Live phone-in programmes A live phone-in programme happens in real time, and can create an impression of spontaneity and risk - one never knows what the caller is going to say. With the BBC’s national networks, there is an unseen selection process for many broadcasts. Callers contact a producer ahead of the programme, which leads to the creation of a list of contributors whom the broadcaster calls back at the point where they are to speak. Pragmatics: In the case of a phone-in programme, this is likely to be a most important area of language theory - since the object of the host or presenter, broadly speaking, is to help people who have little or no experience of broadcasting to make a contribution to the programme, in conjunction with the other callers. In looking at transcripts, always focus on the areas of pragmatics that are covered by: 1) taking and keeping turns; 2) conversational maxims and the cooperative principle; 3) politeness theory; 4) the use of phatic tokens. Lexis: In spontaneous speech it is not always easy for a speaker to sustain an even style, so you may find a mixture of the common register or “simple and undemanding vocabulary, typical of speech” with more learned or special lexis. The two transcripts in this guide challenge the suggestions that: 1) Look for simple or sophisticated lexis, or a combination of these; 2) Look out for accommodation - where a caller or presenter reflects the other’s lexical choices. Grammar: Simple / complex structures: 1) Elliptical forms; 2) Pronouns; 3) Consider all grammar areas and think whether the speaker’s grammar may differ when spoken and written. Discourse features: For the presenter there is a sense of the whole broadcast into which the various callers’ contributions fit. They may have a notional upper and lower time limit, which will allow them to vary the length of time for which each caller speaks. This may affect the structure of the call: 1) Question and answer formats; 2) Who leads the talk; 3) Overlapping Phonology: 1) Pauses; 2) Stresses (if given) ; 3) Elision, contraction, hesitation indicators.
Telephones - Landline and Mobile Spontaneous speech governs much of the language used on the telephone, including SMS texting on mobiles. (Spontaneous written speech?!) Non-verbal communication is lost because speakers cannot (usually) see each other. Theory: Schegloff’s ideas about usual telephone talk patterns: Summons-answer: the caller summons the called person, and the called person picks up the phone. Identification-recognition: each person identifies him/herself and recognises the other. Greetings-greetings: people exchange mutual greetings. Initial (how are you?) enquiries and move to first topic: there’s a certain amount of phatic language while people enquire in very general terms about each other’s health etc., before the caller initiates the first topic. When analysing telephone transcripts, consider: Pragmatics: do speakers do things differently from their practice in face to face conversations - do they observe the conversational maxims listed by Paul Grice, or do they employ face and politeness strategies to a greater degree than when the parties can see each other? In exploring how the technology may influence language as it mediates conversation, then pragmatic analysis is likely to be a fruitful area of study. You will need to make use of some pragmatic concepts, as in this example: "We know from the question that Text F is a sales script. The pragmatic consideration of this text makes us look for features, which are designed to reassure the potential customer rather than to inform them. Particularly, in this case, where the script is for a telephone conversation and one of the objects from the sales-person's viewpoint is to keep the other person talking. This means that the text will try to close off as many potential exits as possible and therefore be similar to some of the normal co-operative principles of spoken language." Grammar: Do people generally vary their grammatical usage in spoken English, when they speak on the telephone, as compared to face-to-face speaking? It is possible that use of the technology might alter one's sense of formality, and attentiveness to supposed "correct" forms. For most people there is considerable difference between the grammar of their writing and their speaking. Discourse Structure: Voice telephony has produced some conventions that help us construct a discourse, in terms of beginning, middle and end. (See Schegloff’s ideas above.) These often give information that is redundant for users of newer forms of telephony (such as answering a call by stating your phone number). But they may survive as a kind of traditional courtesy. Phonology: Do we use different speech sounds when we use certain technologies? Can we account for what we find in answering this question? (For example, does the general tendency towards accommodation become stronger when we use a telephone?) Are we more or less comfortable with pauses and silence than in face-to-face conversation? Do we try to fill silences or even ask the other person questions about them? ("Are you still there/all right?")
Two technologies meet: the language of phone-ins - a presenter hosts a discussion and invites members of the public to participate by phoning the station and putting their point ‘on air. They appear to offer the illusion of a democratic public-participation discussion, though always with the presenter in control. Before a caller goes on air, they may have followed these steps: ‘1. Presenter or host invites potential callers to ring a given number. 2. A ‘researcher’ will usually take their details, establish roughly what they wish to discuss, and either put them on hold or promise to ring them back when the host is ready. 3. A sequence of callers is thus lined up, with the host/presenter having the basic details gathered by the researcher displayed when they are connected; 4. Some stations employ an ‘instant delay’ device that enables them to cut off before they reach the air-waves. What happens next will usually follow a predictable pattern, though with · variations depending on the nature of the programme and the ‘character’ of the host presenter. In some cases, the host is generally courteous and friendly with callers, reassuring them and helping them to feel at ease. In others, the presenter may adopt a more deliberately confrontational and opinionated style appearing to flout basic ‘politeness principles’ in order to provoke callers and create a more shocking impact on listeners. Framework for investigating phone-ins: · How does the host initiate the conversation? · What phatic features, if any, are present? · What degrees of politeness and courtesy are extended to the caller? · How does the caller convey their opinions an d feelings? · In what ways is the professionalism of the presenter/host apparent by contrast with a caller unused to public broadcasting? · To what extent doers the host express agreement or disagreement with the caller, and how does s/he do so? · What closure routine (if any) does the host use before terminating each call? · In what ways does the host/presenter achieve control of the discourse? · Is there any evidence that the host is imposing a specific time constraint on each caller? · In what ways do you think the host’s awareness of the listening audience is influencing their conduct of the conversation?