GESPIN – GESTURE & SPEECH IN INTERACTION – Poznań, 24-26 September 2009
Body Movements in Turn Completion in Mandarin Chinese Talk-in-Interaction Xiaoting Li Peking University/University of Potsdam English Department, Peking University, 100871, Beijing, China lixiaoting@pku.edu.cn
Abstract The present paper adopts microanalysis method to explore body movements and their role in turn construction in natural Mandarin Chinese talk-in-interaction. Specifically, it is to investigate how do body movements, together with other cues, project turn completion. The data are three natural Mandarin Chinese conversations, which last about 2 hours. Certain patterning of body movement in turn completion is observed. For example, there is a forward movement of the head and torso, as well as a hand stroke at the possible last prominent syllable and at the possible last syllable, there is an explicit backward and downward movement of the head and torso, as well as the retraction of the hand movement.
1
Introduction
In smooth social encounters (Goffman 1961), listeners are able to anticipate the exact point where speakers would terminate the turn and an interchange would happen. This point is called “possible completion points” in the turn-taking system proposed by Sacks, Schegloff, and Jefferson (1974). In the past decades, there has been abundant literature on syntax (Schegloff 1979, 1996; Auer 1991, etc.), prosody (Selting 1995, etc.), and their interplay (Auer 1996; Ford, Thopmson 1996; Ford, Fox, Thompson 2002) in the turn construction that helps to project the precise point of their turn completion. However, the role of gestures and other bodily movements in turn construction and completion projection has not been fully explored. This paper belongs to such an endeavor. Among the limited research on body movements and turn completion, Duncan and his collaborators (Duncan 1972 etc.) investigate nonverbal signals of both speakers and auditors in the speaking turn, and propose turn-ending signals. However, in the series of studies, Duncan only adopts a quantitative and context-free research method, which may be due to a lack of empirical support and specific interpretation (Pelose 1987). Thus, an explanation of these body movements signals in turn completion using microanalysis in specific context is needed. Kendon (1972) and Goodwin (1979, 1981) examine gaze direction at the end of a speaking turn, and they focus on “floor-apportionment” signal and the construction of the emergent turn through gaze respectively. DeLong (1974) explores the kinesic terminal signals of preschool children’s utterance, and presents a certain patterning of kinesic cues in three terminal positions. The present paper intends to investigate the patterning of body movement, together with other resources, in the speaker’s flow of behavior that serve as contextualization cues (Gumperz 1982) for the listener to project the completion of his/her turn. The study is based on the following assumptions. First, gesture and body movements are, according to Kendon (1994) and McNeill (1985, 1992), communicative and interactional. Second, body movements are of distinctive
GESPIN proceedings, vol. I
properties, and speakers use them in organizing their turns and conversational activities. Third, in spite of the “intransigency” difficulty in the research of gesture in interaction (Goodwin 1986), there is still certain basic patterning of body movements in turn construction.
2 Methodology 2.1 Data collection The data used in this research are three (two dyads, one triad) naturally occurring Mandarin Chinese conversations, which are about 2 hours. The conversations were recorded by two digital video cameras (CANON FS100), and two digital audio recorders (SONY ICD-MX20 and OLYMPUS IEC/JIS LR6 (ZR6)), producing mpeg and wav files respectively.
2.2 Data analysis and transcription The present research is empirically based. It employs microanalysis (Kendon 1997) conversation analysis (CA), and interactional linguistic (Couper-Kuhlen, Selting 1996; Selting, Couper-Kuhlen 2001) method to uncover micro-level body movements in turn construction. The body movements are observed repeatedly through a super-low and frame-by-frame playing of the video through the multimodal analysis software program ELAN (Max Plank Institute for Psycholinguistics, http://www.lat-mpi.eu/tools/elan/), and the corresponding audio data is also listened to repeatedly. The audio data are analyzed by the audio analysis software program PRAAT (version 5.1., Boersma, P. & Weenink, D., http://www.praat.org), when necessary. The utterances in the data were transcribed following GAT (Gesprächsanalytisches Transkriptionssystem) proposed by Selting et al. (1998), and body parts were transcribed separately above the utterances.
3
Result: Patterning of body movements
In this study, body movements refer to gaze, head movements, torso movements, and hand movements (gesticulation). Due to its complexity and relatively independent functioning, gaze will be discussed seperately in another paper. Therefore, the focus of this paper is on head, torso and hand movements. Through the micro-analysis of the participants’ body movements, certain patterning of the speaker’s movements at turn endings is observed. Two positions are of special importance in this pattern: the possible1 last prominent syllable and the possible last syllable. It is observed that at the possible last prominent syllabe of the speaker’s utterance, there is an obvious forward movement of his/her head and torso, as well as a projecting2 movement or “thrust” of the hand. At the possible last syllable, the head and torso of the speaker move backward, downward, and usually to the side (either leftward or rightward depending on the sitting position), whereas the hand retracts2 to the rest position. The recipient usually immediately starts his/her turn after the termination of these movements, which is an evidence of the existence of the pattern according to the “next turn proof procedure” principle (Hutchby, Wooffitt 1998) in CA. For example: (1) The popular instrumentalist (W_S_00:11:53) Bin and Pei are talking about a girl who played an Erhu3 piece at a party, and became very popular among the guys after that. 01 Bin: ta1men0 wang3shang4 jiu4 shi4 yao4 yao4 yao4 nei4ge0 jiu4 la2 er4hu2 na4ge0 they internet on then ask ask ask that play Erhu that 02
xiao3gu1niang0: (--) na4ge0 dian4hua4 hao4ma3.
1 Based on a prospective perspective here, the “possible last (prominent) syllable” means that the syllable is possible, but not necessarily to be the last (prominent) syllable in the on-line conversation. 2 I owe this pair of terms to Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen who introduces the use of them in Peter Auer’s (2009) article to me. 3 Erhu is a traditional Chinese string instrument.
2
Xiaoting Li: Body Movements in Turn Completion in Mandarin Chinese Talk-in-Interaction
girl: (--) that telephone number. Head F------------ .…B/D/L Torso F----------- .….B/D/L Hand ^ ----------- .….RP 03 er2qie3 GAO1jia4 (-) qiu2gou4. and HIGH price (-) offer to buy. “On the Internet, they asked for the telephone number of the girl who played Erhu, and (even offered) a high price to buy it.” 04 Pei:
<<aspirated>zhen1:> de0 ya0.= <<aspirated>really:> MAUX.= “Really!”
05 Bin: =hou4lai2 wo3 hai2 xiang3 zen3me0 bu2 wen4 wo3; =after that I even thought why NEG ask me; 06
wo3 hai2 you3 ta1 DI4zhi3 ne0. I even have her address MAUX.
Head Torso Hand 07
F----…B/D/L F----…B/D/L ^ …RP ni3 zhi1dao4 ta1 zhu4 nar3:: ta1 zhu4 WANNsee. you know she live where:: she live WANNsee. “After that, I was wondering why didn’t they ask me? I even have her address. Do you know where she lives? She lives in Wannsee.” 08 Pei: (1.0) ((head nods)) 09 Bin: en44. Hm. “Umm.” 4
Transcription conventions: Basic Transcription Conventions in GAT: (.) micro-pause (-), (--), (---) short, middle or long pauses of approx. 0.25-0.75 seconds, up to approx. 1 second ACcent primary, or main accent <<coughing> > accompanying paralinguistic and non-linguistic actions over a stretch of speech Body Movements: F B D L ^ RP …… ------
forward movement backward movement downward movement leftward movement stroke of gesticulation rest position a series of dots represent movement. close dashes indicate the holding of the movement
Chinese Pinyin transcription conventions: neutral (unstressed) tone tone 1 (high level) tone 2 (high rise) tone 3 (dipping low) tone 4 (high fall)
3
GESPIN proceedings, vol. I
Fig. 1 pitch track of line 02 in (1) In this example, the stressed syllable “GAO1” in line 03 is the possible last prominent syllabe as can is shown in Fig. 1. It has significantly higher pitch (about 400 Hz) than all the other adjacent syllables. When the speaker Bin produces this pitch peak “GAO1”, her head and torso leaned noticeably forward. Her right hand projects forward and makes a stroke exactly at the accented syllable “GAO1”, as if she is “beating” the syllable (Fig. 2). Then, her head and torso begin to lean backward, downward, and leftward at the possible last syllable “gou4”; and her hand retracts to the rest position (Fig. 3). Upon the termination of these movements, the recipient Pei immediately initiates her response in line 04, which shows that she interprets the speaker’s turn as completed based on a cluster of cues, among which the patterning of body movements is an important part. Again, in line 07, the speaker Bin produces the most prominent syllable “Wann” which is also the penultimate syllable. At the same time, she moves her head and torso forward, and her right hand also makes a stroke (Fig. 4). Then, at the last syllable “see”, her head and torso move backward, downward and leftward, and she quickly retracts her right hand to the rest position (Fig. 5). By comparing Fig. 2 with Fig. 4, and Fig. 3 with Fig. 5, we can see the recurrent pattern of head, torso and hand movements, which may project the possible turn completion.
Fig. 2 Body movements at “GAO1”
Fig. 3 Body movements at “gou4”
Fig. 4 Body movements at “WANN”
Fig. 5 Body movements at “see”
4
Xiaoting Li: Body Movements in Turn Completion in Mandarin Chinese Talk-in-Interaction
In some other cases, the speaker’s turn will continue when the body movements continue. For example, when the head and torso are still in the forward position, and the hand is still in projection, the turn also continues even if it is already syntactically and prosodically complete. Then, upon the withdrawal of the head and torso and the retraction of the hand, the turn will also terminate in spite of its continuing syntax and prosody. Such deviant cases may also provide evidence for the existence of the patterning of body movements in turn completion. Due to the space limit, the example will not be discussed here. However, by elaborating on the pattern of head, torso and hand movements in this paper, I by no means neglact the role of other body movements, such as gaze, facial expression, and selfadaptor in turn organization. In fact, various body movements may form a continuum of redundancy in terms of their position in the turn. For example, when the recipient is highly involved in the conversation, he/she may initiate the turn earlier just after hand “stroke” at the possible last prominent syllable or after the gaze of the speaker. Some other recipients may start their turn after the speaker’s retracting movements, i.e. turn completion point. In the even less involved situation, the speaker may even have to perform head nods or hand movements at the post-TRP (transition relevance place) position to explicitly signal the “official” completion of his/her turn, and solicit the recipient’s uptake of the turn. Therefore, the later the recipient starts his/her turn after certain point (e.g. the possible last prominent syllable), the more body movements would be produced by the speaker.
4
Discussion
4.1 Function of body movements in interaction In addition to their function in turn completion and turn organization, body movements may also serve other functions in specific conversational interaction. For instance, the speaker Bin in the example above also employs her body movements as a way to reveal her stance and elicit the recipient’s display of affiliation. Bin tells the recipient Pei a sensational story about another girl who became very popular among the guys. She shows her surprise and even jealousy about how popular the girl is through the pitch peak of “GAO1” (high), and her forward head and torso movements, and hand stroke co-occurring with it. The projecting body movements iconically reveals the projecting of her strong stance towards the story she is telling. The retraction of the speaker’s body movments at the possible last syllable of her turn leaves the recipient an open space to display her affiliation to the speaker’s stance. The expectation of an affiliative response is also revealed by this back and “waiting” body movements.
4.2 Body movements and other contextualization cues The present study is not unaware of the methodological difficulty haunting the study of interactional function of gesture in conversation, as is emphasized by Goodwin (1986); i.e. a lack of explicit recipient response that is exclusive from the gesture “as a distinct event in its own right”. For instance, the importance and function of pitch peak and stroke of body movements in perception may not be easily divided nor accounted for separately in isolation. It is also usually the cluster of cues, which includes but not limited to syntax, lexis, prosody, semantic-pragmatics, and body movements, that works together to project the turn compeltion. However, for analytical convenience, one aspect or cue in the cluster is to be considered at a time. The purpose of this article is not to overstate the function of body movements by isolating them from other turn projecting cues, but rather, to remind ourselves of the patterning and role of body movements in the organization of everyday talk-in-interaction which has more or less been neglected and not been fully studied.
5
Conclusion
The present study intends to investigate the patterning of body movements and its role in the projection of turn completion. A pattern of body movements is observed from the data. Specifically, there is an projection of the body movements, i.e. an explicit forward movement of the speaker’s head and torso, as well as a “stroke” of the hand at the possible last prominent
5
GESPIN proceedings, vol. I
syllable. At the possible last syllable, the speaker leans backward, downward, and sometimes also leftward; and the hand retracts to the rest position. In addition, other body movements such as gaze, facial expression, and self-adaptor may also furnish the recipient with some cues to anticipate the possible turn completion point. Finally, it is worth noting that the emphasis on the patterning of body movements is not to undermine the importance of other contextualization cues in turn completion. In everyday conversations, various linguistic and non-linguistic resources form a cluster and project the possible turn completion point together. It is hoped that the present study of body movements in turn organization may shed some light on the future research on the function of body movements in other conversational activities and interactions. Bibliography Auer, P. 1991. Vom Ende deutscher Sätze. In Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik (ZGL) 19. pp. 139-157. Auer, P. 2009. On-line Syntax: Thoughts on the temporality of spoken language. In Language Sciences. 31. pp. 1-13. Couper-Kuhlen, E., Selting, M. 1996. Prosody in Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Delong, A. 1974. Kinesic signals at utterance boundaries in preschool children. In Semiotica. 11(1). pp. 43-73. Duncan, S. Jr. 1972. Some signals and rules for talking speaking turns in conversation. In Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 23(2). pp. 283-292. Ford, C. E., Fox, B. A., Thompson, S. A. 2002. Constituency and the Grammar of Turn Increments. In Ford, C. E., Fox, B. A., Thompson, S. A. (eds.) The Language of Turn and Sequence. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 14-38. Ford C. E., Thompson, S. A. 1996. Interactional Units in Conversation: Syntactic, intonational, and pragmatic resources for the management of turns. In Ochs, Schegloff & Thompson (eds.) Interaction and Grammar. Cambridge University Press. pp. 135-184. Goffman, E. 1961. Encounters: two studies in the sociology of interaction. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merril. Goodwin, C. 1979. The Interactive Construction of a Sentence in Natural Conversation. In Psathas, G. (ed.) Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology. New York: Irvington Publishers. pp. 97-121. Goodwin, C. 1981. Conversational organization: Interaction between speakers and hearers. New York: Academic. Goodwin, C. 1986. Gesture as a resource for the organization of mutual orientation. In Semiotica. 62. pp. 29-49 Gumperz, J. J. 1982. Discourse Strategy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hutchby, I., Wooffitt, R. 1998.Conversation analysis: principles, practices and applications. Cambridge:Polity Press. Kendon, A. 1972. Some relationships between body motion and speech: An analysis of an example. In Siegman, A., Benjamin, P. (eds.) Studies in dyadic communication. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon. pp. 177-210. Kendon A. 1994. Do gestures communicate? A Review. In Research of Language and Social Interaction. 27. pp. 175-200. Kendon, A. 1997. Gesture. In Annual Review of Anthropology. 26. pp. 109-128. McNeill, D. 1985. So you think gestures are nonverbal? In Psychological Review. 92. pp. 350-371. McNeill, D. 1992. Hand and mind. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Pelose, G. C. 1987. The functions of behavioral synchrony and speech rhythm in conversation. In Research on language and social interaction. 20. pp. 171-220. Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A. & Jefferson, G. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking in conversation. In Language. 50(4). pp. 696-735. Schegloff, E. A. 1979. The relevance of repair to syntax-for-conversation. In Givón, T. (ed.) Syntax and semantics, Vol. 12: Discourse and syntax. New York. pp. 261-286. Schegloff, E. A. 1996. Turn organization: one intersection of grammar and interaction. In Ochs, E., Schegloff, E. A., Thompson S. A. (eds.) Interaction and grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 52-133. Selting, M. 1995. Prosodie im Gespräch: Aspekte einer interaktionalen Phonologie der Konversation. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Selting, M., Auer, P., Barden B., Couper-Kuhlen, E., Günthner, S., Quasthoff, U. M., Schlobinski, P., Uhmann, S. 1998. “Gesprächsanalytisches Transkriptionssystem (GAT)”. In Linguistische Berichte. 34. pp. 91-122. Selting, M., Couper-Kuhlen, E. 2001. Studies in Interactional Linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
6