Cover not available
Part of
Communicating Certainty and Uncertainty in Medical, Supportive and Scientific Contexts
Edited by Andrzej Zuczkowski, Ramona Bongelli, Ilaria Riccioni and Carla Canestrari
[Dialogue Studies 25] 2014
► pp. 223–246

Embodying epistemicity

Negotiating (un)certainty through semiotic objects

 | University of Perugia, Italy
 | Key & Key Communications, Italy
 | University of Perugia, Italy
The present paper analyses a corpus of bureaucratic-institutional interactions between migrants and civil servants, in order to investigate the role of objects in negotiating the certainty of information. During the encounters, documents are employed as means to provide and assess information; furthermore, the encounters produce a final artifact (e.g., a filled form), which constitutes the basis for providing a public service. Such objects are both related to, and constitutive of, the activities performed: they are “called into existence” by the interactants, within the temporal development and spatial arrangement of the interaction. Building on data collected within two European Grundtvig projects, the paper takes into account the semiotic resources deployed by the interactants for dealing with the objects, the patterns of actions in which objects are involved their relevance for negotiating the certainty of information.
Published online: 26 November 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.25.11kle
References (60)
References
Arminem, Ikka. 2005. Institutional Interaction: Studies of Talk at Work. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Atkinson, John M., and John Heritage (eds). 1984. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University.Google Scholar
Blommaert, Jan. 2013. “Semiotic and Spatial Scope: Towards a Materialist Semiotics.” In Multimodality and Social Semiosis. Communciation, Meaning-Making, and Learning in the Work of Gunther Kress, ed. by Norbert Pachler, and Margit Boeck, 29–38. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Brassac, Christian, Pierre Fixmer, Lorenza Mondada, and Dominique Vinck. 2008. “Interweaving Objects, Gestures, and Talk in Context.” Mind, Culture and Activity: An International Journal 15 (2): 208–233. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bruxelles, Sylvie, Luca Greco, and Lorenza Mondada. 2009. “Pratiques de Transition: Ressources multimodales pour la structuration de l’activité.” In Méthodologies d’analyse de situations coopératives de conception: Corpus Mosaic, ed. by François Détienne, and Véronique Traverso, 221–302. Nancy: PUN.Google Scholar
Collins, James. 1987. “Conversation and Knowledge in Bureaucratic Settings”. In“Discourse as Organizational Process”, Special Issue of Discourse Processes 10 (4): 303–319. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul. 2006. “When Documents ‘Speak’: Documents, Language and Interaction.” In Talk and Interaction in Social Research Methods, ed. by Paul Drew, Geoffrey Raymond, and 
Darin Weinberg, 63–80. London: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul, and John Heritage (eds.). 1992. Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fasulo, Alessandra, and Chiara Monzoni. 2009. “Assessing Mutable Objects: A Multimodal Analysis.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 42 (4): 36–376. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James J. 1979. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Glenn, Philipp, and Curtis LeBaron. 2011. “Epistemic Authority in Employment Interviews: Glancing, Pointing, Touching.” Discourse & Communication 5 (1): 3–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles. 1979. “The Interactive Construction of a Sentence in Natural Conversation.” In Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. by George Psathas, 97–121. New York, NY: Irvington Publishers.Google Scholar
. 2000. “Action and Embodiment within Situated Human Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 32: 1489–1522. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. “The Body in Action.” In Discourse, the Body and Identity, ed. by 
Justine Coupland, and Richard Gwyn, 19–42. New York, NY: Palgrave/Macmillan.Google Scholar
. 2013. “The Co-operative, Transformative Organization of Human Action and Knowledge.” Journal of Pragmatics 46 (1): 8–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haddington, Pentti. 2006. “The Organization of Gaze and Assessments as Resources for Stance Taking.” Text & Talk 26 (3): 281–328. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heath, Christian. 1986. Body Movement and Speech in Medical Interaction. Cambridge: 
Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. “Embodied Action and Organisational Interaction: Establishing Contract on the Strike of a Hammer.” Journal of Pragmatics 46 (1): 24–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John. 1984. “A Change-of-state Token and Aspects of its Sequential Placement.” In Structures of Social Action, ed. by John Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 299–345. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2004. “Conversation Analysis and Institutional Talk.” In Handbook of Language and Social Interaction, ed. by Robert Sanders, and Kristine Fitch, 103–147. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
