Advertisement

Abstract

This study investigates the variability in the temporal alignment of turn initiations and its relationship to the entrainment and power structure between the interlocutors. The data come from spontaneous, task-oriented human-human dialogues in Standard American English, and focus on single-word turn-initial utterances. The descriptive and quantitative analysis of the data show that an emergent asymmetrical dominance relationship is constructed partly through the accommodation (or its absence) to the temporal and rhythmic features of interlocutors’ turn-initiations.

Keywords

turn-taking entrainment rhythm affirmative cue words dominance 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Schegloff, E.: Sequence Organization in Interaction. CUP, Cambridge (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Coates, J., Sutton-Spence, R.: Turn-taking patterns in deaf conversation. Journal of Sociolinguistics 5, 507–529 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Goodwin, C.: Transparent vision. In: Ochs, E., Schegloff, E., Thompson, S.A. (eds.) Interaction and Grammar, pp. 370–404. CUP, Cambridge (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sacks, H., Schegloff, E., Jefferson, G.: A simplest systematic for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50, 696–735 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schegloff, E.: Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language and Society 19, 1–63 (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ford, C., Thompson, S.: Interactional units in conversation: syntactic, intonational, and pragmatic resources for the management of turns. In: Ochs, E., Schegloff, E., Thompson, S.A. (eds.) Interaction and Grammar, pp. 134–184. CUP, Cambridge (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pickering, M., Garrod, S.: Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27, 169–226 (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Couper-Kuhlen, E.: English Speech Rhythm. John Benjamins, Amsterdam (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Auer, P., Couper-Kuhlen, E., Müller, F.: Language in Time. OUP, Oxford (1999)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ward, A., Litman, D.: Automatically measuring lexical and acoustic/prosodic convergence in tutorial dialog corpora. In: Proceedings of SLaTE Workshop, Farmington, PA (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pardo, J.: On phonetic convergence during conversational interaction. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 119(4), 2382–2393 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Aubanel, V., Nguyen, N.: Automatic recognition of regional phonological variation in conversational interaction. Speech Communication (in press)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shockley, K., Santana, M., Fowler, C.: Mutual interpersonal postural constraints are involved in cooperative conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance 29, 326–332 (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    McFarland, D.: Respiratory markers of conversational interaction. Journal of Speech, Language, & Hearing Research 44, 128–143 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gravano, A.: Turn-Taking and Affirmative Cue Words in Task-Oriented Dialogue. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Columbia University, NY (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Beňuš, Š.: Are we ‘in sync’: Turn-taking in collaborative dialogues. In: Proceedings of 10th INTERSPEECH, pp. 2167–2170. ISCA, Brighton, UK (2009)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Beckman, M., Hirschberg, J., Shattuck-Hufnagel, S.: The original ToBI system and the evolution of the ToBI framework. In: Jun, S.-A. (ed.) Prosodic Typology: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing, pp. 9–54. OUP, Oxford (2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Beattie, G.: Turn-taking and interruption in political interviews: Margaret Thatcher and Jim Callaghan compared and contrasted. Semiotica 39(1/2), 93–114 (1982)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gravano, A., Hirschberg, J.: Turn-Yielding Cues in Task-Oriented Dialogue. In: Proceedings of SIGDIAL, Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 253–261 (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bull, M.: An analysis of between-speaker intervals. In: Cleary, J., Moll&aacute-Aliod, D. (eds.) Proceedings of the Edinburgh Linguistic Conference, pp. 18–27 (1996)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cummins, F., Port, R.: Rhythmic constraints on stress-timing in English. Journal of Phonetics 26(2), 145–171 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Laver, J.: Principles of phonetics. CUP, Cambridge (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Carpenter, S., O’Connel, D.: More than meets the ear: Some variables affecting pauses. Language & Communication 8(1), 11–27 (1998)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Swerts, M.: Filled pauses as markers of discourse structure. J. of Prag. 30, 485–496 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Steward, O., Corley, M.: Hesitation disfluencies in spontaneous speech: The meaning of um. Language and Linguistics Compass 4, 589–602 (2008)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Delvaux, V., Soquet, A.: The influence of ambient speech on adult speech productions through unintentional imitation. Phonetica 64, 145–173 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Edlund, J., Heldner, M., Hirschberg, J.: Pause and gap length in face-to-face interaction. In: Proc. of Interspeech 2009, Brighton, UK (2009)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Beňuš, Š., Gravano, A., Hirschberg, J.: Pragmatic aspects of temporal alignment in turn-taking. Journal of Pragmatics (submitted)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Štefan Beňuš
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Constantine the Philosopher UniversityNitraSlovakia
  2. 2.Institute of InformaticsSlovak Academy of SciencesBratislavaSlovakia

Personalised recommendations