SPEECH INTERRUPTIONS AS BACKCHANNEL ITEM

  • Tetiana Serhiivna Kyrychenko
Keywords: interaction, communication, consent, solidarity, attention, discourse markers, dialogical discourse

Abstract

The paper provides the study of speech interruptions as backchannel item in interaction. The reasons for the interruption studyas backchannel item are determined, as well as the aim of the research is outlined. The complex methodology with the use of the method of linguistic description in connection with such techniques as observation, comparison and generalisation, discourse analysis in combination with contextual analysis, is presented. The interruption is elucidated not as a violation of politeness, but as a manifestation of care, attention, and consent. Particular attention is paid to the demonstration of solidarity in the situation of interruption, which is implemented within the framework of positive politeness and as a feedback signal. Discursive markers in the situation of speech interruption in the context of oral spontaneous dialogical discourse are presented, which are a characteristic fearure of the interruptions aimed at expressing consent, solidarity, attention and assistance. The connection of discursive backchannel itemsand phatic function in communicative interaction, according to which interruption as a manifestation of empathy is an indicator of interest, affection, and active listening, is formulated. It has been established that discursive markers are necessary to reflect the recognition of the addressee role, the demonstration of attention and support. The results obtained illustrate that interruptions should not be interpreted only as a display of dominance, power, the desire to stop the interaction. It is statedthat interruptions can serve as a means of backchannel, whereby the function of discursive markers is to obtain a positive communicative effect, namely, to achieve agreement, understanding, show solidarity and assistance. It is suggested to analyse the interruption in the context of other discursive markers in the interruption utterance. The results of the research are bolstered with the examples of dialogical discourse taken from the movies and works of contemporary British and American authors of the XX – XXI centuries. The prospects for study consist in further investigation of age characteristics, non-verbal means of the interruption, as well as strategies and tactics, which are involved in responding to the speech interruptions, that will allow a more detailed study of an addressee factor.

References

1. Добрушина Н.Р. Исследования средств выражения обратной связи в американской лингвистике. Вопросы языкознания. 2000. № 1. С. 135–140.
2. Иссерс О.С. Речевое воздействие : учебное пособие. Москва : Флинта, 2011. 224 с.
3. Петрова А.А. Мультимодальные аспекты исследования интеракции. Вестник Волгоградского государственного университета. Серия 2 «Языкознание». 2008. № 2. С. 105–111.
4. Сонин А.Г. Моделирование механизмов понимания поликодовых текстов : дисс. … докт. филол. наук : 10.0219 ; Московский государственный лингвистический університет. Москва, 2006. 310 с.
5. Шаховский В.И., Цой А.И. Речевой перебив как маркер неэкологичной бизнес-коммуникации. Вестник Томского государственного педагогического университета. 2012. № 10(125). С. 145–150.
6. Brown P., Levinson S. Politeness. Some universals in language usage. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1987. 352 p.
7. Cordella M. The Dynamic consultation. A discourse analytical study of doctor – patient communication. Philadelphia : John Benjamins, 2004. 254 p.
8. Deppermann A. Multimodal interaction from a conversation analytic perspective. Journal of Pragmatics. 2013. Vol. 46. № 1. P. 1–7.
9. Duncan S.Jr. On the structure of speaker-auditor interaction during speaking turns. Language in Society. 1974. Vol. 3. № 2. P. 161–180.
10. Flynn G. Gone girl. New York : Crown Publishing Group, 2012. 293 p.
11. Goffman E. Frame analysis: an essay on the organization of experience. Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press, 1974. 586 p.
12. Grisham J. A time to kill. New York : Doubleday, 1989. 515 p.
13. Hodgetts H.H., Jones D.M. Interruption of the tower of London task: support for a goal-activation approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2006. № 135. P. 103–115.
14. Kennedy C.W., Camden C.T. A new look at interruptions. Western Journal of Speech Communication. 1983. Vol. 47. P. 45–58.
15. Lamb W. The hour i first believed. New York : Harper Collins Publishers, 2008. 755 p.
16. Schmitt R. Bericht über das 1. Arbeitstreffen multimodale Kommunikation. Sprachreport. 2004. № 1. P. 31–34.
17. Sheldon S. Are you afraid of dark. New York : William Morrow, 2004. 361 p.
18. Tartt D. The secret history. New York : Alfred A. Knopf, 1992. 408 p.
19. The intern (2015). URL: https://english-films.com/ comedies/560-the-intern-2015-hd-720-ru-eng.html (дата звернення: 26.03.2019).
Published
2019-09-30
Pages
43-46