. 2012a. “Epistemics in Action: Action Formation and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012b. “The Epistemic Engine: Sequence Organization and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 30–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John, and Stephen Clayman. 2010. Talk in Action. Interactions, Identities and Institutions. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Heritage, John, and Geoffrey Raymond. 2005. “The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Assessment Sequences.” Social Psychology Quarterly 68 (1): 15–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hodge, Robert, and Gunther Kress. 1988. Social Semiotics. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Hull, Matthew. 2003. “The File: Agency, Authority, and Autography in a Pakistan Bureaucracy.” Language and Communication 23 (3-4): 287–314. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012a. “Documents and Bureaucracy.” Annual Review of Anthropology 41: 251–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012b. Government of Paper: The Materiality of Bureaucracy in Urban Pakistan. Oakland: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Jenkins, K. Neil, and Nick Barber. 2006. “Same Evidence, Different Meanings: Transformation of Textual Evidence in Hospital New Drugs Committees.” Text and Talk 26 (2): 169–189. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kärkkäinen, Elise. 2003. Epistemic Stance in English Conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keisanen, Tiina. 2007. “Stancetaking as an Interactional Activity: Challenging the Prior Speaker.” In Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction, ed. by Robert 
Englebretson, 253–281. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kress, Gunther, and Theo Van Leeuwen. 1996. Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2001. Multimodal Discourse: The Modes and Media of Contemporary Communication. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno. 1987. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lerner, Gene. 2004. Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luff, Paul, John Hindmarsh, and Christian Heath. 2000. Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Informing System Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Milburn, Trudy. 2009. Nonprofit Organizations: Creating Membership Through Communication. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
Mondada, Lorenza. 2006. “Video Recording as the Reflexive Preservation-configuration of Phenomenal Features for Analysis.” In Video Analysis, ed. by Hubert Knoblauch, 51–68. Bern: Lang.Google Scholar
. 2007. “Transcript Variations and the Indexicality of Transcribing Practices.” Discourse Studies 9 (6): 809–821. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. “Emergent Focused Interactions in Public Places: A Systematic Analysis of the Multimodal Achievement of a Common Interactional Space.” Journal of Pragmatics 41: 1977–1997. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. “The Organization of Concurrent Courses of Action in Surgical Demonstrations.” In Embodied Interaction: Language and Body in the Material World, ed. by Jurgen Streeck, Charles Goodwin, and Curtis LeBaron, 207–226. Cambridge: 
Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2012. “Video Analysis and the Temporality of Inscriptions within Social Interaction: The Case of Architects at Work.” Qualitative Research 12 (3): 304–333. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, Mie Femö. 2012. “Using Artifacts in Brainstorming Sessions to Secure Participation and Decouple Sequentiality.” Discourse Studies 14 (1): 87–109. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norris, Sigrid. 2004. Analyzing Multimodal Interaction: A Methodological Framework. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Norris, Sigrid, and Rodney H. Jones. 2005. Discourse in Action: Introducing Mediated Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ochs, Elinor. 1996. “Linguistic Resources for Socializing Humanity.” In Rethinking Linguistic Relativity, ed. by John Gumperz, and Stephen Levinson, 407–437. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey, and John Heritage. 2006. “The Epistemics of Social Relations: Owning Grandchildren.” Language in Society 35: 677–705. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sarangi, Sikrat, and Stefaan Slembrouck. 1996. Language, Bureaucracy and Social Control. 
London: Longman.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel. 2007. Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scollon, Ron. 2001. Mediated Discourse. The Nexus of Practice. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Scollon, Ron, and Suzie Wong Scollon. 2004. Discourses in Place: Language in the Material World. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, Lorenza Mondada, and Jakob Steensig. 2011. The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logo
Stivers, Tanya, and Jack Sidnell. 2005. Multimodal Interaction. Special issue of Semiotica 156 (1/4).Google Scholar
Svinhufvud, Kimmo, and Sanna Vehviläinen. 2013. “Papers, Documents, and the Opening of an Academic Supervision Encounter.” Text & Talk 33 (1): 139–166.Google Scholar
Philips, Susan. 1987. “The Social Organization of Knowledge and its Consequences for Discourse in Bureaucratic Settings.”In “Discourse as Organizational Process”, Special Issue of Discourse Processes 10 (4): 429–433. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1992. Lectures on Conversation. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Streeck, Jürgen. 1996. “How to Do Things with Things.” Human Studies 19: 365–384. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. “Interaction and the Living Body.” Journal of Pragmatics 46 (1): 69–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Streeck, Jürgen, Charles Goodwin, and Curtis LeBaron. 2011. Embodied Interaction. Language and Body in the Material World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Streeck, Jürgen, and Werner Kallmeyer. 2001. “Interaction by Inscription.” Journal of Pragmatics 33 (4): 465–490. DOI logoGoogle Scholar