Cover not available

In:Mobile Eye Tracking: New avenues for the study of gaze in social interaction
Edited by Elisabeth Zima and Anja Stukenbrock
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 351] 2025
► pp. 132–164

Get fulltext
PDF logo with download linkDownload Chapter PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Chapter EPUB

Chapter 5
On the relationship between gaze and the German recipient token hm_hm

 | University of Freiburg
Open Access logo
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Published online: 13 May 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.351.05mas
Abstract
This study examines the interplay between speaker gaze, the German recipient token “hm_hm,” and the Feedback Relevance Space (FRS) in triadic conversations. Our findings underscore the role of speaker gaze in eliciting “hm_hm” tokens: over three-quarters of them were produced by the recipient last looked at by the speaker. However, it challenges previous accounts of the relationship between gaze and recipient feedback (Bavelas et al. 2002) by showing that recipients prioritise the timely placement of “hm_hms” and orient to the FRS — typically located towards the end of the speaker’s intonation phrase — over giving feedback while in mutual gaze with the speaker. This is consistent with the function of “hm_hm” as a continuer. The findings of this study contribute to a refined understanding of the relationship between gaze, recipient feedback and turn-taking.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Previous research on the function of gaze and the placement
    of the recipient token hm_hm
    • 2.1The placement of hm_hm relative to the speaker’s turn
    • 2.2The function of gaze to mobilise recipient responses
    • 2.3The gaze window hypothesis
  • 3.Corpus and methods
  • 4.Results: The relationship between gaze and hm_hm
    • 4.1Description of attested patterns
    • 4.2Quantitative distribution of gaze patterns
    • 4.3Analysis of the temporal placement of gaze-mobilised hm_hms
      • 4.3.1Pattern 1: Timely placement of hm_hm as a reaction to the gaze mobilisation
      • 4.3.2Pattern 1: More time passes between the beginning of mutual gaze and the utterances of hm_hm
      • 4.3.3Pattern 2: The recipient utters hm_hm at the second FRS
      • 4.3.3Pattern 3: The speaker dissolves mutual gaze, and the recipient waits until the FRS to utter hm_hm
  • 5.The placement of hm_hm in relation to gaze and the Feedback Relevance Space
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
References (41)
References
Argyle, Michael und Mark Cook (1976): Gaze and mutual gaze. Cambridge [etc.]: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Auer, Peter and Elisabeth Zima. 2021. “On word searches, gaze, and coparticipation.“ Gesprächsforschung — Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion 22: 390–425.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bavelas, Janet, Coates, Linda and Trudy Johnson. 2000. “Listeners as co-narrators.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79 (6): 941–952. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 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
Beattie, Geoffrey W. 1981. “A further investigation of the cognitive interference hypothesis of gaze patterns during conversation.” British Journal of Social Psychology 20 (4):. 243–248. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cathart, Nicola, Carletta, Jean and Ewan Klein. 2003. “A Shallow Model of Backchannel Continuers in Spoken Dialogue.” Proceedings of the tenth conference on European chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert and Meredyth A. Krych. 2004. “Speaking while monitoring addressees for understanding.” Journal of Memory and Language 50 (1): 62–81. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Kok, Iwan and Dirk Heylen. 2012. “Analyzing nonverbal listener responses using parallel recordings of multiple listeners.“ Cognitive Processes, 13 (2): 499–506. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Delettres, Cécile and Jallerat-Jabs, Britta. 2018. ““Ja Müssen Sie jetzt nix irgendwie aufschreiben?“ — Eine Empirische Untersuchung zur Verwendung von irgendwie im gesprochenen Deutsch”. Diskursive Verfestigungen: Schnittstellen zwischen Morphosyntax, Phraseologie und Pragmatik im Deutschen und im Sprachvergleich, edited by Laurent Gautier, Pierre-Yves Modicom and Hélène Vinckel-Roisin, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter: 229–242. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dittmann, Allen T. and Lynn G. Llewellyn. 1967. “The phonemic clause as a unit of speech decoding.“ Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 6 (3): 341–349. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duncan, Starkey and Donald W. Fiske. 1977. Face-to-face interaction: Research, methods, and theory. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ehlich 2007. „Formen und Funktionen von hm: Eine phonologisch-pragmatische Analyse.“ Sprache und sprachliches Handeln, Bd.2: Prozeduren des sprachlichen Handelns. Berlin, New York: de Gruyter. 273–286.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. “Conversation analysis and recipient behaviour.” The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, ed. by Carol A. Chapelle: 1086–1094. Oxford, U.K.: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goodwin, Charles. 1981. Conversational organization: Interaction between speakers and hearers. Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1986. “Between and within: Alternative sequential treatments of continuers and assessments” Human Studies 9 (2–3): 205–217. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goodwin, Marjorie Harness and Charles Goodwin. 1986. “Gesture and coparticipation in the activity of searching for a word.” Semiotica 62 (1–2): 51–75.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heldner, Mattias, Hjalmarsson, Anna and Jens Edlund. 2013. “Backchannel relevance spaces.“ In Nordic Prosody: Proceedings of the XIth Conference Tartu 2012 ed. by E. L. Asu and P. Lippus.: 137–146. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John. 2012. Epistemics in Action: Action Formation and Territories of Knowledge, Research on Language & Social Interaction, 45:1, 1–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Howes, Christine and Arash Eshghi. 2017. “Feedback relevance spaces: The organisation of increments in conversation. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Computational Semantics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2021. “Feedback Relevance Spaces: Interactional Constraints on Processing Contexts in Dynamic Syntax.” Journal of Logic, Language and Information 30: 331–362. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jefferson, Gail. 1984. “Notes on some orderliness of overlap onset.” Discourse analysis and natural rhethoric. ed. by V. d’Urso und P. Leonardi: 11–38. Padua, Italy: Cleup Editore.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jokinen, Kristiina; Furukawa, Hirohisa; Nishida, Masafumi and Yamamoto, Seiichi. 2013. “Gaze and turn-taking behaviour in casual conversational interactions.” ACM Trans. Interact. Intell. Syst. 3 (2), S. 1–30. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kendon, Adam. 1967. “Some functions of gaze direction in social interaction.” Acta Psychologica 26: 22–63. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koiso, Hanae, Horiuchi, Yasuo and Den Yasuharu. 1998. An Analysis of Turn- Taking and Backchannels Based on Prosodic and Syntactic Features in Japanese Map Task Dialogs. Language and Speech 23: 296–321. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lerner, Gene H. 1996. “On the “semi-permeable” character of grammatical units in conversation: conditional entry into the turn space of another speaker.” Interaction and Grammar (Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff, Sandra A. Thompson, eds.), Cambridge, Cambridge University Press: 238–276. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, William. 1985. “Speech shadowing and speech comprehension.” Speech Comprehension, 4 (1–3), 55–57. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morency, Louis-Philippe, de Kok, Iwan and Jonathan Gratch. 2009. “A probabilistic multimodal approach for predicting listener backchannels” Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems. 20: 70–84. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quasthoff, Uta. 1981. „Zuhöreraktivitäten beim konversationellen Erzählen.“ In Dialogforschung ed. by Peter Schröder and Hugo Steger: 287–313. Düsseldorf: Schwann.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rossano, Federico. 2012a. Gaze behaviour in face-to-face conversation [Doctoral dissertation]. Radboud University Nijmegen.
. 2012b. “Gaze in Conversation.” The Handbook of Conversation Analysis ed. By Sidnell, Jack and Tanya Stivers: 308–329. Oxford, U.K.: Wiley Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff und Gail Jefferson (1974). “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation”. In: Language 50.4, S. 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. Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Selting, M., Auer, P., Barth-Weingarten, D., Bergmann, J., Bergmann, P., Birkner, K., Couper-Kuhlen, E., Deppermann, A., Gilles, P., Gunthner, S., Hartung, M., Kern, F., Mertzlufft, C., Meyer, C., Morek, M., Oberzaucher, F., Peters, J., Quasthoff, U., Schutte, W., Stukenbrock, A., and Uhmann, S. 2009. „Gesprächsanalytisches Transkriptionssystem 2 (GAT 2).“ Gesprächsforschung — Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion 10: 353–402. [URL]
Stivers, Tanya and Federico Rossano. 2010. “Mobilising response.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 43: 3–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tolins, Jackson and Jean E. Tree. 2014. “Addressee backchannels steer narrative development.” Journal of Pragmatics 70: 152–164. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vranjes, Jelena. (2018). “On the role of eye gaze in the coordination of interpreter-mediated interaction: an eye-tracking study”. Dissertation. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.
Ward, Nigel and Wataru Tsukahara. 2000. “Prosodic features which cue backchannel responses in English and Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics 32: 1177–1207. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weiß. 2020. Blick und Turn-Taking in Face-to-Face-Interaktionen: Multimodale Interaktionsanalysen triadischer Gesprächssituationen mit Hilfe von Eye-Tracking [Doctoral dissertation]. Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg.
Wittenburg, P., Brugman, H., Russel, A., Klassmann, A., & Sloetjes, H. (2006). ELAN: a professional framework for multimodality research. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2006) (pp. 1556–1559).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zima, Elisabeth. 2020. “Gaze and recipient feedback in triadic storytelling activities.” Discourse Processes 57 (9): 725–748. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue