Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Securing recipiency in workplace meetings: Multimodal practices

Cecilia E. Ford and Trini Stickle
Discourse Studies
Vol. 14, No. 1, Special Issue on Interaction in Workplace Meetings (February 2012), pp. 11-30
Published by: Sage Publications, Ltd.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/43496251
Page Count: 20
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Download ($40.00)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Securing recipiency in workplace meetings: Multimodal practices
Preview not available

Abstract

As multiparty interactions with single courses of coordinated action, workplace meetings place particular interactional demands on participants who are not primary speakers (e.g. not chairs) as they work to initiate turns and to interactively coordinate with displays of recipiency from coparticipants. Drawing from a corpus of 26 hours of videotaped workplace meetings in a midsized US city, this article reports on multimodal practices — phonetic, prosodic, and bodily-visual — used for coordinating turn transition and for consolidating recipiency in these specialized speech exchange systems. Practices used by self-selecting non-primary speakers as they secure turns in meetings include displays of close monitoring of current speakers' emerging turn structure, displays of heightened interest as current turns approach possible completion, and turn initiation practices designed to pursue and, in a fine-tuned manner, coordinate with displays of recipiency on the parts of other participants as well as from reflexively constructed 'target' recipients. By attending to bodily-visual action, as well as phonetics and prosody, this study contributes to expanding accounts for turn taking beyond traditional word-based grammar (i.e. lexicon and syntax).

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
[11]
    [11]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
12
    12
  • Thumbnail: Page 
13
    13
  • Thumbnail: Page 
14
    14
  • Thumbnail: Page 
15
    15
  • Thumbnail: Page 
16
    16
  • Thumbnail: Page 
17
    17
  • Thumbnail: Page 
18
    18
  • Thumbnail: Page 
19
    19
  • Thumbnail: Page 
20
    20
  • Thumbnail: Page 
21
    21
  • Thumbnail: Page 
22
    22
  • Thumbnail: Page 
23
    23
  • Thumbnail: Page 
24
    24
  • Thumbnail: Page 
25
    25
  • Thumbnail: Page 
26
    26
  • Thumbnail: Page 
27
    27
  • Thumbnail: Page 
28
    28
  • Thumbnail: Page 
29
    29
  • Thumbnail: Page 
30
    30