Tracking Change Over Time in Storytelling Practices: A Longitudinal Study of Second Language Talk-in-Interaction

  • Evelyne Berger
  • Simona Pekarek Doehler


We present a longitudinal case study of a second language speaker’s changing storytelling practices over a period of nine months while interacting with her host family. We focus on how the storyteller moves the telling toward a recognizable end and, jointly with the recipient, engages in closing down the storytelling sequence. Results show an increased use of resources to anticipate the story climax, to recognizably display the story ending and to manifest the speaker’s stance; results also reveal how co-participants orient to such change in accountable ways. We discuss to what extent the documentable change can be interpreted as pertaining the speaker’s increased second language interactional competence and how it is indexically related to the changing local circumstances of the interactions at hand and tied to larger processes of socialization as the people move through time.


  1. Bolden, G., Mandelbaum, J., & Wilkinson, S. (2012). Pursuing a response by repairing an indexical reference. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(2), 137–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brouwer, C. E., & Wagner, J. (2004). Developmental issues in second language conversation. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 29–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Drew, P., & Chilton, K. (2000). Calling just to keep in touch: Regular and habitualised telephone calls as an environment for small talk. In J. Coupland (Ed.), Small talk (pp. 137–162). Pearson Education Limited: Harlow.Google Scholar
  4. Drew, P., & Holt, E. (1998). Figures of speech: Figurative expressions and the management of topic transition in conversation. Language in Society, 27(4), 495–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  6. Golato, A. (2012). German Oh: Marking an emotional change of state. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(3), 245–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Goodwin, C. (1984). Notes on story structure and the organization of participation. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action (pp. 225–246). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Hellermann, J. (2008). Social actions for classroom language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  9. Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  10. Heritage, J. (1998). Oh-prefaced responses to inquiry. Language in Society, 27(3), 291–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Holt, E. (2000). Reporting and reacting: Concurrent responses to reported speech. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 33(4), 425–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jefferson, G. (1978). Sequential aspects of storytelling in conversation. In J. Schenkein (Ed.), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction (pp. 219–248). New York: Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jefferson, G. (1979). A technique for inviting laughter and its subsequent acceptance declination. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology (pp. 79–96). New York: Irvington.Google Scholar
  14. Koschmann, T. (2013). Conversation analysis and learning in interaction. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 1038–1043). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  15. Mandelbaum, J. (1989). Interpersonal activities in conversational storytelling. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 53(2), 114–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mandelbaum, J. (2013). Storytelling in conversation. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 492–507). Chichester: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  17. Maynard, D. (2003). Bad news, good news: Conversational order in everyday talk and clinical settings. Chicago: University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Mori, J., & Koschmann, T. (2012). Good reasons for seemingly bad performance: Competences at the blackboard and the accountability of a lesson. In G. Rasmussen, C. E. Brouwer, & D. Day (Eds.), Evaluating cognitive competence in interaction (pp. 89–117). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ochs, E. (1997). Narrative. In T. van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as structure and process (pp. 185–207). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  20. Pekarek Doehler, S., & Berger, E. (2016). L2 interactional competence as increased ability for context-sensitive conduct: A longitudinal study of story-openings. Applied Linguistics.
  21. Pekarek Doehler, S., & Pochon-Berger, E. (2011). Developing “methods” for interaction: Disagreement sequences in French L2. In J. K. Hall, J. Hellermann, & S. Pekarek Doehler (Eds.), L2 interactional competence and development (pp. 206–243). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  22. Pekarek Doehler, S., & Pochon-Berger, E. (2015). The development of L2 interactional competence: Evidence from turn-taking organization, sequence organization, repair organization and preference organization. In T. Cadierno & S. W. Eskildsen (Eds.), Usage-based perspectives on second language learning (pp. 233–268). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar
  23. Sacks, H. (1974). An analysis of the course of a joke’s telling in conversation. In R. Bauman & J. Sherzer (Eds.), Explorations in the ethnography of speaking (pp. 337–353). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on conversation I-II. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  25. Schegloff, E. A. (1993). Reflections on quantification in the study of conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 26(1), 99–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schegloff, E. A. (1997). “Narrative analysis” thirty years later. The Journal of Narrative and Life History, 7, 97–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schegloff, E. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Selting, M. (2010). Affectivity in conversational storytelling: An analysis of displays of anger or indignation in complaint stories. Pragmatics, 20(2), 229–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Stivers, T. (2008). Stance, alignment, and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41(1), 31–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Svennevig, J. (2014). Direct and indirect self-presentation in first conversations. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33(3), 302–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Evelyne Berger
    • 1
  • Simona Pekarek Doehler
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Applied LinguisticsUniversity of NeuchâtelNeuchâtelSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations