Cover not available

Article published In: Language and Dialogue
Vol. 8:3 (2018) ► pp.439–467

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

On the role of gaze in the organization of turn-taking and sequence organization in interpreter-mediated dialogue

 | Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (Belgium)
 | Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (Belgium)
 | Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (Belgium)
Published online: 2 November 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.00025.vra
Abstract
This paper contributes to the growing line of research that takes a multimodal approach in the study of interpreter-mediated dialogues. Drawing on insights from Conversation Analysis and multimodal analysis, we investigate how extended multi-unit turns unfold with interventions of an interpreter and, more specifically, what is the role of gaze in this process. The analysis is based on videos of interpreter-mediated dialogues (Dutch-Russian) recorded with mobile eye-tracking glasses. We argue that the interpreter’s gaze direction contributes both to the local management of turn-taking (next-speaker selection) and to sequence organization. More specifically, we show how interpreter’s gaze orientation bears on the negotiation of possible transition relevance places and how it contributes to the smooth continuation of the projected extended multi-unit turn.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Turn-taking and gaze in face-to-face interaction
  • 3.Extended tellings in interpreter-mediated talk
  • 4.Data and method
  • 5.Analysis
    • 5.1First pair-parts of an adjacency pair: Gaze at the selected next speaker
    • 5.2Chunking of multi-unit turns
      • 5.2.1Immediate gaze shift to the previous speaker at turn-end: Close collaboration
      • 5.2.2No gaze shift to the previous speaker at turn-end: Temporary incongruity in sequence formation
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (54)
References
Angelelli, Claudia. 2000. “Interpretation as a Communicative Event: A Look through Hymes’ Lenses.” Translators’ Journal 45(4): 580–592.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Auer, Peter. 2005. “Projection in interaction and projection in grammar.” Text 25(1): 7–36. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. “Gaze, addressee selection and turn-taking in three-party interaction.” InLiSt (60): 1–32.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baraldi, Claudio and Laura Gavioli. 2012. “Introduction: Understanding coordination in interpreter-mediated interaction.” In Coordinating Participation in Dialogue Interpreting, ed. by Claudio Baraldi and Laura Gavioli, 1–21. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bavelas, B. Janet, Linda Coates, and Trudy Johnson. 2002. “Listener responses as a collaborative process: The role of gaze.” Journal of Communication 52(3): 566–580. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bolden, Galina. 2000. “Toward understanding practices of medical interpreting: interpreters’ involvement in history taking.” Discourse Studies 2(4): 387–419. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bot, Hanneke. 2005. Dialogue Interpreting in Mental Health. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brône, Geert, Bert Oben, Annelies Jehoul, Jelena Vranjes and Kurt Feyaerts. 2017. “Eye gaze and viewpoint in multimodal interaction management.” Cognitive Linguistics 28(3): 449–484. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clayman, Steven E. 2013. “Turn-Constructional Units and the Transition-Relevance-Place.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 150–166. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davidson, Brad. 2002. “A model for the construction of conversational common ground in interpreted discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 341: 1273–1300. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davitti, Elena and Sergio Pasquandrea. 2017. “Embodied participation: What multimodal analysis can tell us about interpreter-mediated encounters in pedagogical settings.” Journal of Pragmatics 1071: 105–128. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duncan, Starkey. 1972. “Some signals and rules for taking speaking turns in conversations.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 23 (2): 283–292. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta. 1997. “Degree of Interpreter Responsibility in the Interaction Process in Community Interpreting.” In Critical Link: Interpreters in the Community, ed. by Silvana E. Carr, 147–164. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ford, Cecilia E. 2004. “Contingency and units in interaction.” Discourse Studies 6(1): 27–52. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ford, Cecilia E., Barbara Fox, and Sandra A. Thompson. 1996. “Practices in the construction of turns: The TCU revisted.” Pragmatics 6(3): 427–454. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frischen, Alexandra, Andrew P. Bayliss, and Steven P. Tipper. 2007. “Gaze Cueing of Attention: Visual Attention, Social Cognition, and Individual Differences.” Psychological Bulletin 133(4): 694–724. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goodwin, Charles. 1979. “The Interactive Construction of a Sentence in Natural Conversation.” In Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. by George Psathas, 97–121. New York: Irvington Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1981. Conversational Organization. Interaction between Speakers and Hearers. New York/ London: Academic.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. “The co-operative, transformative organization of human action and knowledge.” Journal of Pragmatics 461: 8–23. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hayashi, Makoto. 2013. “Turn Allocation and Turn Sharing.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 167–190. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Houtkoop, Hanneke and Mazeland, Harrie. 1985. “Turns and discourse units in everyday conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 91: 595–619. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kendon, Adam. 1967. “Some functions of gaze-direction in social interaction.” Acta Psychologica 261: 22–63. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lang, Ranier. 1978. “Behavioral aspects of liaison interpreters in Papua New Guinea: some preliminary observations.” In Language Interpretation and Communication, ed. by David Gerver and Wallace H. Sinaiko, 231–244. New York/ London: Plenum Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lerner, Gene H. 1991. “On the Syntax of Sentences in Progress.” Language in Society 201: 441–458. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2003. “Selecting next speaker: The context-sensitive operation of a context-free organization.” Language in Society 321: 177–201. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 2012. “Action formation and ascription.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 103–131. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. and Francisco Torreira. 2015. “Timing in turn-taking and its implications for processing models of language.” In Turn-taking in Human Communicative Interaction, ed. by Judith Holler, Kobin H. Kendrick, Marisa Casillas and Stephen C. Levinson, 10–27. Lausanne: Frontiers Media.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Llewellyn-Jones, Peter and Robert G. Lee. 2014. Redefining the Role of the Community Interpreter: The Concept of role-space. Lincoln: SLI Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, Shuangyu. 2015. “Nine Types of Turn-taking in Interpreter-mediated GP Consultations.” Applied Linguistics Review 6(1): 73–96. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Licoppe, Christian. Forthcoming. “The interpreter as a sequential coordinator in courtroom interaction. ’Chunking’ and the management of turn shifts in extended answers in consecutively interpreted asylum hearings with remote participants.” Interpreting.
Licoppe, Christian, Maud Verdier, and Clair-Antoine Veyrier. 2018. “Voice, control and turn-taking in multi-lingual, consecutively interpreted courtroom proceedings with video links. In Remote Interpreting, ed. by Robert Skinner, Jemina Napier and Sabina Braun, 299–322. Washington (DC): Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mandelbaum, Jenny. 2013. “Storytelling in Conversation.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 492–509. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mason, Ian. 2012. “Gaze, positioning and identity in interpreter-mediated dialogues.” In Coordinating Participation in Dialogue Interpreting, ed. by Claudio Baraldi and Laura Gavioli, 177–199. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Merlino, Sara. 2014. “Traduction orale et organisation de la parole: la gestion multimodale des transitions.” In Corps en interaction: participation, spatialité, mobilité, ed. by Lorenza Mondada, 65–105. Lyon: ENS Editions.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mondada, Lorenza. 2007. “Multimodal resources for turn-taking: pointing and emergence of next speakers.” Discourse Studies 9(2): 194–225. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. “Multiple Temporalities of Language and Body in Interaction: Challenges for Transcribing Multimodality.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 51(1): 85–106. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pasquandrea, Sergio. 2011. “Managing multiple actions through multimodality: Doctors’ involvement in interpreter-mediated interactions.” Language in Society 40 (4): 455–481. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rossano, Federico. 2012. Gaze behavior in face-to-face interaction. PhD Thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson. 1974. “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation.” Language 501: 696–735. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1982. “Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of ‘uh huh’ and other things that come between sentences.” In Analyzing Discourse: Text and Talk, ed. by Deborah Tannen, 71–93. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1996. “Turn Organization: One Intersection of Grammar and Interaction.” Interaction and Grammar 52–133. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2000. “Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation.” Language in Society 291: 1–63. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmitt, Reinhold. 2005. “Zur multimodalen Struktur von turn-taking.“ Gesprächsforschung 61: 17–61.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Selting, Margaret. 2000. “The construction of units in conversational talk.” Language in Society 291: 477–517. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sidnell, Jack and Tanya Stivers (eds). 2013. The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Chichester: Blackwell-Wiley. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya. 2008. “Stance, Alignment and Affiliation during Storytelling: When Nodding is a Token of Affiliation.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 41 (1): 31–57. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. “Sequence organization.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Oxford, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 191–209. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya and Federico Rossano. 2010. “Mobilizing Response.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 43 (1): 3–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Streeck, Jürgen. 2014. “Mutual gaze and recognition. Revisiting Kendon’s “Gaze direction in two-person conversation””. In From Gesture in Conversation to Visible Action as Utterance: Essays in honor of Adam Kendon, ed. by Mandana Seyfeddinpur and Marianne Gullberg, 35–56. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vranjes, Jelena, Hanneke, Bot, Kurt Feyaerts and Geert Brône. Forthcoming. “Displaying recipiency in an interpreter-mediated dialogue: an eye-tracking study.” In Eye-tracking in Interaction. Studies on the Role of Eye Gaze in Dialogue, ed. by Brône Geert and Bert Oben. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Wadensjö, Cecilia. 1998. Interpreting as interaction. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wittenburg, Peter, Hennie Brugman, Albert Russel, Alex Klassmann, and Han Sloetjes. 2006. “ELAN: a Professional Framework for Multimodality Research.” In Proceedings of LREC 2006, Fifth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, 1556–1559. ELRA (European Language Resources Association).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (13)

Cited by 13 other publications

Cavents, Dries, Jelena Vranjes & July De Wilde
2025. Interpreters’ use of embodied resources to manage rapport challenge in video remote interpreting. Perspectives ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Kornacki, Michał & Jan-Louis Kruger
2025. Dynamic eyetracking. In Research Methods in Cognitive Translation and Interpreting Studies [Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 10], ► pp. 235 ff. DOI logo
Leyland, Christopher, Spencer Hazel & Adam Brandt
2024. Enabling people living with dementia to make choices during creative workshops: a conversation analysis study of co-creativity, choice-sequences, and the supportive actions of carers. Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology 49:3 ► pp. 114 ff. DOI logo
Doherty, Stephen, Natalie Martschuk, Jane Goodman-Delahunty & Sandra Hale
2022. An Eye-Movement Analysis of Overt Visual Attention During Consecutive and Simultaneous Interpreting Modes in a Remotely Interpreted Investigative Interview. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo
Gilbert, Andrew Simon, Samantha Croy, Kerry Hwang, Dina LoGiudice & Betty Haralambous
2022. Video remote interpreting for home-based cognitive assessments. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 24:1 ► pp. 84 ff. DOI logo
Vranjes, Jelena & Bert Oben
2022. Anticipation and timing of turn-taking in dialogue interpreting. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 34:4 ► pp. 627 ff. DOI logo
Zhu, Xuelian & Vahid Aryadoust
2022. A Synthetic Review of Cognitive Load in Distance Interpreting: Toward an Explanatory Model. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo
王, 春丽
2022. Multimodal Interpreting Studies: A State-of-the-Art Review and Prospects. Modern Linguistics 10:11 ► pp. 2598 ff. DOI logo
Auer, Peter
2021. Turn-allocation and gaze: A multimodal revision of the “current-speaker-selects-next” rule of the turn-taking system of conversation analysis. Discourse Studies 23:2 ► pp. 117 ff. DOI logo
Auer, Peter
2021. Gaze selects the next speaker in answers to questions pronominally addressed to more than one co-participant. Interactional Linguistics 1:2 ► pp. 154 ff. DOI logo
Tiselius, Elisabet & Michaela Albl-Mikasa
2021. Introduction. Translation, Cognition & Behavior ► pp. 233 ff. DOI logo
Vranjes, Jelena & Geert Brône
2021. Interpreters as laminated speakers: Gaze and gesture as interpersonal deixis in consecutive dialogue interpreting. Journal of Pragmatics 181 ► pp. 83 ff. DOI logo
KINCAL, Şeyda
2020. The interpreter in (inter)action: Divergent renditions in consecutive interpreting. RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi :20 ► pp. 774 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue