A closer look at the 'hint and guess' sequences in aphasic conversation

Laakso, Minna; Klippi, Anu

doi:10.1080/026870399402136

Cited by 114 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In all the excerpts A refers to the aphasic speaker, whereas L and M refer to his nonaphasic co-participants. Also in so-called "hint-and-guess" sequences, which are pervasive in this type of interaction (6,23,28,29), response words like 'yes' and 'no' are very useful to signal whether a guess made by the interlocutor is acceptable or not.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The aphasic participant also has the right to evaluate the contributions of the co-participant, that is, acknowledge the guesses as correct or incorrect interpretations. The main function of a hint-and-guess sequence is usually to establish (part of) a contribution attributed to the aphasic participant (23,29). In other words, hint-and-guess sequences usually arise on the initiative of the language impaired participant, as a means of establishing a contribution "belonging" to this participant.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Prosodic contextualization of minimal responses to yes/no-questions in aphasic talk-in-interaction: A descriptive single-case study of a Norwegian aphasic speaker

Lind¹

2007

Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article explores aspects of the role of prosody as a contextualisation cue in aphasic conversation through auditory and acoustic analysis of an aphasic speaker's use of pitch variation in responses to closed yes/no-requests. The results reveal two prosodic realisations of 'yes' and 'no' contextualising different kinds of responses: a flat realisation with no prolongation and minimal pauses, signalling decisiveness, and a realisation with movement in pitch, prolongation and preceding pauses, signalling indecisiveness. The analysis also shows how the aphasic uses a particular realisation manipulatively for interactional purposes. The study illustrates the vital role that seemingly unimportant details play in the co-constructive process of creating meaning in interaction. The results indicate an area of competence that seems undisturbed in this speaker.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prosodic contextualization of minimal responses to yes/no-questions in aphasic talk-in-interaction: A descriptive single-case study of a Norwegian aphasic speaker

Lind¹

2007

Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In interaction involving PWA, repair sequences were often extended over a number of turns and the degree of other involvement was higher than in typical interactions (Ferguson, 1993, Laakso & Klippi, 1999Oelschlaeger & Damico, 2003). Milroy and Perkins (1992) described the collaborative features of repair in interaction involving PWA and they applied a collaborative model of repair proposed by Clark andSchaefer (1987, 1989) to interaction involving PWA.…”

Section: Repair Aphasia and Dementiamentioning

confidence: 92%

Collaboration, trouble and repair in multiparty interactions involving couples with dementia or aphasia

Samuelsson

Hydén

2016

International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The aim of the present study was to identify problems with communication with persons with aphasia and persons with dementia in a collaborative interview setting with their significant others. In particular, to compare interactional practises used in order to resolve problems caused by specific symptoms.Method: Five persons with aphasia and five persons with dementia and their spouses participated in the present study. Interviews were carried out couple by couple, and the interviews had a task-oriented character with a main focus on interactive and communicative aspects rather than on topical content. The interviews were video and audio recorded. All interviews were transcribed according to conversation analytic principles. Result:The results demonstrated that repair sequences were frequent in interaction involving PWA, and even more so in interaction involving PWD. In general, it was the PWA/PWD that initiated the repair sequence more often than the spouse, thus keeping to the general rule of a preference for self-initiated repair compared to other-initiated repair. Conclusion:The active involvement of the conversational partners in trouble solving sequences in interaction with PWA/PWD demonstrated in the present study indicates that the interactional style of the conversational partner to PWA/PWD are important. This implies that conversation partner training programmes would be useful both for PWA and for PWD.

show abstract

“…A2 engages with what may be described as a hint-and-guess strategy (Laakso and Klippi, 1999), asking if it (it referring to Olle's efforts to convey something) is a matter of using music both in therapy, and at the aphasia house ( an activity centre where Olle goes regularly, and sings in a choir). This suggestion is followed by a rather long pause (line 89) and is not What has been shown in this excerpt is that Olle is quite able to take the initiative to develop topics.…”

Section: Published In Clinical Linguistics and Phoneticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is also shown how hint-and-guess strategies of the kind demonstrated here (cf. Laakso and Klippi, 1999), provide opportunities for the person with aphasia to confirm or reject offered interpretations. It should, however, be remembered that not all persons may have the ability, like Olle, to clearly express their point of view, so the usefulness of this strategy may vary from speaker to speaker.…”

Section: Published In Clinical Linguistics and Phoneticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enhanced patient involvement in Swedish aphasia intervention

Plejert

Samuelsson

Anward

2016

Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present article is a case study in which participation is investigated in terms of the use of interactional practices that enhance the involvement of a man with severe aphasia in activities that aim to capture his and his wifes experiences of everyday communication, and their views of his speech and language intervention. Five practices are identified: 1) collaborative telling, 2) formulations, 3) yes/no questions, 4) declaratives and 5) hint-and-guess strategies. It is demonstrated how participants (wife, a speech and language pathologist, and two research assistants) use of these practices are beneficial for making the viewpoints of the man with aphasia come across, despite his communication difficulties. Results are discussed in light of the importance of finding ways to make patients influence their own intervention, both in terms of a raised awareness of facilitative interactional practices and of activities such as interviews and retrospection sessions with patients and their significant others.

Funding Agencies|Swedish Research Council, VR [2010-1440]

show abstract

A closer look at the 'hint and guess' sequences in aphasic conversation

Cited by 114 publications

References 10 publications

Prosodic contextualization of minimal responses to yes/no-questions in aphasic talk-in-interaction: A descriptive single-case study of a Norwegian aphasic speaker

Prosodic contextualization of minimal responses to yes/no-questions in aphasic talk-in-interaction: A descriptive single-case study of a Norwegian aphasic speaker

Collaboration, trouble and repair in multiparty interactions involving couples with dementia or aphasia

Enhanced patient involvement in Swedish aphasia intervention

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About