English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
  Interactional infrastructure across modalities: A comparison of repair initiators and continuers in British Sign Language and British English

Lutzenberger, H., De Wael, L., Omardeen, R., & Dingemanse, M. (2024). Interactional infrastructure across modalities: A comparison of repair initiators and continuers in British Sign Language and British English. Sign Language Studies, 24(3), 548-581. doi:10.1353/sls.2024.a928056.

Item is

Files

show Files
hide Files
:
Lutzenberger et al_2024_Interactional Infrastructure across Modalities.pdf (Publisher version), 3MB
Name:
Lutzenberger et al_2024_Interactional Infrastructure across Modalities.pdf
Description:
-
OA-Status:
Green
Visibility:
Public
MIME-Type / Checksum:
application/pdf / [MD5]
Technical Metadata:
Copyright Date:
-
Copyright Info:
-
License:
-

Locators

show

Creators

show
hide
 Creators:
Lutzenberger, Hannah1, Author           
De Wael, Lierin, Author
Omardeen, Rehana, Author
Dingemanse, Mark1, Author           
Affiliations:
1Center for Language Studies, External Organizations, ou_55238              

Content

show
hide
Free keywords: -
 Abstract: Minimal expressions are at the heart of interaction: Interjections like "Huh?" and "Mhm" keep conversations flowing by establishing and reinforcing intersubjectivity among interlocutors. Crosslinguistic research has identified that similar interactional pressures can yield structurally similar words (e.g., to initiate repair across languages). While crosslinguistic comparisons that include signed languages remain uncommon, recent work has revealed similarities in discourse management strategies among signers and speakers that share much of their cultural background. This study contributes a crossmodal comparison of repair initiators and continuers in speakers of English and signers of British Sign Language (BSL). We combine qualitative and quantitative analyses of data from sixteen English speakers and sixteen BSL signers, resulting in the following: First, the interactional infrastructure drawn upon by speakers and signers overwhelmingly relies on behaviors of the head, face, and body; these are used alone or sometimes in combination with verbal elements (i.e., spoken words or manual signs), while verbal strategies alone are rare. Second, discourse management strategies are remarkably similar in form across the two languages: A held eye gaze or freeze-look is the predominant repair initiator and head nodding the main continuer. These results suggest a modality-agnostic preference for visual strategies that do not occupy the primary articulators, one that we propose is founded in recipiency; people maintain the flow of communication following principles of minimal effort and minimal interruption.

Details

show
hide
Language(s): eng - English
 Dates: 2024-05-282024-05-28
 Publication Status: Issued
 Pages: -
 Publishing info: -
 Table of Contents: -
 Rev. Type: Peer
 Identifiers: DOI: 10.1353/sls.2024.a928056
 Degree: -

Event

show

Legal Case

show

Project information

show

Source 1

show
hide
Title: Sign Language Studies
Source Genre: Journal
 Creator(s):
Affiliations:
Publ. Info: -
Pages: - Volume / Issue: 24 (3) Sequence Number: - Start / End Page: 548 - 581 Identifier: -