Bodily-Visual Practices and Turn Continuation
Open accessAbstract
This paper considers points in turn construction where conversation researchers have shown that talk routinely continues beyond possible turn completion, but where we find bodily-visual behavior doing such turn extension work. The bodily-visual behaviors we examine share many features with verbal turn extensions, but we argue that embodied movements have distinct properties that make them well-suited for specific kinds of social action, including stance display and by-play in sequences framed as subsidiary to a simultaneous and related verbal exchange. Our study is in line with a research agenda taking seriously the point made by Goodwin (2000a, b, 2003), Hayashi (2003, 2005), Iwasaki (2009), and others that scholars seeking to account for practices in language and social interaction do themselves a disservice if they privilege the verbal dimension; rather, as suggested in Stivers/Sidnell (2005), each semiotic system/modality, while coordinated with others, has its own organization. With the current exploration of bodily-visual turn extensions, we hope to contribute to a growing understanding of how these different modes of organization are managed concurrently and in concert by interactants in carrying out their everyday social actions.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Previous studies (Ford et al., 2012; Lee, 2017; Li, 2014) endorsed gaze and vocative nomination for allocating turns in classroom interactions.
“This finding is in line previous studies (e.g., Ford et al., 2012;Lee, 2017;Li, 2014) that endorsed these two techniques for allocating the turn to others in classroom interactions.”
From A Multisemiotic Investigation of Iranian EFL Teachers’ Turn-allocation Strategies in their Classroom Interactions (2022) · cites this paper as Ford et al., 2012
Section 2.0 identifies gaze as a nonverbal resource in talk-in-interaction, and the Conclusion discusses bodily-visual practices in managing turns. Our copy does not support the more specific attribution that Ford et al. endorsed both gaze and vocative nomination for allocating turns in classroom interactions; no page numbers are provided for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 23
- Couper-Kuhlen E Selting M 1996 Prosody in conversation Cambridge Cambridge University Press
- Davidson J 1984 Subsequent versions of invitations, offers, requests, and proposals dealing with potential or actual rejection Atkinson JM Heritage J Structures of social action 102 28 Cambridge Cambridge University Press
- Ekman P 1976 Movements with Precise Meanings Journal of Communication 26 3 14 26
- Ford CE 1993 Grammar in interaction: Adverbial clauses in American English conversations Cambridge Cambridge University Press 2007 paperback reissue
- Ford CE 2008 Women speaking up: getting and using turns in workplace meetings Houndsmills and New York Palgrave MacMillan
- Ford CE Fox BA Thompson SA 2002 Constituency and the grammar of turn increments Ford CE Fox BA Thompson SA The language of turn and sequence 14 38 Oxford Oxford University Press
- Ford CE Thompson SA 1996 Interactional units in conversation: Syntactic, intonational, and pragmatic resources for the management of turns Ochs E Schegloff EA Thompson SA Interaction and Grammar 134 184 Cambridge Cambridge University Press
- Goffman E 1981 Forms of talk Philadelphia University of Pennsylvania Press
- Goodwin C 2000a Action and embodiment within situated human interaction Journal of Pragmatics 32 10 1489 1522 look up issue in volume
- Goodwin C 2003 The Body in Action Coupland J Gwyn R Discourse, the body and identity 19 42 New York Palgrave/Macmillan
- Goodwin C 2007 Interactive footing Holt E Clift R Reporting talk: reported speech in interaction 16 46 Cambridge Cambridge University Press
- Heritage J 1984 A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement Atkinson JM Heritage J Structures of social action 299 345 Cambridge Cambridge University Press
- Heritage J 2002 The limits of questioning: Negative interrogatives and hostile question content Journal of Pragmatics 34 10/11 1427 1446
- Kendon A 1990 Conducting interaction: Patterns of behavior in focused encounters Cambridge Cambridge University Press
- Labov W Fanshel D 1977 Therapeutic discourse New York Academic Press
- Lerner GH 1989 Notes on overlap management in conversation: the case of delayed completion Western Journal of Speech Communication 53 2 167 177
- Lerner GH 1996 On the ‘semi-permeable’ character of grammatical units in conversation: conditional entry into the turn space of another speaker Ochs E Schegloff EA Thompson SA Interaction and grammar 238 271 Cambridge Cambridge University Press
- Lerner GH 2002 Turn-sharing: the choral co-production of talk-in-interaction Ford CE Fox BA Thompson SA The language of turn and sequence 225 256 Oxford Oxford University Press
- Pomerantz A 1984 Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes Atkinson JM Heritage J Structures of social action 57 101 Cambridge Cambridge University Press
- Rossano F 2006 When the eyes meet: Using gaze to mobilize response Paper delivered at the International Conference on Conversation Analysis Helsinki, Finland
- Sacks H 1995 Lectures on Conversation Oxford Blackwell
- Schegloff EA 1984 On some gestures’ relation to talk Atkinson JM Heritage J Structures of social action 266 296 Cambridge Cambridge University Press
- Selting M 1996 Prosody as an activity-type distinctive cue in conversation: The case of so-called ‘astonished’ questions in repair initiation Couper-Kuhlen E Selting M Prosody in conversation 231 270 Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ghiasvand, F., & PhD Candidate of Applied Linguistics, A. T. U. (2022) · Language Related Research · doi:10.52547/lrr.13.3.17 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
- Authors
- Ford, C. E., Thompson, S. A., & Drake, V.
- Affiliations
- University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
- University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
- Venue
- Discourse Processes
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2012-05-23
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 3-4
- Pages
- 192-212
- ISSN
- 0163-853X (ISSN-L)
- 1532-6950
- PMC
- PMC3601773
- OpenAlex
- W1999349997
- Cited by
- 83
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 40.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Discourse Processes (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health
- National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM088477)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Linguistics and Discourse Analysis
- Keywords
- turn construction, embodied interaction, multimodality, social interaction, sign systems
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
