Abstract

Abstract Language acquisition involves more than learning how to produce words in complex strings. It involves a diversity of aptitudes about how, when, with whom and in what way to use language abilities. While it is acknowledged that these skills are learned through social interaction (Blum-Kulka, S. (1997). Dinner talk: cultural patterns of sociability and socialization in family discourse. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc, Mahwah, NJ; Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. Oxford University Press, Oxford), our understanding about precisely how they emerge and how they are taught and learned remains preliminary at best. Additionally, much of our understanding is strictly limited to spoken language. The analysis and arguments herein detail the consequentiality of child directed interaction strategies (CDIS) which facilitate non-verbal actions and motivate episodic retrospection, making a tangible link between the current interaction and past experiences. Through a multimodal interaction analysis (Author and Pirini, J. (2020). Multimodal (Inter)action Analysis. In McKinley, J. and Rose, H. (Eds.) The Routledge handbook of research methods in applied linguistics. Rouledge, London, pp. 488–499; Norris, S. (2004). Analyzing multimodal interaction: a methodological framework. Routledge, London. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203379493; Norris, S. (2011). Identity in (inter)action: introducing Multimodal (Inter)action Analysis. de Gruyter Mouton, Berlin & New York. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781934078280; Norris, S. (2019). Systematically working with multimodal data: research methods in multimodal discourse analysis. Wiley Blackwell, Hoboken, NJ; Pirini, J. (2014). Introduction to Multimodal (Inter)action Analysis. In: Norris, S. and Maier, C. (Eds.). Interactions, texts and images: a reader in multimodality. Mouton de Gruyter, New York. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614511175.77) of the practice of showing material objects during interaction, I show that non-verbal action, material culture and the physical world are crucial to developing a certain socio-cognitive pragmatic aptitude. CDIS motivating ‘showing’ of tangible objects of personal significance may be the non-verbal antecedent of selecting and introducing new topics during interaction. These CDIS defer interactional agency and motivate non-verbal communicative actions more comfortably within the zone of proximal development. Importantly, the materiality of the objects themselves are of fleeting interactional priority. Instead, the objects provide a bridge between materiality in the here-and-now to past experiences in the there-and-then. Facilitating non-verbal actions of showing help motivate explorations of episodic memory by creating a tangible and immediate link within the unfolding interaction.

Highlights

  • It is no secret that the true site of communicative development for children is in real-time social interaction (Blum-Kulka 1997; Rogoff 2003)

  • While there is some debate regarding intention and parents obviously play a role in evaluating actions as ‘communicative’, few contest that pre-verbal infants exploit non-verbal resources to ‘express things’. This has led some to argue that language acquisition proper is crucially dependant on preverbal pragmatics abilities (Brooks and Meltzoff 2005; Mundy et al 2007) and that interactive aptitudes in this stage lay the groundwork upon which the ability to communicate through words can emerge (Bates 1976; Carpenter et al 1983)

  • Multimodal (Inter)action Analysis (Author and Pirini 2020; Norris 2004, 2011, 2018; Pirini 2014) provides an analytical framework for the inductive qualitative analysis of real-time social interaction occurring through multiple modes of communication while acknowledging the influence and affect of individual-sociocultural, historical and institutional trajectories which undeniably affect the materiality of social action in situ

Read more

Summary

Introduction

It is no secret that the true site of communicative development for children is in real-time social interaction (Blum-Kulka 1997; Rogoff 2003). Parental facilitation and the showing of physical objects appear to be a collaborative form of topic introduction (albeit a multimodal form) and are treated as such by interlocutors This practice, which is more communicatively manageable for the developing interlocutors, may be the non-verbal antecedent to the ability to select and introduce conversational topics through language. The CDISs accomplish a number of interactive and pedagogical goals which facilitate reflection and explicit consideration about topic introductions and the nuances of conversational relevance As such, these strategies and the co-produced interactive practices they initiate can lay the socio-cognitive ground work for further pragmatic development of communicative strategies undertaken more holistically through spoken language. The material and immediate intersects with the historical whereby objects give immediate interactive tangibility to the complexes of experience which become the collective topical foci of the exchanges

Conversational transitions and topic introduction
A note on transcription
Project description and data set
Topic transition
The tooth
The slug
Scales of action
Objects to experience to ‘the now’
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call