Cover not available
Part of
Language and Social Interaction at Home and School
Edited by Letizia Caronia
[Dialogue Studies 32] 2021
► pp. 121–152

Chapter 3
Talking to children with atypical development

A study on the practice of asking ‘Are you going to’ questions

| University of Portsmouth

Interactional studies of children with language impairments and their habitual interlocutors are key to understanding reciprocal adaptations in communication. The chapter is based on video recorded observations of three families at home, each with a child with Down Syndrome of approximately 6 years of age. The analysis focuses on the parental practice of asking the children ‘Are you going to’ questions. The results document two main uses: ‘request for information’ and ‘action solicit’. The analysis suggests that using the question as action solicit may hamper children’s comprehension and undermine their agency. A comparison with other action solicits and relative frequencies of use suggests family styles that either privilege a Requester’s Perspective or the Child’s Perspective. It is argued that, by privileging the Child’s Perspective, parents limit the imposition on children but subtract potential for normative and epistemic socialisation, as well as opportunities for the child to display their collaboration.

Keywords: conversation analysis, atypical interaction, children with down syndrome, action formation, ‘are you going to’ questions, action solicits, directives
Article outline
  • 1.Interactional studies of children with atypical development
  • 2.Communication in children with down syndrome
    • 2.1Focus of the study
    • 2.2The ‘are you going to’ question and the role of time in action solicits
  • 3.Methods
    • 3.1Participants
    • 3.2Data collection and preparation
    • 3.3Analysis
  • 4.Asking ‘are you going to’ questions to children with down syndrome
    • 4.1The ‘are you going to’ questions as requests for information
    • 4.2‘Are you going to/are you going/you gonna’ questions as action solicits
    • 4.3Ambiguous AYGT/AYG/YG questions
    • 4.4AYGT questions oriented to divert the child from another course of action
    • 4.5Variability in use of AYGT/AYG/YG questions
  • 5.Discussion
  • Acknowledgment
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 13 October 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.32.03fas
References
Antaki, Charles, W. Finlay, Chris Walton, and Louise Pate
2008 “Offering choices to people with intellectual disabilities: an interactional study.” Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 52(12): 1165–1175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Antaki, Charles., Ray Wilkinson
2013 “Conversation Analysis and the Study of Atypical Populations.” In Handbook of Conversation Analysia, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 533–550. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Aronsson, Karin
and Asta Cekaite 2011 “Activity contracts and directives in everyday family politics.” Discourse & Society 22(2): 137–154. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brouwer, Catherine E., Dennis Day, Ulrika Ferm, Anders R. Hougaard, Gitte Rasmussen, and Gunilla Thunberg
2011 “Treating the actions of children as sensible.” Journal of interactional research in communication disorders 2(2): 153–182.Google Scholar
Cambridge English Dictionary
Be going to.” Accessed December 12, 2019, [URL].
Cebula, Katie R., D. G. Moore, and Jennifer G. Wishart
2010 “Social cognition in children with Down’s syndrome: Challenges to research and theory building.” Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 54: 113–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chapman, Robin S. and Linda J. Hesketh
2000 “Behavioral phenotype of individuals with Down syndrome.” Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews 6(2): 84–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clayman, Steven E. and John Heritage
2014 “Benefactors and beneficiaries.” In Requesting in social interaction, ed. by Paul Drew and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 55–86. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth
2014 “What does grammar tell us about action?.” Pragmatics 24(3): 623–647. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Curl, Traci S. and Paul Drew
2008 “Contingency and action: A comparison of two forms of requesting.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 41(2): 129–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf
2013 “Multimodal interaction from a conversation analytic perspective.” Journal of Pragmatics 46: 1–7. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dobbinson, Sushie, Mick Perkins and Jill Boucher
2003 “The interactional significance of formulas in autistic language.” Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 17(4–5): 299–307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul
1997 “ ‘Open’class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of troubles in conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 28(1): 69–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enfield, N. J. and Jack Sidnell
2017 “On the concept of action in the study of interaction.” Discourse Studies 19(5): 515–535. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fasulo, Alessandra
2015 “The value of conversation analysis for the study of children’s mental health.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Child Mental Health, ed. by Jessica Nina Lester and Michelle O’Reillly, 3–24. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fasulo, Alessandra, Heather Loyd, and Vincenzo Padiglione
2007 “Children’s socialization into cleaning practices: a cross-cultural perspective.” Discourse & Society 18(1): 11–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fasulo, Alessandra, Janhavi Shukla, and Stephanie Bennett
2017 “Find the hidden object. Understanding play in psychological assessments.” Frontiers in Psychology 8: 323. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fasulo, Alessandra, Jörg Zinken, and Katarzyna Zinken
2016 “Asking ‘What about’questions in chronic illness self-management meetings.” Patient Education and Counseling 99(6): 917–925. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fowler, Anne E., Rochel Gelman, and Lila R. Gleitman
2014 “The course of language learning in children with Down syndrome.” In Constraints on Language Acquisition: Studies of Atypical Children, ed. by Helen Tager-Flusberg, 91–140. Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Gardner, Sushie and Michael Forrester
(eds) 2009 Analysing interactions in childhood: Insights from conversation analysis. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Goodwin, Charles
2000 “Action and embodiment within situated human interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 32: 1489–1522. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Marjorie H. and Asta Cekaite
2014 “Orchestrating directive trajectories in communicative projects in family interaction.” In Requesting in Social Interaction, ed. by Paul Drew and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 185–214. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goody, Esther N
1978 “Towards a theory of questions.” In Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction, ed. by Esther Goody, 17–43. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gullberg, Marianne, Kees De Bot, and Virginia Volterra
2008 “Gestures and some key issues in the study of language development.” Gesture 8(2): 149–179. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kent, Ray D. and Houri K. Vorperian
2013 “Speech impairment in Down syndrome: A review.” Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research (Online) 56(1): 178. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Kidwell, Mardi
2013 “Interaction among Children.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 511–533. Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane
1989 “Be going to and will: A pragmatic account.” Journal of Linguistics 25(2): 291–317. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John
2015 “Well-prefaced turns in English conversation: A conversation analytic perspective.” Journal of Pragmatics 88: 88–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Higginbotham, David Jeffery, and Christopher R. Engelke
2013 “A primer for doing talk–in–interaction research in augmentative and alternative communication.” Augmentative and Alternative Communication 29(1): 3–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Higginbotham, D. Jeffery, Gregory W. Lesher, Bryan J. Moulton, and Brian Roark
2012 “The application of natural language processing to augmentative and alternative communication.” Assistive Technology 24(1): 14–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail
2004a “A note on laughter in ‘male–female’ interaction.” Discourse Studies 6(1): 117–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004b “Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction.” In Conversation Analysis: Studies from the first generation, ed. by Gene H. Lerner, 13–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lanzoni, Monica, Agnieszka Kinsner–Ovaskainen, Joan Morris, Simona Martin, Giovanni La Placa, and Laura Spirito
2019 EUROCAT – Surveillance of congenital anomalies in Europe: epidemiology of Down syndrome 1990–2014. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg. Accessed January 1 2020, [URL]. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laws, Glynis and Dorothy V. M. Bishop
2004 “Pragmatic language impairment and social deficits in Williams syndrome: a comparison with Down’s syndrome and specific language impairment.” International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 39(1): 45–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C
2013 “Action formation and ascription.” In The handbook of conversation analysis, 103–130. Malden, MA: Wiley–Blackwell.Google Scholar
MacLean, William E. and Sigan L. Hartley
2005 “Down syndrome.” In Encyclopedia of Human Development, ed. by Neil Salkind, 394–396. London: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maynard, Douglas W.
2013 “Everyone and no one to turn to: Intellectual roots and contexts for conversation analysis.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 11–31. Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Maynard, Douglas W. and Courtney L. Marlaire
1999 “Good reasons for bad testing performance: the interactional substrate of educational testing.” In Constructing (In)Competence: Disabling Evaluations in Clinical and Social Interaction, ed. by Dana Kovarsky, Judith F. Duchan, and Madeline Maxwell, 171–196. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Mondada, Lorenza
2017 “Precision timing and timed embeddedness of imperatives in embodied courses of action: Examples from French.” In Imperative Turns at Talk: The Design of Directives in Action, ed. by Marja Leena Sorjonen, Liisa Raevaara, and Elizabeth, Couper-Kuhlen, 65–101. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muskett, Tom, Richard Body, and Mick Perkins
2012 “Uncovering the dynamic in static assessment interaction.” Child Language Teaching and Therapy 28(1): 87–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muskett, Tom, Mick Perkins, Judy Clegg, and Richard Body
2010 “Inflexibility as an interactional phenomenon: Using conversation analysis to re–examine a symptom of autism.” Clinical linguistics & phonetics 24(1): 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newton, Richard
2015 “Neuropsychiatry of Down syndrome.” In Down Syndrome–Current Perspectives, ed. by Richard W. Newton, Shiela Puri, and Liz Marder, 238–69. London: Mac Keith Press.Google Scholar
Norén, Niklas and Maja Sigurd Pilesjö
2016 “Supporting a child with multiple disabilities to participate in social interaction: The case of asking a question.” Clinical linguistics & phonetics 30(10): 790–811. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ochs, Sushie and Carolina Izquierdo
2009 “Responsibility in childhood: Three developmental trajectories.” Ethos 37(4): 391–413. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ochs, Elinor and Olga Solomon
2010 “Autistic sociality.” Ethos 38(1): 69–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey
2018 “Which epistemics? Whose conversation analysis?.” Discourse Studies 20(1): 57–89. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raymond Geoffrey, John C. Heritage
2013 “One question after another: Same–turn–repair in the formation of yes/no type initiating actions.” In Conversational Repair and Human Understanding, ed. by Makoto Hyashi, Geoffrey Raymond and Jack Sidnell, 213–272. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rossi, Giovanni
2018 “Composite Social Actions: The Case of Factual Declaratives in Everyday Interaction.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 51(4): 379–397. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey
1984 “On doing ‘being ordinary’.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by Maxwell J. Atkinson and John Heritage, 413–429. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1993 “Reflections on quantification in the study of conversation.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 26: 99–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1996 “Confirming allusions: Toward an empirical account of action.” American Journal of Sociology 102(1): 161–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sidnell, Jack
2005 Talk and Practical Epistemology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sterponi, Laura and Kenton de Kirby
2016 “A Multidimensional Reappraisal of Language in Autism: Insights from a Discourse Analytic Study.” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 46: 394–405. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya
2015 “Coding social interaction: A heretical approach in conversation analysis?” Research on Language and Social Interaction 48(1): 1–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Turk, Jeremy
2015 “Neuropsychiatry of Down Syndrome Part 2: Developmental, Psychological and Psychiatric Function.” In Down Syndrome: Current Perspectives, ed. by Richard Newton, Shiela Puri and Liz Marder, 248–257. MacKeith Press.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, Ray
2019 “Atypical interaction: Conversation analysis and communicative impairments.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 52(3): 281–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woolfson, Lisa and E. Grant
2006 “Authoritative parenting and parental stress in parents of pre‐school and older children with developmental disabilities.” Child: Care, Health and Development 32(2): 177–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wootton, Anthony J.
1990 “Pointing and interaction initiation: The behaviour of young children with Down’s syndrome when looking at books.” Journal of Child Language 17(3): 565–589. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wright, D. E. and Issy Bray
2000 “Estimating birth prevalence of Down’s syndrome.” Journal of Epidemiology and Biostatistics 5(2): 89–97.Google Scholar
Zinken, Jörg
2016 Requesting Responsibility: The Morality of Grammar in Polish and English Family Interaction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar