Rhythm and cadence in interaction

It has already been stated that ethnographic microanalysis points in a clear way to the on-line character of the conduct of speech and nonverbal behavior in interaction. Close analysis of an audiovisual record enables one to see what the listener is doing while the speaker is speaking. From infancy, before we learn to speak a language, through childhood and maturity and on through the entire life cycle, when we converse with others, we do so by interacting at similar rates of speed with our interlocutor. Not only has shared timing been observed but it has also been observed cross-culturally. Thus we can say that shared timing in the performance of interaction is as universal an organizing device in the conduct of speech as are grammar and sound system.

There is a cadential (мелодический) aspect to the organization of timing in interac­tion. Across various languages it can be observed that volume and pitch emphasis marking certain syllables in the speech stream and points of kinesics (body motion) emphasis in the behavior stream of gesture, posture, and gaze often mark a cadence. In other words, there is a regular time interval between the occurrence of these verbal and kinetical points in such a way that an underlying "beat" can be detected in the behaviour stream. Despite differences in syllable rhythm in various languages that differ in syntactic and phonological organization (e.g., English, Russian, French, Chinese, etc.), an underlying cadence of stressed syllables and body motions can be identified that provides a rhythmic foundation for utterance at the level of the clause. This cadence also helps to mark discourse units, for example, the com­pletion of a turn at speaking, the point at which crucial information is being introduced.

Fluency in the performance can be thought of as a matter of participating adequately in going with the flow of interac­tion. One needs to know phonology, grammar, vocabulary, and dis­course rules to produce an utterance in the right time. But individual linguistic and sociolinguistic competence is not enough. In order to perform fluently, a speaker must possess the verbal activity adequately; that is, the participants of communication must act in ways that meet one another's expectations for shared timing and for listening cues. Their speaking activity switches off if the interlocutors do not know how to read one another's implicit signals in mutually congruent ways.

It must be emphasized that verbal strategies for conversa­tional interpretations are for the most part indirect. Information is not overtly expressed in content, but must be withdrawn from tacit presuppositions (исходная предпосылка) acquired through previous interactive experience. Indirect signalling mechanisms differ from lexicalized signs in that they are inherently ambiguous (двусмысленные). Any single utterance is always subject to multiple interpretations. One decides on what interpreta­tion to accept by examining what Austin has called uptake, that is, the conversational process through which lines of reasoning are developed or altered.

Failure to achieve this type of cooperation may indicate undetected differences in signalling systems. In the midst of an exchange, when conversationalists are faced with the need to respond in time and have little opportunity to reflect, such difficulties tend to go undiagnosed. The fact that they exist must be discovered through post hoc (ergo propter hoc), which refers to as false cause, coincidental correlation or correlation not causation.

Individual knowledge of language, then, is not enough for a speaker to perform a speech fluently. Nor is individual knowledge of sociolinguistic conventions concerning politeness or discourse coherence enough. The fluent speaker must also know how to read listeners successfully, during the on-line production of talk, and - equally important - the listeners must also know how to read the speaker. Without such mutual reading ability, neither speaker nor auditor can act in ways that form an articulated interactional environment for one another.

How can we teach second language learners to be rhythmically fluent in conversation, and to be so when they are acting as listeners as well as when they are acting as speakers? From the point of view of micro-ethnography, this is a crucial issue for second language instruction and for bilingual education.

Дата добавления: 2014-01-11