language. Language & Communication, 50, 22–41.
Mondada, L. (2007). Multimodal resources for turn-taking: Pointing and the emergence of possible next speakers. Discourse Studies, 9(2), 194–225.
Mondada, L. (2008). Production du savoir et interactions multimodales. Revue d’anthropologie Des Connaissances, 2(2), 219–266.
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.
Mondada, L. (2019). Contemporary issues in conversation analysis: Embodiment and materiality, multimodality and multisensoriality in social interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 145, 47–62.
Mondada, L., Bouaouina, S. A., Camus, L., Gauthier, G., Svensson, H., & Tekin, B. S. (2021). The local and filmed accountability of sensorial practices: The intersubjectivity of touch as an interactional achievement. Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 4(3), 30.
Morgenstern, A. (2014). Children’s multimodal language development. Manual of Language Acquisition, 123–142.
Morgenstern, A. (2022). Children’s multimodal language development from an interactional, usage-based, and cognitive perspective. WIREs Cognitive Science, 14(2), e1631. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1631
Morgenstern, A., & Boutet, D. (2024). The Orchestration of Bodies and Artifacts in French Family Dinners. In T. Breyer, A. M. Gerner, N. Grouls, & J. F. M. Schick (Eds.), Diachronic Perspectives on Embodiment and Technology (Vol. 46, pp. 111–130). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-50085-5_8
Morgenstern, A., Caët, S., Debras, C., Beaupoil-Hourdel, P., & Le Mené, M. (2021). Children’s socialization to multi-party interactive practices. In L. Caronia (Ed.), Language and Social Interaction at Home and School (pp. 45–86). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Mortensen, K., & Hazel, S. (2024). The Temporal Organisation of Leaning in Social Interaction. Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 7(4).
Müller, F. E. (1996). Affiliating and disaffiliating with continuers: Prosodic aspects of recipiency. Prosody in Conversation: Interactional Studies, 12, 131.
Nevile, M., Haddington, P., Heinemann, T., & Rauniomaa, M. (2014). Interacting with objects: Language, materiality, and social activity. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Ochs, E. (2012). Experiencing language. Anthropological Theory, 12(2), 142-160.
Parisse, C., Blondel, M., Caet, S., Danet, C., De Pontonx S., & Morgenstern, A. (2023) Création et codage d’un corpus multimodal de repas familiaux. In Journées de Linguistique de Corpus. 3-7 July 2023. Grenoble, France.
Schegloff, E. A. (1982). Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of ‘uh huh’and other things that come between sentences. Analyzing Discourse: Text and Talk, 71, 93.
Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53(2), 361–382.
Sikveland, R. O., & Ogden, R. (2012). Holding gestures across turns: Moments to generate shared understanding. Gesture, 12(2), 166–199.
Slobin, D. (1987). Thinking for speaking. Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 435-445.
Stivers, T., & Rossano, F. (2010). Mobilizing Response. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 43(1), 3–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810903471258
Streeck, J. (2009). Gesturecraft: The manu-facture of meaning (Vol. 2). John Benjamins Publishing.
Streeck, J., Goodwin, C., & LeBaron, C. (2011). Embodied interaction: Language and body in the material world. Cambridge University Press.
Streeck, J., & Hartge, U. (1992). Gestures at the transition place. In P. Auer & A. Di Luzio (Eds.), The contextualization of language(pp. 135–157). John Benjamins Publishing.
Tapio, E. (2018). Focal social actions through which space is configured and reconfigured when orienting to a Finnish Sign Language class. Linguistics and Education, 44, 69–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2017.10.006
Terrell, A., & Mutlu, B. (2012). A regression-based approach to modeling addressee backchannels. Proceedings of the 13th Annual Meeting of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue, 280–289. https://aclanthology.org/W12-1639.pdf
Thompson, S. A., & Suzuki, R. (2014). Reenactments in conversation: Gaze and recipiency. Discourse Studies, 16(6), 816–846.
Xudong, D. (2009). Listener response. The Pragmatics of Interaction, 4, 104.
Yamaguchi, T., Inoue, K., Yoshino, K., Takanashi, K., Ward, N. G., & Kawahara, T. (2016). Analysis and prediction of morphological patterns of backchannels for attentive listening agents. Proc. 7th International Workshop on Spoken Dialogue Systems, 1–12.
Yngve, V. H. (1970). On getting a word in edgewise. Papers from the Sixth Regional Meeting Chicago Linguistic Society, April 16-18, 1970, Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago, 567–578.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 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.
