Longitudinal change in linguistic resources for interaction
The case of tu vois (‘you see’) in L2 French
This article presents a longitudinal study of a second language (L2) French speaker’s (Aurelia)
use of the construction tu vois (‘you see’) over 15 months. Research on first language (L1)
French has shown that tu vois has been subject to grammaticalization, whereby the
construction in spoken language frequently serves as a discourse marker rather than a complement-taking
predicate construction expressing visual perception. Drawing on longitudinal Conversation Analysis, I
qualitatively and quantitatively analyze Aurelia’s use of tu vois in relation to its
turn position and interactional purposes. I document a similar change happening in Aurelia’s use of the
construction over time as what has been observed in L1 French: While she initially deploys tu
vois exclusively in its ‘literal’ sense of visual perception and with a complement
(tu vois X, ‘you see X’), she eventually starts using it as a semantically bleached
discourse marker for interaction-organizational and interpersonal purposes. A few ‘hybrid’ cases demonstrate
the progressive nature of this change, and indicate further similarities between L2 acquisition and L1
grammaticalization processes. I discuss possible reasons for the documented change and address implications of
the findings for research on both the development of L2 grammar-for-interaction and language change more
generally.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Grammaticalization of tu vois (‘you see’) and other complement-taking predicate constructions
- 3.The acquisition and changing use of linguistic resources for interaction in the L2
- 4.Data and method
- 5.Analysis
- 5.1Overall tendencies: From low-frequency predicate construction to high-frequency DM
-
Turn/TCU-final tu vois
-
Turn/TCU-initial tu vois
-
TCU-medial tu vois
-
Free-standing tu vois
- Quantitative distribution
- 5.2Hybrid cases: Grammaticalization-in-progress?
- 6.Discussion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
-
References
References (57)
References
Andersen, H. L. (1997). Propositions parenthétiques et subordination en français parlé. Dissertation, University of Copenhagen.
Andersen, H. L. (2007). Marqueurs discursifs propositionnels. Langue Française,
154
1, 13–28. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Asmuß, B. (2011). Proposing shared knowledge as a means of pursuing agreement. In T. Stivers, L. Mondada & J. Steensig (Eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation, (205–234). Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Auer, P. (2020). Genau! Der auto-reflexive Dialog als Motor der Entwicklung von Diskursmarkern. In B. Weidner, K. König, W. Imo & L. Wegner (Eds.), Verfestigungen in der Interaktion: Konstruktionen, sequenzielle Muster, kommunikative Gattungen (pp. 263–294). De Gruyter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Auer, P., & Günthner, S. (2005). Die Entstehung von Diskursmarkern im Deutschen – ein Fall von Grammatikalisierung?. In T. Leuschner, T. Mortelmans & S. De Groodt (Eds.), Grammatikalisierung im Deutschen (pp. 335–362). De Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bolly, C. (2010). Pragmaticalisation du marqueur discursif tu vois. De la perception à l’évidence et de l’évidence au discours. In F. Neveu, V. Muni-Toké, J. Durand, T. Klingler, L. Mondada & S. Prévost (Eds.), Proceedings of the Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française – CMLF 2010 (Discours, pragmatique et interaction) (pp. 673–693). Paris: Institut de Linguistique Française. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bolly, C. (2012). Du verbe de perception visuelle au marqueur parenthétique ‘tu vois’: Grammaticalisation et changement linguistique. French Languange Studies,
22
1, 143–164. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bybee, J. L. (2011). Usage-based theory and grammaticalization. In B. Heine & H. Narrog (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization (2011; online ed., Oxford Academic, 18 Sept. 2012), ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cappeau, P. (2004). Les sujets de deuxième personne à l’oral. Langage et société,
108
1, 75–90. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Clayman, S. E., & Raymond, C. W. (2021).
You know as invoking alignment: A generic resource for emerging problems of understanding and affiliation. Journal of Pragmatics,
182
1, 293–309. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Deppermann, A., & Pekarek Doehler, S. (2021). Longitudinal conversation analysis – Introduction to the special issue. Research on Language and Social Interaction,
54
(2), 127–141. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Détrie, C. (2010). De voir à tu vois/vous voyez : fonction sémantico-énonciative et postures énonciatives construites par ces particules interpersonnelles. In F. Neveu, V. Muni-Toké, J. Durand, T. Klingler, L. Mondada & S. Prévost (Eds.), Proceedings of the Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française – CMLF 2010 (Discours, pragmatique et interaction) (pp. 755–766). ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Diewald, G. (2011). Grammaticalization and pragmaticalization. In B. Heine & H. Narrog (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization (2011; online ed., Oxford Academic, 18 Sept. 2012), ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Diessel, H. (2011). Grammaticalization and language acquisition. In: B. Heine & H. Narrog (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization (2011; online ed., Oxford Academic, 18 Sept. 2012), ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Eskildsen, S. W. (2011). The L2 inventory in action: Usage-based linguistics and conversation analysis in second language acquisition. In G. Pallotti & J. Wagner (Eds.), Learning as social practice: Conversation-analytic perspectives (pp. 327–364). National Foreign Language Resource Center.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Eskildsen, S. W. (2012). L2 negation constructions at work. Language Learning,
62
1, 335–372. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Eskildsen, S. W. (2018). L2 constructions and interactional competence: Subordination and coordination in English L2 learning. In A. Tyler, L. Huang, & H. Jan (Eds.), What is applied cognitive linguistics? Answers from current SLA research (pp. 61–96). Mouton de Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Eskildsen, S. W. (2020). Creativity and routinisation in L2 English – two usage-based case-studies. In W. Lowie, M. Michel, A. Rousse-Malpat, M. Keijzer & R. Steinkrauss (Eds), Usage-based dynamics in second language development (pp. 107–129). Multilingual Matters.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fielder, S. (2020). Tu sais (’you know’) and t’sais (’y’know’) in spoken French. Travaux Neuchâtelois de Linguistique, (72), 1–29. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Giacalone Ramat, A. (1992). Grammaticalization processes in the area of temporal and modal relations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition
