Part of
Bonding through Context: Language and interactional alignment in Japanese situated discourseEdited by Risako Ide and Kaori Hata
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 314] 2020
► pp. 197–214
Edited by Risako Ide and Kaori Hata
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 314] 2020
► pp. 197–214
Chapter 9Creating interactional bonds during
theatrical rehearsals
An interactional approach of the documentary method of interpretation
The process of embodying a
theatrical script for organizing the performance
of an interaction among fictional characters and
displaying interactional bonds on stage depends on
the way the participants (the director and the
actors) interpret the script.
Interpreting the script means for them that each
line of the script becomes an underlying pattern
to which extra elements (embodied behaviors,
broader contextual elements) can be connected in
order to build the multimodal performances of
interactional bonds. In this paper I focus on how
participants build two different interpretations
of the same segment of the script, building two
kinds of interactional bonds among addressed and
un-addressed recipients. The goal of this paper is
to understand how the actors embody the
script and create the performance
of interactional bonds by relying on the
script as an underlying pattern.
Keywords: theatrical rehearsals, script, documentary method of interpretation, multimodality, addressed and un-addressed recipients
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 1.1Interactional bonds
- 1.2Methodology of analysis
- 1.3Data and setting
- 1.4The spatial organization of the theatrical rehearsal: Performing, observing and correcting
-
2.The actors’ performance
- 2.1Situation of the play at the beginning of
Extract 1
- Extract 1 (IRE is standing on the left side of im. 1 and sitting on the right side of im. 2; JER is sitting in bed on im. 1 and 2)
- 2.2Interpreting and embodying the script
- 2.3Establishing interactional bonds through bodily postures and touch
- 2.1Situation of the play at the beginning of
Extract 1
- 3.The director’s correction
- 3.1Explaining the problem
- Extract 2
- 3.2Providing a new context
- Extract 3
- 3.3A new way of performing the same
segment
- Extract 4
- 3.4Miming the new performance
- 3.1Explaining the problem
- 4.Conclusion
-
Note -
References
References (14)
Garfinkel, Harold. 1967. Studies
in
Ethnomethodology, Cambridge Prentice-Hall: Polity Press.
Goffman, Erving. 1981. Forms
of
Talk. University of Pennsylvania Press: Philadelphia.
Goodwin, Marjorie H. 2001. “Participation.” In Key
Terms in Language and
Culture, ed.
by Alessandro Duranti, 172–175. Blackwell Publishing.
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.
. 2000. “Action
and embodiment within situated human
interaction”. Journal
of
Pragmatics 32(10): 1489–1522. 
Goodwin, Charles, and Goodwin, Marjorie. H. 2002. “Participation.” In A
Companion to Linguistic
Anthropology, ed.
by Alessandro Duranti, 222–244. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Lefebvre, Augustin. 2018. “Reading
and embodying the script during the theatrical
rehearsal.” Language
and
Dialogue, 8(2): 261–288.
Mondada, Lorenza. 2006. “Video
recording as the reflexive
preservation-configuration of phenomenal features
for
analysis.” In Video
analysis. Methodology and methods. Qualitative
audiovisual data
analysis, ed.
by Hubert Knoblauch, Bernt Schnettler, Jürgen Raab and Hans-Georg Soeffner, 51–68. Bern: Lang.
. 2009. “Emergent
focused interactions in public places: A
systematic analysis of the multimodal achievement
of a common interactional
space.” Journal of
Pragmatics 41: 1977–1997.
Sacks, Harvey. 1984. “Notes
on
methodology”. In Structures
of Social Action Studies in Conversation
Analysis, ed.
by Atkinson J. Maxwell, and Heritage John, 21–27. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge/ Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme: Paris.
Sacks, Harvey, Schegloff, Emanuel. A. and Jefferson, Gail. 1974. “A
Simplest Systematics for the Organisation of
Turn-Taking for
Conversation.” Language 50(4): 696–735.
Schegloff, Emanuel. A., Jefferson, Gail and Sacks, Harvey. 1977. “The
Preference for Self-Correction in the Organization
of Repair in
Conversation.” Language, 53(2), 361–382.
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1992. “Repair
after Next Turn: The Last Structurally Provided
Defense of Intersubjectivity in
Conversation.” American
Journal of
Sociology, 97(5): 1295–1345.
Schegloff, Emanuel. A. 2007. Sequence
Organization in Interaction. A Primer in
Conversation Analysis
I. Cambridge University Press.
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Lefebvre, Augustin & Lorenza Mondada
2023. Interactional Contingencies in Rehearsing a Theater Scene: The Consequentiality of Body Arrangements as Action Unfolds. Human Studies 46:2 ► pp. 303 ff. 
Norrthon, Stefan & Axel Schmidt
2023. Knowledge Accumulation in Theatre Rehearsals: The Emergence of a Gesture as a Solution for Embodying a Certain Aesthetic Concept. Human Studies 46:2 ► pp. 337 ff.
Suzuki, Minato
2023. The Interactive Construction of Performances in Contemporary Theatrical Rehearsal. The Annual Review of Sociology 2023:36 ► pp. 52 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 september 2024. 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.