Program & abstrakt

Konferensens tidsram:

  • Registrering från kl. 11 på torsdag 15/9
  • Konferensen öppnas med första plenarföredrag kl. 12
  • Konferensmiddag på torsdag kväll 15/9 ca kl. 19
  • Konferensen avslutas senast kl. 16 på fredag 16/9





Professor Numa Markee (University of Illinois): Teachers’ instruction giving sequences in classroom interaction

In this paper, I develop ideas first discussed in Markee (2015). That is, I provide an updated empirical analysis of how baseline ESL data gathered at different institutions, in different countries and during different decades provide preliminary but nonetheless compelling evidence that, despite their mundane commonness, teachers’ instruction giving sequences nonetheless display a great deal of unexpected complexity. More specifically, such sequences are empirically achieved as a tightly organized nexus of embodied social practices, actions, pragmatic/grammatical resources and exogenous cultural artifacts. I also argue that this paper contributes to an emerging comparative, cross-linguistic CA research agenda on this topic, which will likely yield important insights into the potential generality of these practices.


Professor Leelo Keevallik (Linköping University): Affirmative particles as response cries

This talk will focus on the prototypical affirmative response yeah (ja in Swedish and Estonian) in its two non-affirmative uses. The first one is the appreciative-celebratory ja! that occurs in relation to embodied achievements by self or others, such as football goals. Featuring specific pitch shape, height, and amplitude, it is furthermore shown to emerge alongside with the projectably successful action-in-progess. The second one occurs in instructing activities, and participates in the canonical teacher initiation – student response – teacher evaluation sequence, where the response is entirely embodied. The evaluative ja is closure-implicative because it marks a successful accomplishment of an assignment, and it is a participants’ problem to distinguish the appreciative ja from the boundary-marking evaluation. Touching upon the current variability of items in these two functions in Sweden, Finland, and Estonia (jee, jea, jess, ja) the paper argues for the relevance of including embodied actions into sequential analysis of linguistic function. It sets light to another ”response cry” that is far from ”a natural overflowing, a flooding up of previously contained feeling” and instead evidences of ”the alignment we take to events” (Goffman 1981).