Article published in:
Language and Dialogue
Vol. 8:3 (2018) ► pp. 439–467

On the role of gaze in the organization of turn-taking and sequence organization in interpreter-mediated dialogue

| Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (Belgium)
| Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (Belgium)
| Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (Belgium)
This paper contributes to the growing line of research that takes a multimodal approach in the study of interpreter-mediated dialogues. Drawing on insights from Conversation Analysis and multimodal analysis, we investigate how extended multi-unit turns unfold with interventions of an interpreter and, more specifically, what is the role of gaze in this process. The analysis is based on videos of interpreter-mediated dialogues (Dutch-Russian) recorded with mobile eye-tracking glasses. We argue that the interpreter’s gaze direction contributes both to the local management of turn-taking (next-speaker selection) and to sequence organization. More specifically, we show how interpreter’s gaze orientation bears on the negotiation of possible transition relevance places and how it contributes to the smooth continuation of the projected extended multi-unit turn.
Keywords: multimodality, interpreter-mediated dialogue, multi-unit turns, gaze in interaction, turn-taking, conversation analysis, next-speaker selection, transition relevance place
Published online: 02 November 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.00025.vra
References

References

Angelelli, Claudia
2000 “Interpretation as a Communicative Event: A Look through Hymes’ Lenses.” Translators’ Journal 45(4): 580–592.Google Scholar
Auer, Peter
2005 “Projection in interaction and projection in grammar.” Text 25(1): 7–36. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017 “Gaze, addressee selection and turn-taking in three-party interaction.” InLiSt (60): 1–32.Google Scholar
Baraldi, Claudio and Laura Gavioli
2012 “Introduction: Understanding coordination in interpreter-mediated interaction.” In Coordinating Participation in Dialogue Interpreting, ed. by Claudio Baraldi and Laura Gavioli, 1–21. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bavelas, B. Janet, Linda Coates, and Trudy Johnson
2002 “Listener responses as a collaborative process: The role of gaze.” Journal of Communication 52(3): 566–580. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bolden, Galina
2000 “Toward understanding practices of medical interpreting: interpreters’ involvement in history taking.” Discourse Studies 2(4): 387–419. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bot, Hanneke
2005 Dialogue Interpreting in Mental Health. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi Publishers.Google Scholar
Brône, Geert, Bert Oben, Annelies Jehoul, Jelena Vranjes and Kurt Feyaerts
2017 “Eye gaze and viewpoint in multimodal interaction management.” Cognitive Linguistics 28(3): 449–484. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clayman, Steven E.
2013 “Turn-Constructional Units and the Transition-Relevance-Place.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 150–166. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
[ p. 464 ]
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth and Tsuyoshi Ono
2007 “ ‘Incrementing’ in conversation. A comparison of practices in English, German and Japanese.” Pragmatics 17(4): 513–552. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, Brad
2002 “A model for the construction of conversational common ground in interpreted discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 34: 1273–1300. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Davitti, Elena
2013 “Dialogue Interpreting as Intercultural Mediation: Interpreter’s use of upgrading moves in parent-teacher meetings.” Interpreting 15(2): 168–199. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Davitti, Elena and Sergio Pasquandrea
2017 “Embodied participation: What multimodal analysis can tell us about interpreter-mediated encounters in pedagogical settings.” Journal of Pragmatics 107: 105–128. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, Starkey
1972 “Some signals and rules for taking speaking turns in conversations.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 23 (2): 283–292. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta
1997 “Degree of Interpreter Responsibility in the Interaction Process in Community Interpreting.” In Critical Link: Interpreters in the Community, ed. by Silvana E. Carr, 147–164. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ford, Cecilia E.
2004 “Contingency and units in interaction.” Discourse Studies 6(1): 27–52. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ford, Cecilia E., Barbara Fox, and Sandra A. Thompson
1996 “Practices in the construction of turns: The TCU revisted.” Pragmatics 6(3): 427–454. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Frischen, Alexandra, Andrew P. Bayliss, and Steven P. Tipper
2007 “Gaze Cueing of Attention: Visual Attention, Social Cognition, and Individual Differences.” Psychological Bulletin 133(4): 694–724. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles
1979 “The Interactive Construction of a Sentence in Natural Conversation.” In Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. by George Psathas, 97–121. New York: Irvington Publishers.Google Scholar
1981 Conversational Organization. Interaction between Speakers and Hearers. New York/ London: Academic.Google Scholar
2013 “The co-operative, transformative organization of human action and knowledge.” Journal of Pragmatics 46: 8–23. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hayashi, Makoto
2013 “Turn Allocation and Turn Sharing.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 167–190. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Houtkoop, Hanneke and Mazeland, Harrie
1985 “Turns and discourse units in everyday conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 9: 595–619.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kendon, Adam
1967 “Some functions of gaze-direction in social interaction.” Acta Psychologica 26: 22–63. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lang, Ranier
1978 “Behavioral aspects of liaison interpreters in Papua New Guinea: some preliminary observations.” In Language Interpretation and Communication, ed. by David Gerver and Wallace H. Sinaiko, 231–244. New York/ London: Plenum Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lerner, Gene H.
1991 “On the Syntax of Sentences in Progress.” Language in Society 20: 441–458. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2003 “Selecting next speaker: The context-sensitive operation of a context-free organization.” Language in Society 32: 177–201. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 465 ]
Levinson, Stephen C.
2012 “Action formation and ascription.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 103–131. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. and Francisco Torreira
2015 “Timing in turn-taking and its implications for processing models of language.” In Turn-taking in Human Communicative Interaction, ed. by Judith Holler, Kobin H. Kendrick, Marisa Casillas and Stephen C. Levinson, 10–27. Lausanne: Frontiers Media.Google Scholar
Llewellyn-Jones, Peter and Robert G. Lee
2014 Redefining the Role of the Community Interpreter: The Concept of role-space. Lincoln: SLI Press.Google Scholar
Li, Shuangyu
2015 “Nine Types of Turn-taking in Interpreter-mediated GP Consultations.” Applied Linguistics Review 6(1): 73–96. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Licoppe, Christian
Forthcoming. “The interpreter as a sequential coordinator in courtroom interaction. ’Chunking’ and the management of turn shifts in extended answers in consecutively interpreted asylum hearings with remote participants.” Interpreting.
Licoppe, Christian, Maud Verdier, and Clair-Antoine Veyrier
2018 “Voice, control and turn-taking in multi-lingual, consecutively interpreted courtroom proceedings with video links. In Remote Interpreting, ed. by Robert Skinner, Jemina Napier and Sabina Braun, 299–322. Washington (DC): Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Mandelbaum, Jenny
2013 “Storytelling in Conversation.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 492–509. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Mason, Ian
2012 “Gaze, positioning and identity in interpreter-mediated dialogues.” In Coordinating Participation in Dialogue Interpreting, ed. by Claudio Baraldi and Laura Gavioli, 177–199. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Merlino, Sara
2014 “Traduction orale et organisation de la parole: la gestion multimodale des transitions.” In Corps en interaction: participation, spatialité, mobilité, ed. by Lorenza Mondada, 65–105. Lyon: ENS Editions.Google Scholar
Mondada, Lorenza
2007 “Multimodal resources for turn-taking: pointing and emergence of next speakers.” Discourse Studies 9(2): 194–225. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2018 “Multiple Temporalities of Language and Body in Interaction: Challenges for Transcribing Multimodality.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 51(1): 85–106. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pasquandrea, Sergio
2011 “Managing multiple actions through multimodality: Doctors’ involvement in interpreter-mediated interactions.” Language in Society 40 (4): 455–481. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rossano, Federico
2012 Gaze behavior in face-to-face interaction. PhD Thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson
1974 “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation.” Language 50: 696–735. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1982 “Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of ‘uh huh’ and other things that come between sentences.” In Analyzing Discourse: Text and Talk, ed. by Deborah Tannen, 71–93. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
1996 “Turn Organization: One Intersection of Grammar and Interaction.” Interaction and Grammar 52–133. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2000 “Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation.” Language in Society 29: 1–63. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 466 ]
Schmitt, Reinhold
2005 “Zur multimodalen Struktur von turn-taking.“ Gesprächsforschung 6: 17–61.Google Scholar
Selting, Margaret
2000 “The construction of units in conversational talk.” Language in Society 29: 477–517. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sidnell, Jack and Tanya Stivers
(eds) 2013 The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Chichester: Blackwell-Wiley. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya
2008 “Stance, Alignment and Affiliation during Storytelling: When Nodding is a Token of Affiliation.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 41 (1): 31–57. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013 “Sequence organization.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Oxford, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 191–209. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya and Federico Rossano
2010 “Mobilizing Response.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 43 (1): 3–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Streeck, Jürgen
2014 “Mutual gaze and recognition. Revisiting Kendon’s “Gaze direction in two-person conversation””. In From Gesture in Conversation to Visible Action as Utterance: Essays in honor of Adam Kendon, ed. by Mandana Seyfeddinpur and Marianne Gullberg, 35–56. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vranjes, Jelena, Hanneke, Bot, Kurt Feyaerts and Geert Brône
Forthcoming. “Displaying recipiency in an interpreter-mediated dialogue: an eye-tracking study.” In Eye-tracking in Interaction. Studies on the Role of Eye Gaze in Dialogue ed. by Brône Geert and Bert Oben Amsterdam John Benjamins Crossref
Wadensjö, Cecilia
1998 Interpreting as interaction. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Wittenburg, Peter, Hennie Brugman, Albert Russel, Alex Klassmann, and Han Sloetjes
2006 “ELAN: a Professional Framework for Multimodality Research.” In Proceedings of LREC 2006, Fifth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, 1556–1559. ELRA (European Language Resources Association).Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 5 other publications

Auer, Peter
2021. Turn-allocation and gaze: A multimodal revision of the “current-speaker-selects-next” rule of the turn-taking system of conversation analysis. Discourse Studies 23:2 ► pp. 117 ff. Crossref logo
Gilbert, Andrew Simon, Samantha Croy, Kerry Hwang, Dina LoGiudice & Betty Haralambous
2021. Video remote interpreting for home-based cognitive assessments. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting Crossref logo
KINCAL, Şeyda
2020. Çevirmen etkileşimde: Ardıl çeviride uyumsuz aktarımlar. RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi ► pp. 774 ff. Crossref logo
Tiselius, Elisabet & Michaela Albl-Mikasa
2021. Introduction. Translation, Cognition & Behavior ► pp. 233 ff. Crossref logo
Vranjes, Jelena & Geert Brône
2021. Interpreters as laminated speakers: Gaze and gesture as interpersonal deixis in consecutive dialogue interpreting. Journal of Pragmatics 181 ► pp. 83 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 02 november 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.