Cover not available
Article published In:
Skype and domestic settings: Interpersonal video communication as a site of human sociality
Edited by Richard Harper, Rod Watson and Christian Licoppe
[Pragmatics 27:3] 2017
► pp. 387–418

Talking about things

Image-based topical talk and intimacy in video-mediated family communication

| Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers, and Orange Labs Paris
| Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales and Orange Labs, Paris
This paper focuses on how conversation and a shared participation frame are maintained in video-mediated family conversations which ordinarily do not have a particular agenda. In order to examine this question, how conversations are maintained whilst being sometimes improvised, the paper analyses a particular interactional phenomenon, namely, the image-based topic management accomplished via two methods: showings and noticings. Through a detailed multimodal analysis of family video mediated conversations, it shows how these methods are used for introducing or changing topics and hence sustaining talk. Moreover, by describing the practical actions that involve technological and social dimensions, the paper highlights the link between interaction, personal relationships and technology. The analysis of showings and noticings, enabled by the technical features of the systems used by the participants, reveals how video-communication technology is mobilized by family members as a resource for maintaining intimacy in distant relationships.
Keywords: Skype, video-mediated conversation, technology use, conversation analysis, ethnomethodology, topic management, image-based topic, showings, noticings, participation frameworks, relationship
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background: Topical talk
  • 3.Showings as visual turn taking in storytelling between relatives
    • 3.1Showing an environment
    • 3.2Showing one’s clothing
    • 3.3Summary
  • 4.Noticings as intimacy achieving practices
    • 4.1Noticings about physical appearance
    • 4.2Focusing conversation on children’s activities through noticings
    • 4.3Summary
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 16 October 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.27.3.04zou
References (20)
References
Adato, A. 1980. “‘Occasionality’ as a Constituent Feature of the Known-in-Common Character of Topics”. Human Studies 31: 47–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Button, G., and N. Casey. 1984. “Generating Topic: The Use of Topic Initial Elicitors.” In Structures of Social Action. Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by J. M. Atkinson, and J. Heritage, 165–190. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Coupland, J. (ed.). 2000. Small talk. Essex, UK: Longman Harlow.Google Scholar
Coupland, J., and A. Jaworski. 2003. “Transgression and Intimacy in Reconnaitre Talk Narratives.” Research on Language and Social interaction 361: 85–106. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, P., and K. Chilton, 2000. “Calling just to Keep in Touch: Regular and Habitualised Telephone Calls as an Environment for Small Talk.” In Small talk, ed. by J. Coupland, 137–162. Essex, UK: Longman Harlow.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. 1964. “The Neglected Situation.” American Anthropologist 661: 133–6. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, G. 1978a. “What’s in a ‘Nyem’?” Sociology 12 (1): 135–139. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1978b. “Sequential Aspects of Storytelling in Conversation.” In Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction, ed. by J. N. Schenkein, 213–248. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kirk, D., A. Sellen, and X. Cao. 2010. “Home Video Communication: Mediating Closeness.” Proceedings of CSCW: ACM Press: pp. 135–144.Google Scholar
Levinson, S. C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Licoppe, C., and J. Morel. 2014. “Mundane Video Directors in Interaction. Showing One’s Environment in Skype and Mobile Video Calls.” In M. Broth, E. Laurier, and L. Mondada (eds.), Studies of Video Practices, Video at Work, 135–160. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Maynard, D. W. 1980. “Placement of Topic Choices in Conversation.” Semiotica 301: 263–290. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maynard, D. W., and D. H. Zimmerman. 1984. “Topical Talk, Ritual and the Social Organization of Relationships.” Social Psychology Quarterly, vol. 471: 301–316. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Relieu, M. 2007. “La téléprésence, ou l’autre visiophonie.” In «De la rue au tribunal. Etudes sur la visiocommunication. Réseaux 1441, ed. by C. Licoppe, and M. Relieu, 183–224. Paris: Hermès.Google Scholar
Radford, J. and C. Tarplee. 2000. “The Management of Conversational Topic by a Ten Year Old Child with Pragmatic Difficulties.” Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 141: 5.Google Scholar
Sacks, H. 1992. Lectures on Conversation. 21 vol., ed. by G. Jefferson. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
1984. “On Doing ‘Being Ordinary.’” In Structures of social action. Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by M. Atkinson, and J. Heritage, 413–429. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. 1968. “Sequencing in Conversational Openings.” American Anthropologist 70 (6): 1075–1095. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1990. “The Organization of Sequences as a Source of Coherence in Talk-in-Interaction.” In Conversational Organization and its Development, ed. by B. Dorval, 51–77. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex.Google Scholar
Sunakawa, C. 2012. “Japanese Family via Webcam: An Ethnographic Study of Cross-Spatial Interactions.” In Lecture Notes, in Computer Science, vol. 72581, ed. by M. Okumura, D. Bekki, and K. Satoh, 264–276. Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Boudouraki, Andriana, Stuart Reeves, Joel E Fischer & Sean Rintel
2022. CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Hougaard, Anders
2021. Hyperembodiment. Cognitive Semiotics 14:2 ► pp. 131 ff. DOI logo
Siitonen, Pauliina, Mirka Rauniomaa & Tiina Keisanen
2021. Language and the Moving Body: Directive Actions With the Finnish kato “look” in Nature-Related Activities. Frontiers in Psychology 12 DOI logo
Shaw, Sara E, Deborah Cameron, Joseph Wherton, Lucas M Seuren, Shanti Vijayaraghavan, Satyajit Bhattacharya, Christine A’Court, Joanne Morris & Trisha Greenhalgh
2018. Technology-Enhanced Consultations in Diabetes, Cancer, and Heart Failure: Protocol for the Qualitative Analysis of Remote Consultations (QuARC) Project. JMIR Research Protocols 7:7 ► pp. e10913 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 october 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.