刊讯｜SSCI 期刊《语言与社会互动》2021年第3期

 Volume 54  Issue 3 (2021) 

Research on LANGUAGE AND SOCIAL INTERACTION（SSCI一区，2020 IF：3.077）2021年第3期共发文5篇。内容涉及手势语、表达异议时的身体语言、“中立”的互动成本等议题。

目录

Articles

• How to Use Comic-Strip Graphics to Represent Signed Conversation，by Kristian Skedsmo

• Embodiment in Dissent: The Eye Roll as an Interactional Practice, by Rebecca Clift

• Body Trouble: Some Sources of Difficulty in the Progressive Realization of Manual Action, by Gene H. Lerner and Geoffrey Raymond

• The Interactional Costs of “Neutrality” in Police Interviews with Child Witnesses, by Guusje Jol and Wyke Stommel

• How a Terminal Tag Can Display Epistemic Stance and Constrain Responses: The Case of Oder Nicht in German, by Veronika Drake, Andrea Golatob, and Peter Golatoc

摘要

How to Use Comic-Strip Graphics to Represent Signed Conversation

Kristian Skedsmo

Department of International Studies and Interpreting, Oslo Metropolitan University, Norway

Abstract This article explores comic-strip-inspired graphic transcripts as a tool to present conversational video data from informal multiperson conversations in a signed language, specifically Norwegian Sign Language (NTS). The interlocutors’ utterances are represented as English translations in speech bubbles rather than glossed or phonetically transcribed NTS, and the article discusses advantages and disadvantages of this unconventional choice. To contextualize this exploration of graphic transcripts, a small-scale analysis of a stretch of interaction is embedded in the article. The extract shows conversational trouble and repair occurring when interlocutors respond to utterances produced while they as recipients were looking elsewhere. The NTS extract is introduced with a short sample of multilinear, Jefferson-inspired glossed transcript and then presented in full as graphic transcript. The article concludes that for presenting nonsensitive data, graphic transcripts have several advantages, such as improved access to visual features, flexible granularity, and enhanced readability. Data are in Norwegian Sign Language with English translations.

Embodiment in Dissent: The Eye Roll as an Interactional Practice

Rebecca Clift

University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park

Abstract 

This article investigates a recognizable embodied practice for displaying dissent: the “eye roll,” whereby the eyes are rolled up or sideways in their sockets as a response to something said or done. On a corpus of videoed interaction, it shows that: (a) the eye roll may be only the most salient—visible—element of a constellation of practices embodying dissent; and (b) it can be quite specific in its selection of recipients and can be used to pursue affiliation with another party. Investigation suggests that the eye roll is in fact a protest in response to someone going too far. As an expression of stance that may not be visible to the party whose action it targets, the eye roll is collusive for those who witness it: In its ambivalent status lies its value as an interactional object. Data are in British and American English.

Body Trouble: Some Sources of Difficulty in the Progressive Realization of Manual Action

Gene H. Lerner and Geoffrey Raymond

Department of Sociology, University of California, Santa Barbara

Abstract This report examines interactional troubles that find their source, not in talk, but in manual action. First, we introduce the intertwined character of two fundamental features of most, if not all emergent human conduct: The ongoing structural projection of an action-in-progress along with its continuing progressive realization. We then identify two sources of body-behavioral trouble that interfere with the action implication of emerging manual action, and result in remedial action by its recipient. Manual actors sometimes 1) foreshorten the “preparation phase” of emerging manual action, or 2) interrupt manual action before it comes to completion. Additionally, we demonstrate how misconstruing the action implication of emerging manual action can also result in body trouble that leads to recipient remediation, even when there is no reduction of its structural projectability or interruption of its progressive realization. For each circumstance, we describe the adjusting actions that remediate such body troubles. [Occasionally, English is spoken.]

The Interactional Costs of “Neutrality” in Police Interviews with Child Witnesses

Guusje Jol and Wyke Stommel

Centre for Language Studies, Radboud University, The Netherlands

Abstract This paper concerns the interactional dilemma between displaying affiliation and doing being neutral. This dilemma is highly salient in police interviews with child witnesses where interviewing guidelines encourage police officers to take a neutral stance to avoid steering children’s stories. In this article, we use conversation analysis to analyze childrens’ volunteered accounts of their own role during the alleged offense, e.g., how they resisted. Such accounts make relevant affiliative uptakes such as approval, disagreement, or reassurance that may be seen as nonneutral. Hence, these accounts raise interactional dilemmas for police officers: Should they do what is interactionally relevant or follow the guidelines? Our analysis shows how police officers display and deal with this dilemma and that children may add to it by pursuing something more than neutralistic uptakes. The upshot of this analysis is that attempting to be neutral in interaction may cause apparently undesirable interactional difficulties. The data are from the Netherlands.

How a Terminal Tag Can Display Epistemic Stance and Constrain Responses: The Case of Oder Nicht in German

Veronika Drake, Andrea Golatob, and Peter Golatoc

a English Department, Saginaw Valley State University; b

The Graduate College, Texas State University; c

Department of World Languages and Literatures, Texas State University

Abstract This conversation analytic study explores German turn-final oder nich(t), as in Soll ich jetzt weiterlesen oder nicht (“should I continue reading or not”). These oder nicht-appended questions raise one state of affairs and invoke its negated version via oder nicht. They emerge in environments in which epistemics and/or deontics are negotiated. Through these turns, participants index their commitment to the likelihood of the state of affairs expressed in the question. Oder nicht works as an epistemic stance marker and minimizes the potential for disconfirmation. As such, oder nicht is a resource for questioners to design their questions in ways that index their stance that an agreeing response is more likely. Thus, oder nicht effectively constrains the recipient’s options (similar to English polarized tag questions). Data are in German with English translations.

期刊简介

© 2017 Thomson Reuters, 2016 Journal Citations Report® ranks

Research on Language and Social Interaction 17th out of 79 in the Communication (social science), 

18th out of 180 in the Linguistics, and 25th out of 62 in the Social Psychology (social science)

categories with an Impact Factor of 1.896.

Five-Year Impact Factor: 3.192

All figures ©2017 Thomson Reuters, 2016 Journal Citation Reports®

The journal publishes the highest quality empirical and theoretical research bearing on  language as it is used in interaction.

Researchers in communication, discourse analysis, conversation analysis, linguistic anthropology, and ethnography are likely to be the most active contributors, but we welcome submission of articles from the broad range of interaction researchers.

Published papers will normally involve the close analysis of naturally-occurring interaction. The journal is also open to theoretical essays and to quantitative studies where these are tied closely to the results of naturalistic observation.

Peer Review Policy: All articles have undergone anonymous double-blind review. 

Publication office: Taylor & Francis, Inc., 530 Walnut Street, Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106.

本文来源：Research on LANGUAGE AND SOCIAL INTERACTION

往期推荐

  审     核：心得小蔓

转载&合作请联系

"心得君"

微信：xindejun_yyxxd

点击“阅读原文”可跳转下载