14
(3), 293–322.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goffman, E. (1978). Response cries. Language,
54
(4), 787–815. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goodwin, C. (2009). Things, bodies, and language. In B. Fraser & K. Turner (Eds.), Language in life, and a life in language: Jacob Mey – A Festschrift (pp. 105–109). Emerald. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hopper, P. J., & Traugott, E. C. (2003). Grammaticalization (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ishida, M. (2009). Development of interactional competence: Changes in the use of ne in L2 Japanese during study abroad. In H. T. Nguyen & G. Kasper (Eds.), Talk-in interaction: Multilingual perspectives (pp. 351–386). University of Hawai‘i.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kärkkäinen, E. (2003). Epistemic stance in English conversation. A description of its interactional functions, with a focus on ‘I think’. John Benjamins.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Keevallik, L., & Amon, M. (in press). Seeing is believing: The multisensorial emergence of the Estonian näed ‘you see’ as an evidential. Interactional Linguistics.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kim, Y. (2009). Korean discourse markers in L2 Korean speakers’ conversation: An acquisitional perspective. In H. T. Nguyen & G. Kasper (Eds.), Talk-in-interaction: Multilingual perspectives (pp. 317–350). National Foreign Language Resource Center.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lindström, J., Maschler, Y., & Pekarek Doehler, S. (Eds.) (2016). Grammar and negative epistemics in talk-in-interaction: Cross-linguistic studies. Special Issue of Journal of Pragmatics,
106
1.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Labov, W. (1994). Principles of linguistic change. Volume 1: Internal Factors. Blackwell.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2015). Complexity theory. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 227–244). Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Markee, N. (1997). Managing curricular innovation. Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mondada, L. (2004). Marqueurs linguistiques et dynamiques discursives : le role des verbes de perception visuelle et de la spatialité dans la gestion du topic. In J. Fernandez-Vest & S. Carter-Thomas (Eds.), Structure informationnelle et particules énonciatives: essai de typologie (pp. 101–126). L’Harmattan.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Olsher, D. (2004). Talk and gesture: The embodied completion of sequential actions in spoken interaction. In R. Gardner & J. Wagner (Eds.), Second language conversations (pp. 221–245). Continuum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pekarek Doehler, S. (2018). Elaborations on L2 interactional competence: The development of L2 grammar-for-interaction. Classroom Discourse,
9
1, 3–24. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pekarek Doehler, S. (2021). How grammar grows out of social interaction: From multi-unit to single-unit question. Open Linguistics,
7
(1), 837–864. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pekarek Doehler, S. (2022). Multimodal action formats for managing preference: chais pas ‘dunno’plus gaze conduct in dispreferred responses to questions. Journal of Pragmatics,
197
1, 81–99. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pekarek Doehler, S. (in press). How grammar-for-interaction emerges over time: Evidence from second language talk. In M. Selting & D. Barth-Weingarten (Eds.), New perspectives in interactional linguistic research. John Benjamins.
Pekarek Doehler, S., & Balaman, U. (2021). The routinization of grammar as a social action format: A longitudinal study of video-mediated interactions. Research on Language and Social Interaction,
54
1, 283–202. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pekarek Doehler, S., & Berger, E. (2018). L2 interactional competence as increased ability for context-sensitive conduct: A longitudinal study of story-openings. Applied Linguistics,
39
1, 555–578.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pekarek Doehler, S., & Berger, E. (2019). On the reflexive relation between developing L2 interactional competence and evolving social relationships: A longitudinal study of word-searches in the ‘wild’. In J. Hellermann, S. W. 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. 51–75). Springer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pekarek Doehler, S., & Skogmyr Marian, K. (2022). Functional diversification and progressive routinization of a multiword expression in and for social interaction: A longitudinal L2 study. The Modern Language Journal,
106
(S1), 23–45. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pekarek Doehler, S., & Thörle, B. (in press). Discourse markers in second language acquisition. In M.-B. Mosegaard Hansen & J. Visconti (Eds.), Discourse markers in Romance. De Gruyter.
Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 57–101). Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Raumolin-Brunberg, H., & Nurmi, A. (2011). Grammaticalization and language change in the individual. In B. Heine & H. Narrog (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization (2011; online ed., Oxford Academic, 18 Sept. 2012), ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Reaves, A. (2023). Discourse markers in second language French. Routledge. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. (5. ed.). Free press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schirm, S. K. (2022). L2 discourse markers and the development of interactional competence during study abroad. Dissertation, University of Waterloo.
Skogmyr Marian, K. (2021). Assessing without words: Verbally incomplete utterances in complaints. Frontiers in Psychology. 121:689443. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Skogmyr Marian, K. (2022). The development of L2 interactional competence: A multimodal study of complaining in French interactions. Routledge. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Stivers, T., & Robinson, J. (2006). A preference for progressivity in interaction. Language in Society,
35
(3), 367–392. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Stivers, T., & Rossano, F. (2010). Mobilizing response. Research on Language and Social Interaction,
43
1, 3–31. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Stoenica, I. M., & Fiedler, S. (2021). Multimodal practice for mobilizing response: The case of turn-final tu vois ‘you see’ in French talk-in-interaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 121:659340. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Streeck, J. (2009). Forward-gesturing. Discourse Processes,
46
(2–3), 161–179. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)