Cover not available

Article published In: Interactional Linguistics
Vol. 4:1 (2024) ► pp.68–96

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

From doing work on your own talk to doing work on others’ talk

The longitudinal development of also ‘so’ in L2 German

ORCiD logo with link | Bielefeld University
Published online: 5 April 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/il.23008.sch
Abstract
Research on L2 interactional competence (IC) has become increasingly focused on how L2 speakers develop and recalibrate linguistic resources to do interactional work, i.e., how L2 speakers develop a grammar-for-interaction (Pekarek Doehler, S. (2018). Elaborations on L2 interactional competence: The development of L2 grammar-for-interaction. Classroom Discourse, 9(1), 3–24. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). In this paper, I use interactional linguistics to track one L2 German speaker’s IC development over 11 months by analyzing her use of German also (English ‘so’) in formulations (see Deppermann, A. (2011). The study of formulations as a key to an interactional semantics. Human Studies, 34(2), 115–128. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Heritage, J., & Watson, D. R. (1979). Formulations as conversational objects. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology (pp. 123–163). New York: Irvington Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, (1980). Aspects of the properties of formulations in natural conversations: Some instances analysed. Semiotica, 30(3–4), 245–262. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). In initial months, the L2 speaker uses also exclusively to do work on her own prior talk, e.g., in upshots, consequences, and unpackings. The L2 speaker’s initial also uses contribute to moves that maintain intersubjectivity by ensuring her co-interactant’s understanding of her own talk. In later months, the L2 speaker diversifies her uses of also, including uses oriented to co-interactants’ prior talk that address manifest problems of intersubjectivity: to preface an other-correction of an incorrect candidate understanding, and to preface turns addressing a co-interactant’s problem of understanding. The L2 speaker’s changing also uses demonstrate her ability to contribute to interactional organization in increasingly diverse ways, evidencing a developing grammar-for-interaction. I end by calling for more research on the L2 development of linguistic resources that primarily serve interactional functions, such as particles.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Interactional competence and grammar-for-interaction
  • 3.German also: Connective adverb with interactional functions
  • 4.Participant & data
  • 5.Analysis
    • 5.1Nina maintaining intersubjectivity with also in months 2–4
      • 5.1.1Canonical also: Signalling upshots and consequences
      • 5.1.2Unpacking also
    • 5.2Nina restoring intersubjectivity with also in months 11 and 12
      • 5.2.1Targeting a co-interactant’s talk: Correcting candidate understandings
      • 5.2.2Also in other-initiated self-reformulations
  • 6.Overview of Nina’s also use over time
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Symbols used in transcripts
  • References
References (51)
References
Alm, M. (2004). Contribution of sentence position: the word also in spoken German. ZAS Papers in Linguistics, 35(1), 1–14. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Antaki, C. (2012). Affiliative and disaffiliative candidate understandings. Discourse Studies, 14(5), 531–547. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Auer, P. (1996). The pre-front field in spoken German and its relevance as a grammaticalization position. Pragmatics, 6(3), 295–322.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Auer, P., & Günthner, S. (2005). Die Entstehung von Diskursmarkern im Deutschen – ein Fall von Grammatikalisierung? In T. Leuschner, T. Mortelmans, & S. De Groodt (Eds.), Grammatikalisierung im Deutschen (pp. 335–362). Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blühdorn, H., Foolen, A., & Loureda, O. (2017). Diskursmarker: Begriffsgeschichte – Theorie – Beschreibung. Ein bibliographischer Überblick. In H. Blühdorn, A. Deppermann, H. Helmer, & T. Spranz-Fogasy (Eds.), Diskursmarker im Deutschen. Reflexionen und Analysen (pp. 3–36). Göttingen: Verlag für Gesprächsforschung.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bolden, G. B. (2006). Little words that matter: Discourse markers “so” and “oh” and the doing of other-attentiveness in social interaction. Journal of Communication, 56(4), 661–688. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015). Discourse markers. In K. Tracy, T. Sandel, & C. Ilie (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of language and social interaction (pp. 1–7). Chichester: Wiley & Sons. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Council of Europe. (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2018). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Companion volume with new descriptors. Council of Europe Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2020). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment – Companion volume. Council of Europe Publishing. [URL][URL]
Couper-Kuhlen, E., & Selting, M. (2018). Interactional linguistics. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Deppermann, A. (2011). The study of formulations as a key to an interactional semantics. Human Studies, 34(2), 115–128. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Deppermann, A., & Helmer, H. (2013). Zur Grammatik des Verstehens im Gespräch: Inferenzen anzeigen und Handlungskonsequenzen ziehen mit also und dann. Zeitschrift Für Sprachwissenschaft, 32(1), 1–39. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Deppermann, A., & Pekarek Doehler, S. (2021). Longitudinal conversation analysis – Introduction to the special issue. ROLSI, 54(2), 127–141. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dittmar, N. (2011). Zum Verhältnis von Form und (kommunikativer) Funktion in der mündlichen Rede am Beispiel des Konnektors also. In N. Dittmar & N. Bahlo (Eds.), Beschreibungen für gesprochenes Deutsch auf dem Prüfstand: Analysen und Perspektiven (pp. 99–135). Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drew, P. (1997). “Open” class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of trouble in conversation. JoP, 281, 69–101. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dudenredaktion. (n.d.). also. Duden Online. Retrieved August 13, 2021, from [URL]
