What Does Embodied Interaction Tell Us About Grammar?

References

• Arminen, I., Koskela, I., & Palukka, H. (2014). Multimodal production of second pair parts in air traffic control training. Journal of Pragmatics, 65, 46–62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Broth, M., & Keevallik, L. (2014). Getting ready to move as a couple: Accomplishing mobile formations in a dance class. Space and Culture, 17(2), 107–121.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Broth, M. (2014). Pans, tilts and zooms. Conventional camera gestures in TV-production. In M. Broth, E. Laurier, & L. Mondada (Eds.), Studies of video practices: Video at work (pp. 63–96). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bybee, J. (2003). Cognitive processes in grammaticalization. In M. Tomasello (Ed.), The new psychology of language (Vol. II, pp. 145–167). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Cekaite, A. (2010). Shepherding the child: Embodied directive sequences in parent-child interactions. Text and Talk, 30(1), 1–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, H. H. (2016). Depicting as a method of communication. Psychological Review, 123(3), 324–347.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clift, R. (2016). Conversation analysis. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Couper-Kuhlen, E., & Selting, M. (1996). Prosody in conversation: Interactional studies. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Couper-Kuhlen, E., & Selting, M. (in press). Interactional linguistics: Studying language in social interaction. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• De Stefani, E., & Gazin, A.-D. (2014). Instructional sequences in driving lessons: Mobile participants and the temporal and sequential organization of actions. Journal of Pragmatics, 65, 63–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deppermann, A. (2013a). Introduction: Multimodal interaction from a conversation analytic perspective. Journal of Pragmatics, 46(1), 1–7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deppermann, A. (2013b). Turn-design at turn-beginnings: Multimodal resources to deal with tasks of turn-construction in German. Journal of Pragmatics, 46(1), 91–121.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enfield, N. (2009). The anatomy of meaning: Speech, gesture, and composite utterances. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eriksson, M. (2009). Referring as interaction: On the interplay between linguistic and bodily practices. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(2), 240–262.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ford, C. E., Thompson, S. A., & Drake, V. (2012). Bodily-visual practices and turn-continuation. Discourse Processes, 49(3–4), 192–212.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox, B. (2007). Principles shaping grammatical practices: An exploration. Discourse Studies, 9(3), 299–318.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox, B., & Heinemann, T. (2015). The alignment of manual and verbal displays in requests for the repair of an object. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 48(3), 342–362.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox, B. A., & Robles, J. (2010). It’s like mmm: Enactments with it’s like. Discourse Studies, 12(6), 715–738.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gallagher, S. (2011). Interpretations of embodied cognition. In W. Tschacher & C. Bergomi (Eds.), The implications of embodiment: Cognition and communication (pp. 59–71). Exeter, England: Imprint Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Ginzburg, J., & Poesio, M. (2016). Grammar is a system that characterizes talk in interaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1938.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Golato, A. (2000). An innovative German quotative for reporting on embodied actions: Und ich so/und er so “and I’m like/and he’s like.” Journal of Pragmatics, 32(1), 24–59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. (1980). Restarts, pauses, and the achievement of a state of mutual gaze at turn-beginning. Sociological Inquiry, 50(3–4), 272–302.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. (1981). Conversational organization: Interaction between speakers and hearers. New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 1489–1522.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C., & Goodwin, M. H. (1992). Assessments and the construction of context. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 147–190). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, M. H., & Goodwin, C. (1987). Children’s arguing. In S. Philips, S. Steele, & C. Tanz (Eds.), Language, gender, and sex in comparative perspective (pp. 200–248). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hayashi, M. (2003). Language and the body as resources for collaborative action: A study of word searches in Japanese conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 36(2), 109–141.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayashi, M. (2005). Joint turn construction through language and the body: Notes on embodiment in coordinated participation in situated activities. Semiotica, 156, 21–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopper, P. (1998). Emergent grammar. In M. Tomasello (Ed.), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure (pp. 155–175). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Iwasaki, S. (2009). Initiating interactive turn spaces in Japanese conversation: Local projection and collaborative action. Discourse Processes, 46(2), 226–246.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iwasaki, S. (2011). The multimodal mechanics of collaborative unit construction in Japanese conversation. In J. Streeck, C. Goodwin, & C. LeBaron (Eds.), Embodied interaction: Language and body in the material world (pp. 106–120). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kärkkäinen, E., & Keisanen, T. (2012). Linguistic and embodied formats for making (concrete) offers. Discourse Studies, 14(5), 1–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keevallik, L. (2012). Compromising progressivity: “No”-prefacing in Estonian. Pragmatics, 22(1), 119–146.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keevallik, L. (2013). The interdependence of bodily demonstrations and clausal syntax. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 46(1), 1–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keevallik, L. (2014). Turn organization and bodily-vocal demonstrations. Journal of Pragmatics, 65, 103–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keevallik, L. (2015). Temporality in interaction. In A. Deppermann & S. Günthner (Eds.), Coordinating the temporalities of talk and dance (pp. 309–336). Amsterdam, The Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Keevallik, L. (2016, September). Affirmative particles as response cries. Plenary talk at OFTI 34, Helsinki, Finland.
   Google Scholar
• Keevallik, L. (2017). Linking performances: The temporality of contrastive grammar. In R. Laury, M. Etelämäki, & E. Couper-Kuhlen (Eds.), Linking clauses and actions in social interaction (pp. 54–72). Helsinki, Finland: Finnish Literary Society.
   Google Scholar
• Keisanen, T. (2012). “Uh-oh we were going there”: Environmentally occasioned noticings of trouble in in-car interaction. Semiotica, 191(1/4), 199–224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keisanen, T., & Kärkkäinen, E. (2014). A multimodal analysis of compliment sequences in everyday English interactions. Pragmatics, 24(3), 649–672.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keisanen, T., & Rauniomaa, M. (2012). The organization of participation and contingency in pre-beginnings of request sequences. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(4), 323–351.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kendon, A. (2004). Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kendrick, K. H., & Drew, P. (2016). Recruitment: Offers, requests, and the organization of assistance in interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 49(1), 1–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindström, A., & Mondada, L. (Eds.). (2009). Assessments in social interaction [Special issue]. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 42(4).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linell, P. (2009). Rethinking language, mind, and world dialogically: Interactional and contextual theories of human sense-making. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• McNeill, D. (2005). Gesture and thought. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2007). Multimodal resources for turn-taking: Pointing and the emergence of possible next speakers. Discourse Studies, 9, 194–225.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2009a). Emergent focused interactions in public places: A systematic analysis of the multimodal achievement of a common interactional space. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(10), 1977–1997.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2009b). The embodied and negotiated production of assessments in instructed actions. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 42(4), 329–361.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2014a). Requesting immediate action in the surgical operating room: Time, embodied resources and praxeological embeddedness. In P. Drew & E. Couper-Kuhlen (Eds.), Requesting in social interaction (pp. 269–302). Amsterdam, The Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2014b). The local constitution of multimodal resources for social interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 65, 137–156.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mori, J., & Hayashi, M. (2006). The achievement of intersubjectivity through embodied completions: A study of interactions between first and second language speakers. Applied Linguistics, 27, 195–219.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mortensen, K. (2009). Establishing recipiency in pre-beginning position in the second language classroom. Discourse Processes, 46, 491–515.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mortensen, K. (2016). The body as a resource for other-initiation of repair: Cupping the hand behind the ear. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 49(1), 34–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Musk, N. (2016). Correcting spellings in second language learner’s computer-assisted collaborative writing. Classroom Discourse, 7, 36–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nevile, M. (2015). The embodied turn in research on language and social interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 48(2), 121–151.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ochs, E., Schegloff, E. A., & Thompson, S. A. (Eds.). (1996). Interaction and grammar. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• 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). London, England: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Pinker, S. (1995). The language instinct: How the mind creates language. New York, NY: HarperPerennial.
   Google Scholar
• Rasmussen, G., Hazel, S., & Mortensen, K. (Eds.). (2014). A body of resources—CA studies of social conduct [Special issue]. Journal of Pragmatics, 65(2014).
   Google Scholar
• Rauniomaa, M., & Keisanen, T. (2012). Two multimodal formats for responding to requests. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(6–7), 829–842.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rossi, G. (2012). Bilateral and unilateral requests: The use of imperatives and Mi X? interrogatives in Italian. Discourse Processes, 49(5), 426–458.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rossi, G. (2014). When do people not use language to make requests? In P. Drew & E. Couper-Kuhlen (Eds.), Requesting in social interaction (pp. 303–334). Amsterdam, The Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Ruusuvuori, J., & Peräkylä, A. (2009). Facial and verbal expressions in assessing stories and topics. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 42(4), 377–394.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696–735.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (1996). Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp. 52–133). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (1984). On some gestures’ relation to talk. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 266–295). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Selting, M., & Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2001). Studies in interactional linguistics. Amsterdam, The Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Seo, M.-S., & Koshik, I. (2010). A conversation analytic study of gestures that engender repair in ESL conversational tutoring. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(8), 2219–2239.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sidnell, J. (2010). Conversation analysis: An introduction. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Sinclair, J., & Coulthard, M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sorjonen, M.-L., & Raevaara, L. (2014). On the grammatical form of requests at the convenience store. In P. Drew & E. Couper-Kuhlen (Eds.), Requesting in social interaction (pp. 243–268). Amsterdam, The Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Stevanovic, M., & Monzoni, C. (2016). On the hierarchy of interactional resources: Embodied and verbal behavior in the management of joint activities with material objects. Journal of Pragmatics, 103, 15–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stivers, T. (2008). Stance, alignment and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41(1), 31–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stivers, T., & Sidnell, J. (2005). Multi-modal interaction. Semiotica, 156, 1–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stoenica, I.-M., & Pekarek Doehler, S. (2015, July). Relative clauses as turn continuations in French talk-in-interaction. Paper presented at the 14th International Pragmatics Conference, Antwerp, Belgium.
   Google Scholar
• Stoenica, I.-M. (2018). Le rôle des relatives dans l’organisation séquentielle de l’interaction : une approche temporelle, interactionnelle et praxéologique. [The role of relative clauses in the sequential organization of interaction: a temporal, interactional, and praxeological approach.] Thesis presented at Faculté des Lettres et Sciences Humaines Institut des Sciences du langage et de la communication, Université de Neuchâtel, Switzerland.
   Google Scholar
• Streeck, J. (2002). Grammars, words, and embodied meanings: On the uses and evolution of so and like. Journal of Communication, 52, 581–596.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Streeck, J. (2009). Gesturecraft: The manufacture of meaning. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Streeck, J., Goodwin, C., & LeBaron, C. (Eds.). (2011). Embodied interaction: Language and body in the material world. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tulbert, E., & Goodwin, M. H. (2011). Choreographies of attention: Multimodality in a routine family activity. In J. Streeck, C. Goodwin, & C. LeBaron (Eds.), Embodied interaction: Language and body in the material world (pp. 79–92). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Walsh, S. (2011). Exploring classroom discourse: Language in action. London, England/New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar