Chapter 9. Changes in turn-design over interactional histories – the case of instructions in driving school lessons

Deppermann, Arnulf

doi:10.1075/pbns.293.09dep

Cited by 44 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Goodwin, ), and that is, from somebody lacking knowledge to somebody with sufficient knowledge for relevant task‐performances, which characterizes the process of learning. As we will see in sections 4 and 5, the evolution of the student's competence over time is reflected by the linguistic resources used for instructions at various stages of the learning process (Deppermann, forthcoming).…”

Section: Instructions In Driving Lessonsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Instruction practices in German driving lessons: Differential uses of declaratives and imperatives

Deppermann

2018

Int J App Linguistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Building on a corpus of 70 hours of German driving lessons, this paper studies the use of declaratives vs. imperatives for instruction. It shows how these linguistic resources are adapted to different praxeological, temporal and participant‐related environments. Declaratives are used for first instructions, task‐setting and post‐trial discussions. They exhibit complex syntax and do not call for immediate compliance. Their high degree of explicitness conveys how the action is to be carried out. Imperative instructions overwhelmingly correct ongoing actions of students or respond to their failure to produce expected actions. They exhibit minimal argument structure. They are reminders which presuppose that the student monitors the scene and can perform the action unproblematically. They index that requests have to be complied with immediately or even urgently.

show abstract

Section: Instructions In Driving Lessonsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Instruction practices in German driving lessons: Differential uses of declaratives and imperatives

Deppermann

2018

Int J App Linguistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Schegloff 1968), or the more sophisticated varieties of recipient design (cf. Deppermann 2018). Inferences thus are an integral part of interactional practice, both as a resource for participants (in presupposing, implying, and inferring) and a topic of conversation (of attribution, negotiation, disclaiming, etc.).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inferential Practices in Social Interaction: A Conversation-Analytic Account

Deppermann

2018

Open Linguistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper argues that conversation analysis has largely neglected the fact that meaning in interaction relies on inferences to a high degree. Participants treat each other as cognitive agents, who imply and infer meanings, which are often consequential for interactional progression. Based on the study of audio-and video-recordings from German talk-in-interaction, the paper argues that inferences matter to social interaction in at least three ways. They can be explicitly formulated; they can be (conventionally) indexed, but not formulated; or they may be neither indexed nor formulated yet would be needed for the correct understanding of a turn. The last variety of inferences usually remain tacit, but are needed for smooth interactional progression. Inferences in this case become an observable discursive phenomenon if misunderstandings are treated by the explication of correct (accepted) and wrong (unaccepted) inferences. The understanding of referential terms, analepsis, and ellipsis regularly rely on inferences. Formulations, third-position repairs, and fourth-position explications of erroneous inferences are practices of explicating inferences. There are conventional linguistic means like discourse markers, connectives, and response particles that index specific kinds of inferences. These practices belong to a larger class of inferential practices, which play an important role for indexing and accomplishing intersubjectivity in talk in interaction.

show abstract

“…Each contribution builds on, and adds to, the participants' common ground, that is their shared interactional history [20]. When a contribution signals uncertainty, indicating insufficient understanding, the participants jointly engage in a problem-solving process or repair work to reach a mutual understanding sufficient enough for the activity to proceed [31,32].…”

Section: Learning and Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While these studies unanimously report that learning still is possible for people living with dementia given focussed and structured interventions, few studies address novel learning in everyday life of people with dementia. By studying learning in everyday life, one circumvents the experimental context that is usually applied and attains access to learning trajectories of high ecological relevance [20]. Moreover, in most experimental studies, the organization of the learning process in terms of the interaction between the learner and the "expert" has not been studied.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A person living with dementia learning to navigate an iPad: a case study

Ingebrand

Samuelsson

Hydén

2020

Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This study challenges the notion that people living with dementia are unable to achieve novel learning without focussed intervention techniques. The purpose of this study is to explore how a woman living with dementia (Alzheimer's disease) learns to use a tablet computer with support from communicative partners. Method: The study is based on video recordings and the theoretical framework of learning as changing participation in joint activities. Quantitative and qualitative focus is on changes in the interactional organization over the course of six weeks in the activity of using an augmentative and alternative communication application. Results: Over time, the participant living with dementia, relies less on the expertise and explicit instructions of her communicative partners when navigating the application, and more on the immediate feedback provided by the tablet computer. Conclusions: The findings suggest that novel learning still is possible for people living with dementia, even without the implementation of focussed interventions. This study further emphasizes the procedural nature of learning for people living with dementia as the woman's embodied actions were carried out in an increasingly more direct fashion. ä IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION For people living with dementia, learning in everyday activities is facilitated by repeated exposure to the activity and the scaffolding practices of a more experienced communicative partner. In instances of novel learning, one should not underestimate the importance of embodied engagement from people living dementia. Care professionals need not to worry about exposing people living with dementia to unfamiliar activities.

show abstract

Chapter 9. Changes in turn-design over interactional histories – the case of instructions in driving school lessons

Cited by 44 publications

References 27 publications

Instruction practices in German driving lessons: Differential uses of declaratives and imperatives

Instruction practices in German driving lessons: Differential uses of declaratives and imperatives

Inferential Practices in Social Interaction: A Conversation-Analytic Account

A person living with dementia learning to navigate an iPad: a case study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About