Communicative Interactions

State an opinionfind informationget somethingexert power

1936

Personal Goals in conversation?

Social goalsavoid conflictmake friends

How do we win friends and influence people through our conversation?

We have to beAgreeableappease peopleBe polite

Rules of Talk

Rules of talk determine:

Who talks and when they talk (turn taking)

Who sets the topic of the talk

Who may change the topic and when it may be changed

What kind of language is used in the talk (formal, informal, polite)

Structural properties of conversationsconversation is based on principles of turn takingWe use everyday when we carry on conversations in every imaginable social context

• taking turns,• waiting for turns,• competing for turns,• talking out of turn,• talking so no one can get a “word in edgewise" and so on.

Turns are the key to modeling how conversation works, how conversation is organized. the basic structure of turns, their allocation are context free but the ways that turns are used by speakers, their length and content, are sensitive to situation, allowing greater or lesser opportunities of co-participants So we have to look at both the structure of turn taking and the uses that people make of them

Turn-taking is the fundamental organization of social interaction.

Turn transition points are places in conversation when speaker change may or does occur. Turn transition points bound the fundamental conversational unit, the turn. Thus, a turn is a point in ones talk when another may or does speak

Turn-taking

In any language, there are rules for conversation that govern such things as how to interrupt a speaker, how to know when a speaker’s turn is over, how to change a topic, what topic is appropriate, etc.

how turns are allocated among participants in a conversation

three options1.Current Speaker selects Next Speaker2.Next Speaker Self-selects as Next3.Current Speaker Continues.

Turn Allocational Component

occurrences of more than one speaker at a time are common but brieftransitions from one turn to the next with no gap and no overlap or with slight gap or overlap make up the majority of transitions

speakers give us clues about when they are finished speaking or when they expect us to speak or not to speak. These clues are known as discourse markers. Criteria for recognizing these points in a conversation are:

1. Pauses - A pause as short as 0.3 seconds is time enough for a person to take a turn in a conversation.

2. In-breath3. sentence intonation - points in a conversation when a

speaker's voice marks the end of a sentence.4. Question intonation - points in the conversation when a

speaker's voice marks the end of a question.5. Speaker change

The next speaker normally begins his or her turn at the completion of a turn allocation unit

turn taking conversation

In multiparty conversations turns to not rotate in a fixed sequence but are variable in distributionTurns allocated in two waysCurrent speaker selection and self- selectionOrder of turns (in multiparty conversations), size of turn, and length of conversation varyThe features are sensitive to social constraints based on relative status of participants

Generally, in encounters between unequal’s, higher status members assume more rights to turns and to longer turns than do those of lower status

a pair of conversational turns by two different speakers such that the production of the first turn (called a first-pair part) makes a response (a second-pair part) of a particular kind relevant.

i.e. utterances are linked automatically to particular kinds of responsesFor example, a question, such as "what's your name?", requires the addressee to provide an answer in the next conversational turn. In multiparty conversations they are a means by which the current speaker selects the nextA failure to give an immediate response is noticeable and accountable.Many actions in conversation are accomplished through adjacency pair sequences, for example:

offer-acceptance/rejectiongreeting-greetingcomplaint-excuse/remedyrequest-acceptance/denial

Talk tends to occur in responsive pairs

Adjacency Pair

adjacency pairs etc

Utterances beginning with a declarative proposition to which a question or “tag” added particularly effective for ending a turn because the addressee is obliged by confirming or denying the tag.

Tag questions

If current speaker does not select next speaker, a next speaker may “self-select”. But the next speaker may not just start talking anytime he or she wants to? there are special “places” in the talk that speaker-changes or “speaker transitions” become relevant?

turn entry devices devices that signal a person’s desire

Beginners begin with a beginning with words such as “well”, “but” “and” or “so

because of things like overlaps we have repair mechanisms to correct errors so that one party in simultaneous talk stops and allows the other to complete her turn social norms based on status affect actual outcomes

higher status people tend to interrupt or complete their turns when interrupted lower status people are apt to be successfully interrupted.

If no other participant selects him or herself as next speaker, current speaker may, but need not, continue speaking, for example: A: Great weather today! (.) A: Wanna play tennis later?

Devices to maintain the floor• Increase volume• “hold that thought”• “um” and “ahs”

backchannel cuesWhen one person is speaking to another, the listener has to let the speaker know that they are listening and want the speaker to continue. This is done differently in different languages, but most languages use come kind of speech device to signal the speaker to continue. These devices are know as backchannel cues.In English, the listener often says uh hu, ya, right, sure, yes or simply nods the head once in a while.These devices have no referential meaning.Saying yes is an acknowledgement of what is said not agreement with itTheir purpose is to maintain the interaction by indicating one’s attention to and ratification of the speaker’s talkThey must be well timed to clauses and phrases within the speaker’s turnToo many vocalizations by listeners may be seen as disruptive and too few as showing a lack of interestIf you don’t believe these are necessary for conversation in English, try an experiment. Next time you are speaking to someone don’t do anything when it’s their turn to talk and see what happens.

Conversations have beginnings and ends that frame the activity of talktypically begin with some sort of greeting end with some form of closingGreetings and closings are examples of adjacency pairs Greetings are routines that mark a person’s availability to talkBoth participants signal by their response that they understand and agree to a jointly negotiated behaviour including their willingness to engage in talk "Good Morning/Afternoon/Evening. It is nice to meet you."

Long time no see

Greetings

after an initial greeting people propose and ratify topics of conversation people of higher status assume more rights to speakGenerally, people are more interested to talk about themselves.Often the conversation on the situation – the weather

usually achieved through a process at the end of a topice.g. well, or so, or okay or fine – words of agreementanother technique is to return to a prior topic

Termination of encounters

• Oh, look at the ______ . I'll have to go. • It's been ______ talking to you. • We have to make ______ to get together some• Let's do ______ some time. • I won't ______ you any longer.• I'll ______ you go now.• I'm going to have to ______ . • I'll have to say goodbye. • Let's continue this another ______ . _• _____ care. • Nice meeting ______ . • Let's get ______ soon.

The links that hold a conversation together Conversations are internally cohesive because of their formal structure and because techniques that speakers use to relate current talk to previous interactions One technique is repetition either verbatim, partially or paraphrase Repetition

allows people to stall while formulating their talk Provides redundancy to hearers as an aid to comprehension and connecting turns of talk has varied interactional purposes such as • controlling the floor,• demonstrating active listenership• ratifying the previous speakers talk• showing or appreciating humour• emphasizing one’s own or another’s contribution

sends a message of rapport

Cohesiveness in conversations

assumptions about the situation and co-participants based on cultural models of interaction, of the fit between behaviour and context and of people’s rights and obligationscultural norms also dictate what can be said and what should not be said in particular situations as well as the ways to say what can be saidIf interlocutors belong to the same culture, none of these assumptions need to be stated or even consciously recognized; they are learned and presupposed in daily life

Conversational Postulates

Gina: Hey Angela! So are you gonna have a baby next year? (Yup, she went right for it - she knows about my miscarriage so I guess she was just trying to make conversation? I dunno…)Me: Oh, hello Gina.I don’t know, maybe - we’re not in a rush or anything.Gina: Oh, that’s good.You shouldn’t have a baby next year - it’s the year of the rat. If you have a baby, your baby will be a rat (she is asian and I guess she follows chinese astrology). Wait until 2009, that’s the year of the ox.Me: (irritated that she said my baby would be a rat! wtf???) Oh, thanks for sharing. Yeah, I don’t know when we plan on having a child but whatever happens, happens. (and I’m certainly not going to wait just because she said so!)

Most people cooperative in social encountersParticipants have common aims to make mutually dependent contributions to conversationsome agreement on purpose of the conversationConversation should be informative (quantity) – as much info as neededConversation should be truthful , sincere (quality)Relation – must be relevantManner – should not be obscure, ambiguous, must be brief and orderly

Conversational Postulates

We can’t always be truthful, relevant, informative or coherentSocial constraints might require us to tell a white lie – but may be relevant to the function of the conversation .e.g. Maintaining in relationshipIf we know we are breaking the rule it is important to maintain the relationship by acknowledging the violationuse linguistic devices as prefaces to statements to signal or acknowledge theory violations of presupposed maxims

•I’m probably totally wrong on this but•I don’t want to get too far off topic but I’m not sure if this is relevant but•I don’t know if this makes any sense but•It’s difficult to state this clearly

requests for action intended to result in an action by the hearerBased on several assumptions about the relationship

Directives

speaker wants hearer to do actspeaker assumes hearer is able to do actspeaker assumes hearer is willing to actspeaker assumes hearer will not do act in the absence of the request

Can you stay out?Would you be willing to stay out?Will you stay out? These directives are either statements or questions – not a bald order - Stay outHearers are expected to react to obey and not answer the question

Directives have to be seen as reasonable and sincere Hearer can challenge the directive by questioning underlying assumptions or by denying assumed conditions

why do you want me to stay out? It’s safe in thereThe playground is closed , so I need to play in the quarrywhy do think I’d be willing to stay out?you don’t have to tell me to do it. I was just going to stay out anyway.

Higher status speakers are less often challenged by lower status people regardless of their remarks or when issuing directivesAnd regardless of the inconvenience of complying

speakers should phrase directives so as to have the greatest likelihood of complianceTherefore they are sensitive to context and the relationship between speaker and addresseeBut because a social relationship of some sort exists between interlocutors (even if one is a stranger), speakers must be sensitive to addressee’s feelingsAn issuer of must make the request clear enough so that the addressee comprehends the directive intent, but must also pay attention to the addressee’s needs not to be imposed on by a blunt presumptions of the speaker’s power.

Can I have your number

Need statement ( speaker asserts her need or want)I need you to open your book at page 3

Imperative (speaker commands an action of heareropen your book at page 3

Embedded imperative (command is embedded in another linguistic frame

Could you open your book at page 3?Permission directive (speaker asks permission, implying action of heaer)

If you would open your book at page 3?Question directive (speaker asks a question, indirectly implying action of hearer)

Can open your book at page 3?Hints (Speaker makes assertion, hinting a request)

It might be a good idea to open your book at page 3

I want you to open your book at page 3Alternatives for issuing directives

Markers of politeness that minimize the force of directives

May I please have the salt?

“would you be so kind as to give me the salt”

Speakers select among linguistic alternatives for directives based on context and on relationship with addressees

politeness and mitigation are generally used by speakers who are subordinate to addresses or who for reasons either of context or personality, wish to soften the force of a directive

bald imperatives may emphasize a person’s rights to command addresses (e.g. Towards children) but are seen as inappropriate, impolite and threatening

mitigation

Interrogative: - could you mow the lawn?Negation – l wonder if you wouldn’t mind mowing the lawn?Past tense - I wanted to ask you0 to mow the lawnEmbedded “if” clause: - I wonder if you could mow the lawnConsultative devices (indirectly asking for addresses cooperation): do you think we could mow the lawn?

Mitigating linguistic devices

Understaters (minimizing requests) - Could you mow the lawn before I start?Hedges (avoiding commitment): It would really help if you could mow the lawnDowntoner (signalling possibility of non-compliance) : Will you perhaps be able to mow the lawn?

mitigating devices used to lessen the impact of an utterance and avoid responsibility for underlying implications.Typically, adjectives or adverbs, but can also consist of clauses. He is a slightly stupid person. (adverb)There might just be a few insignificant problems we need to address. (adjective)The party was somewhat spoiled by the return of the parents. (adverb)I'm not an expert but you might want to try restarting your computer. (clause)Hedges help speakers communicate more precisely the degree of accuracy and truth in assessments. For instance, in “All I know is smoking is harmful to your health”, all I know is a hedge that indicates the degree of the speaker’s knowledge instead of only making a statement, “Smoking is harmful to your health”.

Hedges

addresses select among alternative means of respondingIf an addressee intends to comply with a request, a direct response is usually givenNon-compliance is usually accomplished indirectlySince the social nature of conversation requires participants be cooperative refusals of directives typically contain a justification for refusal .

Responses to requests

Often the refusal is related to the validity of the requestIs there a need to mow the lawn?Can the person comply to the requestDoes the speaker have the right to make the request Bald challenges – NO - can be seen as confrontational and are usually mitigated

Similarities with face-to-face conversationbased on structure of turn takingusually begins with a greetingdevelops into one or more topics and ends with a formulaic closing

Telephone Conversation

Differenceshave to rely on auditory cues and messages – not visually cues in understanding .e.g. no facial or bodily gestures that may alter the meaningrecognition is through sound of voice or name recognitiongreetings, topic introductions and developments and closings differ somewhat in structure and in interaction

The asymmetry between caller and answerer, because a caller controls the communication she/he has with the answererface-to-face begins with a mutual co-response, telephone conversation begins with a caller issuing a unilateral summons i.e. by making the call - thus interrupting the activities of the addressee - even rest

Caller Hegemony

by this beginning the caller is in an advantageous position – the call is planned you can choose not to answer (especially with caller ID, but that decision is often based on a social reason i.e. wishing not to interact with a particular person at that time.Most people answerCaller also knows the identity of the addressee, or at least of the intended addresseethe caller is in the position of offering the first topic - i.e. the reason for the call

while caller ID mitigate the "power" of the caller caller hegemony is maintained it is the caller who begins the conversation.while we tend to "screen" callers with our cellphone's caller ID, our first reaction is not to like being screened.We are managing two sets of communication (social) contexts: the physical context and the mediated context

At the beginnings and at the ends of telephone conversations there are adjacency pairs - hello - hello and goodbye - byeAnswerer responds to the summons of the caller with a voice sample - HelloCaller responds with by providing a voice sample in the form of an identification of the addressee – Hi it`s Jane Second set of utterances function as routine openers and markers of social interaction - greetings initiated by the caller `how are you` “fine” or “good”Degrees of familiarity between caller and answerer affect the content of these turnse.g. calling a business the caller may first identify him or herself by name before stating the reason for the callgreeting exchanges (how are you) likely to be omittedname identifications omitted in people who are familiar going straight to greetings

Telephone conversation sequence

Concepts of Politeness

Politeness...

“ … is one of the constraints of human interaction, whose purpose is to consider other`s feelings, establish levels of mutual comfort, and promote rapport.” Hill et al. (1986: 282)

“ … what we think is appropriate behaviour in particular situations in an attempt to achieve and maintain successful social relationships with others.“ (Lakoff 1972: 910)

It is more important in a conversation to avoid offense than to be clear politeness is another level to conversational interaction besides the rules of the cooperative principleIn most informal conversations, actual communication of important ideas is secondary to reaffirming and strengthening relationships Lakoff’s postulates for politeness• Don’t impose• Give options• Make A feel good – be friendly

Politeness

“dinner is served” does not intrude on the addressee`s wants and needsInterpersonally distantWhereas with “would you like to eat? The person is addressed directlypassive constructions ``like`` is more polite than direct questions

Don’t impose

Speakers giving options by using hedges and mitigated expressions that allow hearers to form and hold their own opinions

hedges and mitigation blunt potential confrontations

hearers can respond affirmatively or negatively

“I guess it’s time to leave now”

Give options

Make A feel good – be friendly

implies that speakers share similar models and norms for behaviour and that they evaluate speech according to the same presupposed notions

polite behaviour is based on assumptions of cooperation because all social groups need to minimize conflict among members

Politeness is concerned with “face”

Concept of "face"

"face" public self-image that every member of society wants to claim

for itself

negative face refers to the want of every competent adult member that his actions be unimpeded by others

positive face refers to the want of every member that his wants be desirable to at least some others

politeness strategies develop to deal with face-threatening acts

What threatens face, or what sort of persons have rights to face-protection is culturally relative.

Positive Politeness

Positive Politeness is redress directed to the addressee's positive face, his desire that his wants should be thought of as desirable.

Redress consists in partially satisfying that desire by communicating that one's own wants are in some respects similar to the addressee’s wants.

politeness strategies express solidarity, friendlinees, in group reciprocity

The linguistic realizations of Positive Politeness are in many respects representative of the normal linguistic behavior between intimates

Negative politeness• Redressive action addressed to the addressee´s

negative face• Addressee wants to have his freedom unhindered

and his attention unimpeded• Specific and focused to minimize the particular

imposition that the FTA effects

• Negative strategies express Speaker`s restraint and avoidance imposing on Hearer

• requests necessarily impose on Hearer’s negative face – desire to be unimpeded

• The most elaborated and the most conventionalized set of linguistic strategies for FTA redress (“Knigge“)

Face-Threatening-Activity

FTAs= those acts that by their nature run contrary to the face

wants of the addressee and/or of the speaker`s

The negative face is threatened by...…acts that appear to impede the addressee´s independence of movement and freedom of action

The positive face is threatened by……acts which appear as disapproving of their wants

the more threatening an act is, the more polite and indirect are the means used to accomplish itrequests that involve minimal cost to Hearer are made through positive politeness strategies, stressing solidarity between Speaker and Hearerrequests involving greater imposition on Hearer are made through negative politeness strategies that are more formal and distancing the most imposing requests are expressed through indirection and hints.