Cover not available
Article published In:
Pragmatics of Active Social Inclusion
Edited by Yoshiko Matsumoto and Heidi E. Hamilton
[Pragmatics and Society 15:1] 2024
► pp. 104–121
Section 2: Exploring inclusivity practices within activity-based interactions

On an even playing field of haiku making

An inclusive activity of creative verbal art

ORCID logo | Stanford University
| Stanford University
| Harvard University
| Georgia Institute of Technology
To help older adults living with cognitive impairments to engage in positive social interactions and maintain verbal creativity, intergenerational small-group sessions of haiku creation and appreciation activity were conducted online during the pandemic. Haiku, a short 17-syllable form of poetry originating in Japan, conveys simple yet emotive seasonal images free from the complexity or logical continuity required of prose. Accordingly, it offers anyone the challenge of an unfamiliar activity while minimizing impediment from linguistic and memory difficulties. The participants’ interactions during the activity and post-session interviews reveal that for both young and old, the haiku creation format facilitated self-expression and sharing of personal narratives. The key to meaningful interaction was the equal positioning of persons with and without cognitive impairments and their efforts to understand their interlocutor’s purpose and conversational direction. The study encourages further studies in pragmatics centered on affect-oriented communication.
Keywords: intergenerational communication, social inclusivity, verbal art, cognitive impairment, equal positioning, pragmatics of understanding
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background and structure of haiku activity sessions
    • 2.1Background
    • 2.2The structure of sessions
  • 3.Interactions during the haiku activity sessions
    • 3.1Inclusive interactions – Mutual inclusion
      • 3.1.1In haiku-focused interaction
      • 3.1.2In casual conversation-focused interactions
    • 3.2Unintended exclusion – Other inclusion
    • 3.3Discussion
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 18 December 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.23037.mat
References (30)
References
Ameka, Felix K., and Marina Terkourafi. 2019. “What If …? Imagining Non-Western Perspectives on Pragmatic Theory and Practice.” Journal of Pragmatics 1451: 72–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Backhaus, Peter. 2017. Care Communication: Making a Home in a Japanese Eldercare Facility. New York, NY: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coupland, Nikolas, Justine Coupland, and Howard Giles. 1991. Language, Society and the Elderly: Discourse, Identity and Ageing. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Coupland, Nikolas, Justine Coupland, Howard Giles, and Karen Henwood. 1988. “Accommodating the Elderly: Invoking and Extending a Theory.” Language in Society 171: 1–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cummings, Louise. 2017. “Clinical Pragmatics.” In The Oxford Handbook of Pragmatics, edited by Yan Huang, 346–361. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Davies, Bronwyn, and Rom Harré. 1990. “Positioning: The Discursive Production of Selves.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 20 (1): 43–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davis, Boyd H., ed. 2005. Alzheimer Talk, Text and Context: Enhancing Communication. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davis, Boyd H., and Jacqueline Guendouzi, eds. 2013. Pragmatics in Dementia Discourse. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Giles, H., Justine Coupland, and Nikolas Coupland. (Eds.), 1991. Contexts of accommodation: Developments in applied sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giles, Howard, Nikolas Coupland, Justine Coupland, Angie Williams, and Jon Nussbaum. 1992. “Intergenerational Talk and Communication with Older People.” International Journal of Aging and Human Development 34 (4): 271–297. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grice, Paul. 1975. “Logic and Conversation.” In Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, edited by Peter Cole, and Jerry L. Morgan, 41–58. New York, NY: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guendouzi, Jacqueline A., and Nicole Müller. 2006. Approaches to Discourse in Dementia. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, Heidi E. 1994. Conversations with an Alzheimer’s Patient: An Interactional Sociolinguistic Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005. “Epilogue: The Prism, the Soliloquy, the Couch, and the Dance—The Evolving Study of Language and Alzheimer’s Disease.” In Alzheimer Talk, Text and Context: Enhancing Communication, edited by Boyd H. Davis, 224–246. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011. “At the Intersection of Art, Alzheimer’s Disease, and Discourse: Talk in the Surround of Paintings.” In Communication in Elderly Care: Cross-Cultural Perspectives, edited by Peter Backhaus, 166–192. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Keenan, Elinor Ochs. 1976. “The Universality of Conversational Postulates.” Language in Society 51: 67–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kirschenbaum, Scott. 2010. You’re Looking at Me Like I Live Here and I don’t. Documentary Film.Google Scholar
Kitwood, Tom. 1997. Dementia Reconsidered: The Person Comes First. Berkshire: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Matsumoto, Yoshiko. 1989. “Politeness and Conversational Universals: Observations from Japanese.” Multilingua 8 (2–3): 207–221. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. “Painful to Playful: Quotidian Frames in the Conversational Discourse of Older Japanese Speakers.” Language in Society 40 (5): 591–616. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020. “Pragmatics of Understanding: Centrality of the Local. Cases from Japanese Discourse and Alzheimer’s Interaction.” Contrastive Pragmatics 2 (1): 24–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pinkert, Christiane, Kerstin Köhler, Milena von Kutzleben, Iris Hochgräber, Christoph Cavazzini, Silke Völz, Rebecca Palm, and Bernhard Holle. 2019. “Social Inclusion of People with Dementia: An Integrative Review of Theoretical Frameworks, Methods and Findings in Empirical Studies.” Ageing and Society 1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ramanathan, Vai. 1997. Alzheimer Discourse: Some Sociolinguistic Dimensions. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Ryan, Ellen B., Kerry Byrne, Hendrika Spykerman, and J. B. Orange. 2005. “Evidencing Kitwood’s Personhood Strategies: Conversation as Care in Dementia.” In Alzheimer Talk, Text and Context: Enhancing Communication, edited by Boyd H. Davis, 190–198. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ryan, Ellen B., Howard Giles, Giampiero Bartolucci, and Karen Henwood. 1986. “Psycholinguistic and Social Psychological Components of Communication by and with the Elderly.” Language and Communication 6 (1–2): 1–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ryan, Ellen B., Mary Lee Hummert, and Linda H. Boich. 1995. “Communication Predicaments of Aging: Patronizing Behavior toward Older Adults.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 14 (1–2): 144–166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ryan, Ellen B., and Lori Schindel Martin. 2011. “Using Narrative Arts to Foster Personhood in Dementia.” In Communication in Elderly Care: Cross-Cultural Perspectives, edited by Peter Backhaus, 193–217. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah. (1984) 2005. Conversational Style: Analyzing Talk among Friends. New edition, New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Williams, Angie and Jon F. Nussbaum. 2001. Intergenerational Communication Across the Life Span. Mahwah, NJ and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Wray, Alison. 2013. “Mislaying Compassion: Linguistic Triggers for Inadequate Care-Giving in Alzheimer’s Disease Care.” In Pragmatics in Dementia Discourse, edited by Boyd H. Davis, and Jacqueline Guendouzi, 117–145. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar