Article published in:
Interacting with Objects: Language, materiality, and social activity
Edited by Maurice Nevile, Pentti Haddington, Trine Heinemann and Mirka Rauniomaa
[Not in series 186] 2014
► pp. 145–168

Organising the soundscape

Participants’ orientation to impending sound when turning on auditory objects in interaction

| University of Oulu
| University of Southern Denmark
This chapter examines two auditory objects, i.e. devices that produce sounds when in use: audio entertainment systems and vacuum cleaners. Despite their apparent differences, both objects raise similar relevancies for how and when they are employed. The chapter demonstrates that participants treat the turning on of an auditory object as negotiable and requiring disengagement from other involvements, such as talk. Consequently, turning on an auditory object occurs typically at points where the participants have brought a previous interactional activity to a close collaboratively and where the possibility of turning on the auditory object has been explicated either verbally or physically
Published online: 12 September 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/z.186.07rau
References
Arminen, I., & Leinonen, M.
(2006) Mobile phone call openings: Tailoring answers to personalized summonses. Discourse Studies, 8, 339–368. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Egbert, M.
(1997) Schisming: The collaborative transformation from a single conversation to multiple conversations. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 30, 1–51. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Emmertsen, S., & Heinemann, T.
(2010) Realization as a device for remedying problems of affiliation in interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 43, 109–132. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fasulo, A., & Monzoni, C.
(2009) Assessing mutable objects: A multimodal analysis. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 42, 362–376. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, J.J.
(1977) The theory of affordances. In R. Shaw, & J. Bransford (Eds.), Perceiving, acting and knowing: Toward an ecological psychology (pp. 67–82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Goffman, E.
(1963) Behavior in public places. New York, NY: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Goodwin, C.
(1997) The blackness of black: Color categories as situated practice. In L.B. Resnick, R. Säljö, C. Pontecorvo, & B. Burge (Eds.), Discourse, tools and reasoning: Essays on situated cognition (pp. 111–140). Berlin: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2000) Practices of color classification. Mind, Culture and Activity, 7, 19–36. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, M.H.
(1996) Informings and announcements in their environment: Prosody within a multi-activity work setting. In E. Couper-Kuhlen, & M. Selting (Eds.), Prosody in conversation: Interactional studies (pp. 436–461). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Haddington, P., & Rauniomaa, M.
(2011) Technologies, multi-tasking, and driving: Attending to and preparing for a mobile phone conversation in a car. Human Communication Research, 37, 223–254. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Haviland, J.B.
(2011) Musical spaces. In J. Streeck, C. Goodwin, & C. LeBaron (Eds.), Embodied interaction: Language and body in the material world (pp. 289–304). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Heath, C.
(1983) Research note: Computer-aided diagnosis in the consultation. Sociology of Health & Illness, 5, 332–344. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heath, C., Knoblauch, H., & Luff, P.
(2000) Technology and social interaction: The emergence of ‘workplace studies’. British Journal of Sociology, 51, 299–320. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heinemann, T.
(2009) Two answers to inapposite inquiries. In J. Sidnell (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Comparative perspectives (pp. 159–186). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2011) From home to institution: Roles, relations and the loss of autonomy in the care of old people in Denmark. In P. Backhaus (Ed.), Communication in elderly care (pp. 90–111). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Heinemann, T., Landgrebe, J., Mitchell, R., & Buur, J.
in press). Narrating value networks and business models through tangible materials. TAMARA (Special issue on Materiality & Storytelling).
Heinemann, T., Lindström, A., & Steensig, J.
(2011) Addressing epistemic incongruence in question–answer sequences through the use of epistemic adverbs. In T. Stivers, L. Mondada, & J. Steensig (Eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation (pp. 107–130). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, J.
(1984) A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J.M. Atkinson, & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action (pp. 299–345). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2002) The limits of questioning: Negative interrogatives and hostile question content. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 1427–1466. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hindmarsh, J., Reynolds, P., & Dunne, S.
(2011) Exhibiting understanding: The body in apprenticeship. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 489–503. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, M.
(1999) Experimental investigation of the acoustical characteristics of university classrooms. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106, 1810–1819. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hutchby, I., & Barnett, S.
(2005) Aspects of the sequential organization of mobile phone conversation. Discourse Studies, 7, 147–171. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, G.
(1979) A technique for inviting laughter and its subsequent acceptance/declination. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology (pp. 79–96). New York, NY: Irvington Publishers.Google Scholar
(1993) Caveat speaker. Preliminary notes on recipient topic-shift implicature. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 26, 1–30. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2004) Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13–31). Amsterdam /Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Keisanen, T., & Rauniomaa, M.
(2012) The organization of participation and contingency in prebeginnings of request sequences. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45, 323–351. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Keisanen, T., Rauniomaa, M., & Haddington P.
in press). Suspending action: From simultaneous to consecutive ordering of multiple courses of action. In P. Haddington, T. Keisanen, L. Mondada, & M. Nevile (Eds.) Multiactivity in social interaction Amsterdam/Philadelphia John Benjamins
Koschmann, T., LeBaron, C., Goodwin, C., & Feltovich, P.
(2011) “Can you see the cystic artery yet?” A simple matter of trust. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 521–541. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Laurier, E.
(2008) Drinking up endings: Conversational resources of the café. Language & Communication, 28, 165–181. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Laurier, E., Whyte, A., & Buckner, K.
(2001) An ethnography of a neighbourhood café: Informality, table arrangements and background noise. Journal of Mundane Behavior, 2, 1–30.Google Scholar
LeBaron, C.D., & Jones, S.E.
(2002) Closing up closings: Showing the relevance of the social and material surround to the completion of an interaction. Journal of Communication, 52, 542–565. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lindström, A.
forthcoming). Accepting remote proposals. In G. Raymond, G.H. Lerner, & J. Heritage (Eds.) Enabling human conduct: Naturalistic studies of talk-in-interaction in honor of Emanuel A. Schegloff Amsterdam/Philadelphia John Benjamins
Local, J., & Walker, G.
(2004) Abrupt-joins as a resource for the production of multi-unit, multi-action turns. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 1375–1403. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Luff, P., Heath, C., & Hindmarsh, J.
(2000) Workplace studies: Recovering work practice and informing systems design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McKellin, W.H., Shahin, K., Hodgson, M., Jamieson, J., & Pichora-Fuller, K.
(2007) Pragmatics of conversation and communication in noisy settings. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 2159–2184. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mondada, L.
(2009) The methodical organization of talking and eating: Assessments in dinner conversations. Food Quality and Preference, 20, 558–571. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nevile, M., & Haddington, P.
(2010) In-car distractions and their impact on driving activities. Road Safety Grant Report 2010-001. Canberra: Australian Government, Department of Infrastructure and Transport.Google Scholar
Nielsen, M.F.
(2002) Nå! En skiftemarkør med mange funktioner [Oh! A change-of-state token with many functions]. In Studier i Nordisk 2000–2001 (pp. 51–67). Copenhagen: Selskabfor Nordisk Filologi.Google Scholar
Nishizaka, A.
(2011) Touch without vision: Referential practice in a non-technological environment. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 504–520. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ochs, E.
(1988) Culture and language development. Language acquisition and language socialization in a Samoan village. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rauniomaa, M., & Keisanen, T.
(2012) Two multimodal formats for responding to requests. Journal of Pragmatics, 44, 829–842. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Raymond, G.
(2004) Prompting action: The stand-alone “so” in ordinary conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 37, 185–218. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sanchez Svensson, M., & Tap, H.
(2003) Alarms – localization, orientation and recognition. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 15, 51–66. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E.A.
(1968) Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist, 70, 1075–1095. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1998) Body torque. Social Research, 65, 535–596.Google Scholar
(2007) Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis, vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E.A., & Sacks, H.
(1973) Opening up closings. Semiotica, 7, 289–327.Google Scholar
Stivers, T., & Rossano, F.
(2010) Mobilizing response. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 43, 3–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Toerien, M., & Kitzinger, C.
(2007) Emotional labour in action: Navigating multiple involvements in the beauty salon. Sociology, 41, 645–662. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
vom Lehn, D.
(2013) Withdrawing from exhibits: The interactional organisation of museum visits. In P. Haddington, L. Mondada, & M. Nevile (Eds.), Interaction and mobility: Language and the body in motion (pp. 65–90). Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
vom Lehn, D., Heath, C., & Hindmarsh, J.
(2001) Exhibiting interaction: Conduct and collaboration in museums and galleries. Symbolic Interaction, 24, 189–216. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wiggins, S.
(2002) Talking with your mouth full: Gustatory mmms and the embodiment of pleasure. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 35, 311–336. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2013) The social life of ‘eugh’: Disgust as assessment in family mealtimes. British Journal of Social Psychology, 52, 489–509. CrossrefGoogle Scholar