Advertisement

“Elephants to ride upon, my little Irish Rose”

Performing Memory
  • Heidi E. Hamilton
Chapter

Abstract

In this chapter, we explore performances of memory in interactions of everyday life. As important background, we first situate this examination within what is called ‘procedural memory’ (Eichenbaum, The cognitive neuroscience of memory (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012) and discussions of formulaic language (Wray and Perkins, Language & Communication, 20(1), 1–28, 2000), followed by a brief case study. We then turn to everyday conversation for evidence of the following phenomena: performed memory in the form of singing songs and reading aloud; management of interactional system requirements and constraints; displays of formulaic language; and the eventual malfunction of the autopilot.

References

  1. Appell, J., Kertesz, A., & Fisman, M. (1982). A study of language functioning in Alzheimer patients. Brain and Language, 17, 73–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bayles, K. (1979). Communication profiles in a geriatric population. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Arizona, Tucson.Google Scholar
  3. Bayles, K. (1982). Language function in senile dementia. Brain and Language, 16, 265–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bayles, K., & Kaszniak, A. (1987). Communication and cognition in normal aging and dementia. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
  5. Bolinger, D. (1961). Syntactic blends and other matters. Language, 37, 366–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cummings, J., Houlihan, J., & Hill, M. (1986). The pattern of reading deterioration in dementia of the Alzheimer type: Observations and implications. Brain and Language, 29, 315–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Davis, B. H., & Maclagan, M. (2014). Talking with Maureen: Extenders and formulaic language in small stories and canonical narratives. In R. Schrauf & N. Müller (Eds.), Dialogue and dementia: Cognitive and communicative resources for engagement (pp. 87–120). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  9. Eichenbaum, H. (2012). The cognitive neuroscience of memory (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Folstein, M., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (1975). “Mini-mental state” a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12(3), 189–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Garvey, C. (1977). The contingent query: A dependent act in conversation. In M. Lewis & L. Rosenblum (Eds.), Interaction, conversation and the development of language (pp. 63–94). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  12. Goffman, E. (1959). Presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  13. Goffman, E. (1981). Replies and responses. In E. Goffman (Ed.), Forms of talk (pp. 5–77). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  14. Guendouzi, J., & Müller, N. (2001). Intelligibility and rehearsed sequences in conversations with a DAT patient. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 15, 91–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hamilton, H. E. (1994). Conversations with an Alzheimer’s patient: An interactional sociolinguistic analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Honsinger, W. (1962). To light a candle. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  17. Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  18. Hydén, L.-C. (2014). Cutting Brussels sprouts: Collaboration involving persons with dementia. Journal of Aging Studies, 29, 115–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kempler, D. (1984). Syntactic and symbolic abilities in Alzheimer’s disease. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  20. Kontos, P. C. (2006). Embodied selfhood: An ethnographic exploration of Alzheimer’s disease. In A. Leibing & L. Cohen (Eds.), Thinking about dementia: Culture, loss, and the anthropology of senility (pp. 195–217). New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. McDermott, O., Crellin, N., Ridder, H. M., & Orrell, M. (2013). Music therapy in dementia: A narrative synthesis systematic review. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 28, 781–794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Merleau-Ponty, M. (1964). Signs (trans: McCleary, R. C.). Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Obler, L. K. (1981). Review of Le langage des dements by Luce Irigaray. Brain and Language, 12, 375–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sabat, S. R., Wiggs, C., & Pinizzotto, A. (1984). Alzheimer’s disease: Clinical vs. observational studies of cognitive ability. Journal of Clinical Experimental Gerontology, 6, 337–359.Google Scholar
  25. Sacks, H., Schegloff, E., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schegloff, E., & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, 8, 289–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schegloff, E., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for the self-correction of talk in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53(2), 361–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Schwartz, M. F., Marin, O., & Saffran, E. (1979). Dissociations of language function in dementia: A case study. Brain and Language, 7, 277–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Squire, L. R. (2004). Memory systems of the brain: A brief history and current perspective. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 82(3), 171–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tannen, D. (1987a). Repetition in conversation as spontaneous formulaicity. Text, 7, 215–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tannen, D. (1987b). Repetition in conversation: Towards a poetics of talk. Language, 63, 574–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wray, A. (2014). Formulaic language and threat: The challenge of empathy and compassion in Alzheimer’s disease interaction. In R. Schrauf & N. Müller (Eds.), Dialogue and dementia: Cognitive and communicative resources for engagement (pp. 263–286). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  33. Wray, A., & Perkins, M. R. (2000). The functions of formulaic language: An integrated model. Language & Communication, 20(1), 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Heidi E. Hamilton
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of LinguisticsGeorgetown UniversityWashington, DCUSA

Personalised recommendations