Like many other languages, but unlike modern (standard) English, German has a distinct second person plural pronoun
(ihr, ‘you guys’), contrasting with the second person singular pronoun (du). The second person plural
pronoun addresses a turn to more than one, and possibly all co-present participants. This paper investigates turn-taking after such multiply
addressed turns, taking as an example information-seeking questions, i.e., a sequential context in which a specific next action is relevant
in the adjacent position. It might appear that in such a context, self-selection applies (Schegloff
1992: 122); more than one co-participant is addressed, but none selected as next speaker. In this paper, I show on the basis of
spontaneous interactions recorded with mobile eye-tracking equipment that this is not the case and that TCU-final gaze is employed to select
the next speaker. The participant not being gazed at TCU-finally is addressed, but not selected as the answerer in next position and may
provide an answer in a sequential position after the first answer. The article demonstrates that gaze is an efficient way to allocate turns
in the absence of verbal cues and thus contributes to our understanding of turn-taking from a multimodal perspective.
Auer, P. (2021). Turn-allocation and gaze: A multimodal revision of the ‘current-speaker-selects-next’ rule of the turn-taking system of conversation analysis. Discourse Studies,
23
(2), 117–140.
Auer, P. & Lindström, J. (to appear). On agency and affiliation in second assessments. German and Swedish opinion verbs in talk-in-interaction. In J. Lindström, R. Lauri, A. Peräkylä & M.-L. Sorjonen (Eds.), Intersubjectivity in Action. Amsterdam: Benjamins (Pragmatics & Beyond, N.S.).
Blythe, J., Garnder, R., Mushin, I. & Sterling, L. (2018). Tools of engagement: Selecting a next speaker in Australian aboriginal multiparty conversations. Research on Language and Social Interaction51
(2), 145–170.
Brône, G., Oben, B., Jehoul, A., Vranjes, J. & Feyaerts, K. (2017). Eye gaze and viewpoint in multimodal interaction management. Cognitive Linguistics28
(3).
Clayman, Steven E.2010. Address terms in the service of other actions: The case of news interview talk. Discourse & Communication 4(2), 161–183.
Clayman, Steven E.2012. Address terms in the organization of turns at talk: The case of pivotal turn extensions, Journal of Pragmatics, vol. 44, no. 13, 1853–1867.
Couper-Kuhlen, E. & Barth-Weingarten, D. (2011). A system for transcribing talk-in-interaction: GAT 2 translated and adapted for English. Gesprächsforschung – Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion12
1, 1–51 ([URL])
Deppermann, A. & Helmer, H. (2013). Zur Grammatik des Verstehens im Gespräch: Inferenzen anzeigen und Handlungskonsequenzen ziehen mit „also“ und „dann“. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft32
(1), 1–40.
Duncan, S. (1975). Interaction units during speaking turns in dyadic, face-to-face conversations. In A. Kendon, R. M. Harris & M. R. Key (Eds.), Organization of Behavior in Face-to-Face Interaction (pp. 199–212). The Hague: Mouton.
Ehlich, K. & Rehbein, J. (1982). Augenkommunikation. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Günthner, S. (2000). Form concessive connector to discourse marker: The use of obwohl in everyday German interaction. In E. Couper-Kuhlen & B. Kortmann (Eds.), Cause, Condition, Concession, Contrast. Cognitive and Discourse Perspectives (pp. 439–468). Berlin, New York: de Gruyter.
Günthner, S. (2016). Praktiken erhöhter Dialogizität: onymische Anredeformen als Gesten personifizierter Zuwendung. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik44
(4), 406–436.
Günthner, S. (2019). Namentliche Anreden in onkologischen Aufklärungsgesprächen: eine interaktional ausgerichtete Studie zu Formen und Funktionen onymischer Anreden. Online: [URL]. (retrieved May 26, 2020).
Hayashi, M., Mori, J. & Tagaki, T. (2002). Contingent achievement of co-tellership in a Japanese conversation: An analysis of talk, gaze and gesture. In C. Ford, B. A. Fox & S. Thompson (Eds.), The Language of Turn and Sequence (pp. 81–122). New York: Oxford University Press.
Heritage, J. (2012). Epistemics in action: action formation and territories of knowledge. Reseach on Language and Social Interaction,
45
(1), 1–29.
Holler, J. & Kendrick, K. (2015). Unaddressed participants’ gaze in multi-person interaction: Optimizing recipiency. Frontiers in Psychology,
6
(98).
Kendon, A. (1967). Some functions of gaze direction in social interaction. Acta Psychologica26
1, 22–63.
Kendon, A. (1990). Conducting Interaction: Patterns of Behavior in Focused Encounters. Cambridge: CUP.
Lerner, G. H. (1992). Assisted storytelling: Deploying shared knowledge as a practical matter. Qualitative Sociology15
(3), 247–271.
Lerner, G. H. (2003). Selecting next speaker: The context sensitive operation of a context-free organization. Language in Society32
1, 177–201.
Link, G. (1991). Plurals. In A. von Stechow & D. Wunderlich (Eds.), Semantik: Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung (pp. 418–440). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Levinson, S. (2016). Turn-taking in human communication – origins and implications for language processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences20
(1), 6–14.
Mondada, L. (2019). Conventions for multimodal transcription. ([URL])
Raymond, G. T. (2003). Grammar and social organzation: Yes/no interrogatives and the structure of responding. American Sociological Review68
(6), 939–976.
Robinson, J. D. (2020). Revisiting preference organization in context: A qualitative and quantitative examination of responses to information seeking. Research on Language and Social Interaction53
(2), 197–222.
Rossano, F. (2012). Gaze behavior in face-to-face interaction. Unpublished PhD, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen.
Rossano, F., Brown, P. & Levinson, S. C. (2009). Gaze, questioning and culture. In J. Sidnell (Ed.), Conversation Analysis: Comparative Perspectives (pp. 187–249). Cambridge: CUP.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A. & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking for conversation. Language50
(4), 696–735.
Schegloff, E. A. (1968). Sequencing in Conversational openings. American Anthropologist70
(6), 1075–1095.
Schegloff, E. A. (1992). To Searle on conversation: A note in return. In H. Parret & J. Verschueren (Eds.), (On) Searle on Conversation (pp. 113–128), Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Selting, M., et al. (2009). Gesprächsanalytisches Transkriptionssystem 2 (GAT2). Gesprächsforschung – Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion10
1, 353–401. ([URL]).
Stivers, T. (2021). Is conversation built for two? The partitioning of social interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction54
(1), 1–19.
Stivers, T. & Rossano, F. (2010). Mobilizing response. Research on Language and Social Interaction43
(1), 3–31.
Stukenbrock, A. (2018a). Blickpraktiken von SprecherInnen und AdressatInnen bei der Lokaldeixis. Mobile Eye Tracking-Analysen zur Herstellung von joint attention. Gesprächsforschung – Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion19
1, 132–168. ([URL])
Stukenbrock, A. (2020). Deixis, meta-perceptive gaze practices, and the interactive achievement of joint attention. Frontiers in Psychology11
1(1779).
Stukenbrock, A. & Dao, A. N. (2019). Joint attention in passing: What dual mobile eye tracking reveals about gaze in coordinating embodied activities at a market. In Elisabeth Reber & Cornelia Gerhardt (Eds.), Embodied Activities in Face-to-Face and Mediated Settings (pp. 177–216). London etc.: Palgrave Macmillan.
Tiitinen, S. & Ruusovuori, J. (2012). Engaging parents through gaze: Speaker selection in three-party interactions in maternity clinics. Patient Education and Counseling89
(1), 38–43.
Weiß, C. (2018). When gaze-selected next speakers do not take the turn. Journal of Pragmatics133
1, 28–44.
Weiß, C. (2019). Blickverhalten des nicht-blickselegierten Sprechers während Korrekturen und Elaborierungen. Gesprächsforschung – Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion20
1, 1–28. ([URL])
Weiß, C. (2020). Blick und Turn-Taking in Face-to-Face-Interaktionen. Multimodale Interaktionsanalysen triadischer Gesprächssituationen mit Hilfe von Eye-Tracking. Göttingen: Verlag für Gesprächsforschung. ([URL])
Wittenburg, P., Burgman, H., Russel, A., Klassmann, A., & Sloetjes, H. (2006). ELAN: A professional framework for multimodality research. Proc. 5th Intern. Conf. Lg. Resources and Evaluation (LREC).
Zima, E. (2018). Multimodale Mittel der Rederechtsaushandlung im gemeinsamen Erzählen. Gesprächsforschung – Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion18
1, 241–273. ([URL])
Cited by (4)
Cited by four other publications
Blythe, Joe, Fakry Hamdani & Scott Barnes
2024. Tactile engagement of prospective next speakers in Indonesian multiparty conversations. Language in Society 53:4 ► pp. 671 ff.
Rühlemann, Christoph
2024. Gaze alternation predicts inclusive next-speaker selection: evidence from eyetracking. Frontiers in Communication 9
Kendrick, Kobin H., Judith Holler & Stephen C. Levinson
2023. Turn-taking in human face-to-face interaction is multimodal: gaze direction and manual gestures aid the coordination of turn transitions. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 378:1875
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 november 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.