Cover not available
Part of
Mobilizing Others: Grammar and lexis within larger activities
Edited by Carmen Taleghani-Nikazm, Emma Betz and Peter Golato
[Studies in Language and Social Interaction 33] 2020
► pp. 47–82

Chapter 3
Mobilizing for the next relevant action

Managing progressivity in card game interactions

 | The Ohio State University
 | Saginaw Valley State University
 | Texas State University
 | University of Waterloo
This chapter discusses three different actions speakers can employ to move between two concurrently ongoing activities, playing cards and talking. Specifically, we describe three turn formats that mobilize another participant to perform the next move in a card game: (1) turns including the discourse marker so, (2) imperatives, and (3) second-person declaratives.
So-turns and imperative forms are used to resume a game put on hold, however, imperatives are only used if speakers have already shown an orientation to game resumption. In contrast, second-person declaratives are used in situations when one player is not oriented to the game but others are. In the discussion, we show that turn formats are sensitive to the multimodal context and participation framework of the interaction.
Keywords: games, gaze, German, imperatives, multimodality, progressivity, prompt, second-person declaratives, so
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Previous research
  • Data
  • Discourse marker so: Transitioning between actions
  • Imperative turns
  • Second-person declarative turns
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 13 May 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slsi.33.03tal
References (66)
References
Atkinson, J. Maxwell, and John Heritage (eds.). 1984. Structures of Social Action. Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Antaki, Charles, and Alexandra Kent. 2012. “Telling People What to Do (and Sometimes, Why): Contingency, Entitlement and Explanation in Staff Requests to Adults with Intellectual Impairments.” Journal of Pragmatics 44 (6–7): 876–889. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. “Offering Alternatives as a Way of Issuing Directives to Children: Putting the Worse Option Last.” Journal of Pragmatics 78: 25–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Auer, Peter. 2017. “Epilogue: Imperatives – the Language of Immediate Action.” In Imperative Turns at Talk: The Design of Directives in Action, ed. by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Liisa Raevaara and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 411–423. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barske, Tobias, and Andrea Golato. 2010. “German so: Managing Sequence and Action.” Text & Talk 30 (3): 245–266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bolden, Galina. 2017. “Requests for Here-and-Now Actions in Russian Conversation.” In Imperative Turns at Talk: The Design of Directives in Action, ed. by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Liisa Raevaara, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 175–211. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brünner, Gisela. 1987. Kommunikation in institutionellen Lehr-Lern-Prozessen. Diskursanalytische Untersuchungen zur Instruktion in der betrieblichen Ausbildung. [Communication in Institutional Teaching and Learning Processes. Discourse Analytic Examination of Instruction in Work Place Training]. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Craven, Alexandra, and Jonathan Potter. 2010. “Directives: Entitlement and Contingency in Action.” Discourse Studies 12 (4): 419–442. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf. 2018a. “Changes in Turn-Design over Interactional Histories – the Case of Instructions in Driving School Lessons.” In Time in Embodied Interaction: Synchronicity and Sequentiality of Multimodal Resources, ed. by Arnulf Deppermann, and Jürgen Streeck, 293–324. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018b. “Instruction Practices in German Driving Lessons: Differential Uses of Declaratives and Imperatives.” International Journal of Applied Linguistics 28 (2): 1–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehlich, Konrad. 1987. “so – Überlegungen zum Verhältnis sprachlicher Formen und sprachlichen Handelns, allgemein und an einem widerspenstigen Beispiel [so – Thoughts on the Relationship between Speech Forms and Speech Actions, in General and in an Intractable Example].” In Sprache und Pragmatik [Language and Pragmatics]. Lunder Symposium 1986, ed. by Inger Rosengren, 279–298. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Fatigante, Marilena, Vivian Liberati, and Clotilde Pontecorvo. 2010. “Transitions in and out of Games: How Parents and Children Bracket Game Episodes at Home.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 43 (3): 346–371. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fogarty, Kathryn, Martha Augoustinos, and Lisa Kettler. 2013. “Re-thinking Rapport through the Lens of Progressivity in Investigative Interviews into Child Sexual Abuse.” Discourse Studies 15 (4): 395–420. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fox, Barbara, and Sandra Thompson. 2010. “Responses to Wh-Questions in English Conversation.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 43: 133–156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frick, Maria. 2017. “Combining physical actions and verbal announcements as ‘What I’m doing’ combinations in everyday conversation.” In Linking Clauses and Action in Social Interaction, ed. By Ritva Laury, Marja Etelämäki, and Elizabeth Couper Kuhlen Laury, 27–53. Helsinki: Finnish Literary Society. [URL]
Golato, Andrea. 2018. “Turn-Initial Naja in German.” In At the Intersection of Turn and Sequence: Turn-Initial Particles across Languages, ed. by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, and John Heritage, 403–432. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Marjorie Harness, and Charles Goodwin. 1986. “Gesture and Coparticipation in the Activity of Searching for a Word.” Semiotica 62: 51–75.Google Scholar
Haddington, Pentti. 2010. “Turn-Taking for Turntaking: Mobility, Time, and Action in the Sequential Organization of Junction Negotiations in Cars.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 43 (4): 372–400. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haddington, Pentti, Tiina Keisanen, Lorenza Mondada, and Maurice Nevile. 2014. “Towards Multiactivity as a Social and Interactional Phenomenon.” In Multiactivity in Social Interaction: Beyond Multitasking, ed. by Pentti Haddington, Tiina Keisanen, Lorenza Mondada, and Maurice Nevile, 3–32. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Heritage, John. 2007. “Intersubjectivity and Progressivity in Person (and Place) Reference.” In Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives, ed. by Nick J. Enfield and Tanya Stivers, 255–280. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2012a. “Epistemics in Action: Action Formation and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012b. “The Epistemic Engine: Sequence Organization and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45: 30–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John, and Geoffrey Raymond. 2005. “The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Talk-in-Interaction.” Social Psychology Quarterly 68 (1): 15–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. “Navigating Epistemic Landscapes: Acquiescence, Agency and Resistance in Responses to Polar Questions.” In Questions: Formal, Functional, and Interactional Perspectives, ed. by J. P. de Ruiter, 179–192. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Imo, Wolfgang. 2009. “Konstruktion oder Funktion? Erkenntnisprozessmarker (change-of-state-tokens) im Deutschen [Construction or Function? Change-of-State Tokens in German].” In Grammatik im Gespräch [Grammar in Conversation], ed. by Susanne Günthner, and Jörg Bücker, 57–86. Berlin: deGruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keevallik, Leelo. 2012. “Compromising Progressivity: ‘‘no’’-Prefacing in Estonian.” Pragmatics 22: 119–146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keisanen, Tiina, Mirka Rauniomaa, and Pentti Haddington. 2014. “Suspending Action: From Simultaneous to Consecutive Ordering of Multiple Courses of Action.” In Multiactivity in Social Interaction: Beyond Multitasking, ed. by Pentti Haddington, Tina Keisanen, Lorenza Mondada, and Maurice Nevile, 109–137. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kent, Alexandra. 2012a. “Compliance, Resistance and Incipient Compliance When Responding to Directives.” Discourse Studies 14 (6): 711–730. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012b. “Responding to Directives: What Can Children Do When a Parent Tells Them What to Do?” In Disputes in Everyday Life: Social and Moral Orders of Children and Young People, ed. by Susan Danby, and Maryanne Theobold, 57–84. Bingley: Emerald Books. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kent, Alexandra, and Kobin H. Kendrick. 2016. “Imperative Directives: Orientations to Accountability.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 49 (3): 272–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuroshima, Satomi. 2010. “Another Look at the Service Encounter: Progressivity, Intersubjectivity, and Trust in a Japanese Sushi Restaurant.” Journal of Pragmatics 42: 856–869. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, Seung-Hee. 2011. “Responding at a Higher Level: Activity Progressivity in Calls for Service.” Journal of Pragmatics 43: 904–917. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Licoppe, Christian, and Sylvaine Tuncer. 2014. “Attending to a Summons and Putting other Activities “on Hold”: Multiactivity as a Recognizable Interactional Accomplishment.” In Multiactivity in Social Interaction: Beyond Multitasking, ed. by Pentti Haddington, Tiina Keisanen, Lorenza Mondada, and Maurice Nevile, 167–191. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Mazeland, Harrie. 1983. “Openingssequenties van lesbeginnen. [Opening Sequences in Lesson Beginnings]” Toegepaste taalwetenschap in artikelen [Applied Linguistics in Article Form] 16 (b): 95–121.Google Scholar
. 1984. “Eröffnungssequenzen in Unterrichtsstunden Unpublished working paper No. 6, DFG-Project “Analysemethoden von Unterrichtskommunikation [Methods for Analyzing Classroom Communication]”.Google Scholar
Meier, Christoph. 2002. Arbeitsbesprechungen. Interaktionsstruktur, Interaktionsdynamik und Konsequenzen einer sozialen Form [Business Meetings. Interactional Dynamics and Consequences of a Social Form]. Radolfzell: Verlag für Gesprächsforschung. <[URL]>.
Mondada, Lorenza. 2011. “The Situated Organization of Directives in French: Imperatives and Action Coordination in Video Games.” Nottingham French Studies 50 (2): 19–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012a. “Coordinating Action and Talk-in-Interaction in and out of Video Games.” In The Appropriation of Media in Everyday Life, ed. by Ruth Ayaß, and Cornelia Gerhardt, 231–270. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012b. “Talking and Driving: Multiactivity in the Car.” Semiotica 19 (1): 223–256. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. “Coordinating Mobile Action in Real Time: The Timely Organization of Directives in Video Games.” In Interaction and Mobility, ed. by Pentti Haddington, Lorenza Mondada, and Maurice Nevile, 300–342. Berlin: deGruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014a. “Requesting Immediate Action in the Surgical Operating Room.” In Requesting in Social Interaction, ed. by Paul Drew, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 269–302. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
. 2014b. “The Temporal Orders of Multiactivity: Operating and Demonstrating in the Surgical Theatre.” In Multiactivity in Social Interaction: Beyond Multitasking, ed. by Pentti Haddington, Tina Keisanen, Lorenza Mondada, and Maurice Nevile, 33–79. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
. 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/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018. “Multiple Temporalities of Language and Body in Interaction: Challenges for Transcribing Multimodality.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 51(1): 85–106. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, Søren Beck. 2016. “How Doctors Manage Consulting Computer Records while Interacting with Patients.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 49 (1): 58–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Okada, Misao. 2018. “Imperative Actions in Boxing Sparring Sessions.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 51 (1): 67–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita. 1984. “Pursuing a Response.” In Structures of Social Action. Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 152–164. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rauniomaa, Mirka. 2017. “Assigning Roles and Responsibilities.” In Imperative Turns at Talk: The Design of Directives in Action, ed. by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Liisa Raevaara, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 325–355. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raevaara, Liisa. 2017. “Adjusting the Design of Directives to the Activity Environment: Imperatives in Finnish Cooking Club Interaction.” In Imperative Turns at Talk: The Design of Directives in Action, ed. by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Liisa Raevaara and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 381–410. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey. 2003. “Grammar and Social Organization: Yes/no Interrogatives and the Structure of Responding.” American Sociological Review 68 (December): 939–967. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey, and Gene Lerner. 2014. “A Body and its Involvement: Adjusting Action from Dual Involvements.” In Multiactivity in Social Interaction: Beyond Multitasking, ed. by Pentti Haddington, Tina Keisanen, Lorenza Mondada, and Maurice Nevile, 227–247. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Rossi, Giovanni. 2012. “Bilateral and Unilateral Requests: The Use of Imperatives and mi X? Interrogatives in Italian.” Discourse Processes 49: 426–458. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. “Secondary and Deviant Uses of the Imperative for Requesting in Italian.” In Imperative Turns at Talk: The Design of Directives in Action, ed. by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Liisa Raevaara, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 103–137. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1979. “The Relevance of Repair to Syntax-for-Conversation.” Syntax and Semantics 12: 261–286.Google Scholar
1996. “Turn Organization: One Intersection of Grammar and Interaction.” In Interaction and Grammar, ed. by Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Sandra A. Thompson, 52–133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007. Sequence Organization in Interaction. A Primer in Conversation Analysis (Vol. 1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schirm, R. Samuel. 2017. “Negotiating Relevance: German aha in the Receipt of Information”. Paper presented at the Conference on Intersubjectivity in Action, Helsinki, Finland, May 11–13.
Sorjonen, Marja-Leena, Liisa Raevaara, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen. 2017. “Imperative Turns at Talk: An Introduction.” In Imperative Turns at Talk: The Design of Directives in Action, ed. by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Liisa Raevaara, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 1–26. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevanovic, Melisa. 2011. “Participants’ Deontic Rights and Action Formation: The Case of Declarative Requests for Action.” InLiSt – Interaction and Linguistic Structures 52.Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya. 2005. “Modified Repeats: One Method for Asserting Primary Rights from Second Position.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 38 (2): 131–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, and Jeffrey Robinson. 2006. “A Preference for Progressivity in Interaction.” Language in Society 35: 367–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ticca, Anna Claudia. 2014. “Managing Multiactivity in a Travel Agency: Making Phone Calls while Interacting with Customers.” In Multiactivity in Social Interaction: Beyond Multitasking, ed. by Pentti Haddington, Tina Keisanen, Lorenza Mondada, and Maurice Nevile, 191–227. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Usatch, Eric Paul. 2000. A Conversation Analytic Study of Social Actors’ Methods for Accomplishing Activities in Interaction. Doctoral Thesis. University of Southern Illinois.Google Scholar
Wootton, Anthony J. 1997. Interaction and the Development of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zinken, Jörg, and Arnulf Deppermann. 2017. “A Cline of Visible Commitment in the Situated Design of Imperative Turns. Evidence from German and Polish.” In Imperative Turns at Talk: The Design of Directives in Action, ed. by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Liisa Raevaara, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 27–63. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zinken, Jörg, and Eva Ogiermann. 2013. “Responsibility and Action: Object Requests in English and Polish Everyday Interaction.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 46 (3): 256–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Golato, Andrea, Emma Betz, Carmen Taleghani-Nikazm & Veronika Drake
2024. Verbal and bodily practices for addressing trouble associated with embodied moves in game play. In New Perspectives in Interactional Linguistic Research [Studies in Language and Social Interaction, 36], ► pp. 187 ff. DOI logo
Kornfeld, Laurenz
2024. Giving space for self-direction. Interactional Linguistics DOI logo
Stokoe, Elizabeth & Emma Richardson
2023. Asking for help without asking for help: How victims request and police offer assistance in cases of domestic violence when perpetrators are potentially co-present. Discourse Studies 25:3 ► pp. 383 ff. DOI logo
Floyd, Simeon
2021. Conversation and Culture. Annual Review of Anthropology 50:1 ► pp. 219 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 november 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.