M´ etodo de descomposici´ on a partir de regresiones de RIF

Above it was argued the absence of gesture hold displays a claimed rather than suggested, or checked, understanding. In a sense then, what Tor is displaying by releasing his gesture (example 6.8) is that shared understanding is already available when Lars starts talking. This brings us to the next example, which further demonstrates the interactional relevance of releasing a gesture. Here Anne abandons her own turn production (verbal and gestural) in order to display that shared understanding is already available, and she does so on the basis of Oscar’s simultaneous contributions. This example is an important contribution to the data collection because it further illustrates how we are continuously sensitive to our verbal and visual actions when working

towards shared understanding, including the use of gestures.

Oscar has been explaining how he finds it difficult to learn and use French, despite having attended conversational French courses in Stockholm. In 01 Anne suggests the generality of this problem: In order to learn a language properly you need to use it where it is spoken in everyday terms. 01 is a compound construction, and in overlap with 02, in 03, Oscar shows his ability to anticipate the projected completion of Anne’s turn, by collaborating on the further turn production.

180 (6.9) KTH-NO, AO, 07:50 ”befinne seg”

01 A: ˇja: h° (.) altså den `ENeste måten å lære seg YES THUS THE ONLY WAY TO LEARN refl.pron yes the only way to learn

et språk ¯SKIKkelig— A LANGUAGE PROPERLY a language properly

02 A: *-> det er jo [å be [`FINne segˀ [ja, THAT IS part TO BE refl.pron YES that is to be (present)- yes 03 O: <<all >[det er jo å>[`BO i la [ndet ja, THAT IS part TO LIVE IN COUNTRYdet YES that is to live in the country yes 04 A: [´DET er det; [det ]=

THAT IS IT IT that’s it it 05 O: [javis [st. mm.]= RIGHT right mm

06 A: =°h det er jo egentlig ˆTULL ↑jeg syns at det er IT IS part ACTUALLY NONSENSE- I THINK THAT IT IS it’s really (quite) nonsense- I think it is

´TULL dette de ((...)) NONSENSE THAT THEY

nonsense what they ((...))

Oscar initiates his collaboration in 03 by recycling the lexis/syntax in Anne’s construction in 02: Oscar reuses Anne’s det er jo å/“that is to” following Anne’s compound break. In this way Oscar shows that he collaborates on Anne’s projection. Another aspect of Oscar’s collaboration is illustrated by how Oscar progresses to the main verb simultaneously with Anne (Oscar achieves this by producing this turn- initiation slightly faster than Anne). That is, Oscar’s bo/“live” (03), is time-aligned with the prominent syllable in Anne’s beFINne/“be (present)” (02). More precisely, the release of the bilabial closure in Oscar’s bo is simultaneous with the release of the labiodental stricture in Anne’s beFinne (see transcript 6.9a below). These two simultaneous syllables are also the locations of pitch accents in Anne’s and Oscar’s respective utterances. Arguably, this is an achievement, with which Oscar makes his actions recognisable as being co-constructive with Anne’s actions.

181 (6.9a) KTH-NO, AO, 07:50 ”befinne seg” WAVEFORM AND IPA TRANSCRIPTION

The prominent syllable of Anne’s befinne/“be (present)” is co-expressed with a gesture, as illustrated in 6.9b. 572.6 573.5 b ə f ɪ n ɘ s j ɑ befinne seg- ja o b u ɪ l ɑ n ɘ j ɑ å bo i landet ja a Anne: Oscar:

182 (6.9b) KTH-NO, AO, 07:50 ”befinne seg” GESTURE ANNOTATION

a

b c

d

MG(A) //...^^x^^(x)...//

11 A: det er jo [å be [`FInne segˀ [ja, that is to be (present)- yes

[det er jo å [`BO i la [ndet ja, that is to live in the country yes

Anne’s gesture appears to indexically locate a place somewhere else, by thrusting her hands in a synchronised movement away from both herself and Oscar. Figures a and b represent the main movement of this gesture. Figure b shows the peak of the gesture, which is aligned with the offset/onset between the prominent syllable and the following syllable in Anne’s befinne/“be (present)” and Oscar’s bo/“live”. Then, as it appears that Anne is heading for another peak she withdraws her gesture (figure c and d). This happens at the same time as she halts the production of the reflexive pronoun seg: Anne’s gestural withdrawal starts in the middle of [s] in this pronoun. Further, Anne’s production of the vowel in this pronoun is strongly laryngealised (i.e. not creaky voice), as can also be seen in the waveform of x. Also, the vowel quality in seg is much more centralised than expected: It is realised as [sæ ], whereas one could expect a more diphtongised [sæɪ] in most circumstances. In sum, Anne produces a combined gestural and phonatory/articulatory ‘withdrawal’ here.

What Anne does by withdrawing her turn production is displaying that shared understanding has been achieved, in response to Oscar having made a similar

Withdraws prior to gesture peak

183 contribution to hers. This is further confirmed by the following ja/“yes” (end of line 02). The fact that Anne does this and at a time when a candidate understanding is accessible from Oscar’s contribution, shows that shared understanding is of fundamental

relevance to her, and clearly a more central aspect of her action than completing her own proposition. It is only for this reason that Anne abandons her own verbal/gestural actions in the manner and at the time that she does.

Example 6.9 demonstrates how we orient to the implications of our own actions, in real time and while we speak. In relation to the examples of gesture holds above, example 6.9 supports the claim that gestures (and other actions that maintain an action

trajectory) are only in existence for as long as shared understanding is still a relevant process. In relation to the proposed sequence (Table 6.A), Anne moves from step 1 to step 3 in the proposed sequence (Table 6.A), because step 2 is no longer relevant.