Egbert, M. (2004). Other-initiated repair and membership categorization – Some conversational events that trigger linguistic and regional membership categorization. JoP, 36(8), 1467–1498.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fernández-Villanueva, M. (2007). Uses of also in oral semi-informal German. Catalan Journal of Linguistics, 61, 95–115. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fischer, K. (2006). Towards an understanding of the spectrum of approaches to discourse particles: introduction to the volume. In K. Fischer (Ed.), Approaches to discourse particles (pp. 1–20). Amsterdam: Elsevier. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garfinkel, H., & Sacks, H. (1970). On formal structures of practical actions. In J. C. McKinney & E. A. Tiryakian (Eds.), Theoretical sociology: Perspectives and developments (pp. 337–366). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Golato, A. (2012). German oh: Marking an emotional change of state. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(3), 245–268. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gülich, E. (2002). Reformulierungen. In I. Kolboom, T. Kotschi, & E. Reichel (Eds.), Handbuch Französisch. Sprache-Literatur-Kultur-Gesellschaft (pp. 350–357). Berlin: Erich Schmidt.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hellermann, J. (2008). Social actions for classroom language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, J. (1984). A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 299–345). Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1998). Oh-prefaced responses to inquiry. Language in Society, 27(3), 291–334. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, J., & Sorjonen, M.-L. (2018). Introduction. Analyzing turn-initial particles. In J. Heritage & M.-L. Sorjonen (Eds.), Between turn and sequence. Turn-Initial particles across languages (pp. 1–22). Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, J., & Watson, D. R. (1979). Formulations as conversational objects. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology (pp. 123–163). New York: Irvington Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1980). Aspects of the properties of formulations in natural conversations: Some instances analysed. Semiotica, 30(3–4), 245–262. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ishida, M. (2009). Development of interactional competence: Changes in the use of ne in L2 Japanese during study-abroad. In H. thi Nguyen & G. Kasper (Eds.), Talk-in-interaction: Multilingual perspectives (pp. 351–387). Honolulu: National Foreign Resource Center-University of Hawai’i.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koschmann, T. (2013). Conversation analysis and learning in interaction. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 1038–1043). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mandelbaum, J. (2013). Storytelling in conversation. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), Handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 492–507). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pekarek Doehler, S. (2018). Elaborations on L2 interactional competence: The development of L2 grammar-for-interaction. Classroom Discourse, 9(1), 3–24. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2019). On the nature and the development of L2 interactional competence. State of the art and implications for praxis. In S. Salaberry, Rafael M. Kunitz (Ed.), Teaching and testing L2 interactional competence (pp. 25–59). New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pekarek Doehler, S., & Berger, E. (2018). L2 interactional competence as increased ability for context-sensitive conduct: A longitudinal study of story-openings. Applied Linguistics, 39(4), 555–578.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2019). On the reflexive relation between developing L2 interactional competence and evolving social relationships: A longitudinal study of word-searches in the ‘wild.’ In J. Hellermann, S. W. Eskildsen, S. Pekarek Doehler, & A. Piirainen-Marsh (Eds.), Conversation analytic research on learning-in-action. The complex ecology of second language acquisition “in the wild” (pp. 51–75). Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pekarek Doehler, S., & Eskildsen, S. W. (2022). Emergent L2 grammars in and for social interaction: Introduction to the special issue. MLJ, 106(1), 3–22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pfeiffer, M. (2017). Über die Funktion der Reparaturmarker im Deutschen. In H. Blühdorn, A. Deppermann, H. Helmer, & T. Spranz-Fogasy (Eds.), Diskursmarker im Deutschen. Reflexionen und Analysen (pp. 259–283). Göttingen: Verlag für Gesprächsforschung.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (1997). Third turn repair. In G. R. Guy, C. Feagin, D. Schiffrin, & J. Baugh (Eds.), Towards a social science of language: Papers in honor of William Labov (pp. 31–40). Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Ten operations of self-initiated, same-turn repair. In M. Hayashi, G. Raymond, & J. Sidnell (Eds.), Conversation repair and human understanding. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A., & Lerner, G. H. (2009). Beginning to respond: Well-prefaced responses to wh-questions. ROLSI, 42(2), 91–115.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schirm, R. S. K. (2022). L2 discourse markers and the development of interactional competence during study abroad [Ph.D. Dissertation]. University of Waterloo.
Selting, M., Auer, P., Barth-Weingarten, D., Bergmann, J., Bergmann, P., Birkner, K., … Uhmann, S. (2011). A system for transcribing talk-in-interaction: GAT 2. Gesprächsforschung, 121, 1–51.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shively, R. L. (2011). L2 pragmatic development in study abroad: A longitudinal study of Spanish service encounters. JoP, 43(6), 1818–1835. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Skogmyr Marian, K. (2023). Longitudinal change in linguistic resources for interaction. The case of tu vois (‘you see’) in L2 French. Interactional Linguistics, 1–35.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Skogmyr Marian, K., & Balaman, U. (2018). Second language interactional competence and its development: An overview of conversation analytic research on interactional change over time. Linguistics and Language Compass, 121, 1–16. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sorjonen, M.-L. (2018). Reformulating prior speaker’s turn in Finnish. Turn-initial siis, eli(kkä), and nii(n) et(tä). In J. Heritage & M.-L. Sorjonen (Eds.), Between turn and sequence: Turn-initial particles across languages (pp. 251–286). Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wagner, J., Pekarek Doehler, S., & González-Martínez, E. (2018). Longitudinal research on the organization of social interaction: Current developments and methodological challenges. In S. Pekarek Doehler, J. Wagner, & E. González-Martínez (Eds.), Longitudinal studies on the organization of social interaction (pp. 3–35). London: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue