Establishing joint imagined spaces in game explanations

Differences in the use of embodied resources among primary school children

Authors

  • Noelle Kinalzik University of Wuppertal
  • Vivien Heller University of Wuppertal

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1558/rcsi.12417

Keywords:

deixis, explaining, multimodal conversation analysis, joint imagination, learning disability

Abstract

This study builds on the observation that establishing joint imagined space is an integral part of a wide range of discursive practices, e.g. telling a story or discussing architectonic problems. Conceptualizing imagination as a co-operative and interactively organized activity that involves the participants’ embodied co-orientation to absent entities, we examine in detail how an imagined space of a game board is created in the activity of explaining a game. The analysis is based on video recordings of children with varying capabilities as they engage in game explanations with an adult. Drawing on multimodal conversation analysis and Bühler’s theory of deixis, we examine how two children come to terms with the epistemic and perceptual tasks involved in establishing joint imagined spaces. Findings demonstrate that both children demonstrate considerable skills in dealing with the perceptual task, i.e. mobilizing and monitoring the addressee’s visual co-orientation. They differ, however, in how they attend to the epistemic task, i.e. take into account differential states of knowledge and reorganize the indexical ground.

Author Biographies

  • Noelle Kinalzik, University of Wuppertal

    Noelle Kinalzik is PhD student and research assistant at the chair of German linguistics and their didactics at Wuppertal University. The topic of her PhD is explanatory discourse practices of children with and without learning disability. Drawing on multimodal analysis, her research focus is on multimodal resources of children while explaining conceptual, procedural and causal relations. Most recently, she is involved in research about teacher professional development focusing on classroom talk.

  • Vivien Heller, University of Wuppertal

    Vivien Heller is professor in German linguistics and their didactics at Wuppertal University. She received her PhD in linguistics from Dortmund University on genre repertoires and argumentative discourse practices in families and classrooms. Based on ethnomethodology and multimodal analysis, her research focuses on interactional support and embodiment in language and discourse acquisition, both in family and classroom environments. Recent publications examined gaze and epistemic stance in children’s collaborative reasoning, epistemic ecologies in the classroom and academic discourse practices.

References

Antaki, C. (1994). Explaining and arguing: The social organization of accounts. London: Sage Publications.

Barbieri, M., Colavita, F., & Scheuer, N. (1990). The beginning of the explaining capacity. In G. Conti Ramsden & C. Snow (Eds.), Children's language (Vol. 7, pp. 245-272). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Beals, D. (1993). Explanatory talk in low-income families' mealtime conversations. Applied Psycholinguistics, 14(4), 489-513.

Blum-Kulka, S., Hamo, M., & Habib, T. (2010). Explanations in naturally occurring peer talk: Conversational emergence and function, thematic scope, and contribution to the development of discursive skills. First Language, 30(3-4), 440-460.

Bühler, K. (1934/2011), translated by D. F. Goodwin & A. Eschbach. Theory of Language. The Representational Function of Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Cekaite, A. (2018). Microgenesis of language creativity: Innovation, conformity and incongruence in children's language play. Language Sciences, 65, 26–36.

Clark, H.H. (1996). Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Colletta, J.-M., & Pellenq, C. (2010). The Development of Multimodal Explanations in French Children. In M. A. Nippold & C. M. Scott (Eds.), Expository discourse in children, adolescents, and adults. Development and disorders (pp. 63-97). New York: Psychology Press.

Demir, Ö. E., Rowe, M., Heller, G., Goldin-Meadow, S., & Levine, S. (2015). Vocabulary, syntax, and narrative development in typically developing children and children with early unilateral brain injury: Early parental talk about the “there-and-then” matters. Developmental Psychology, 51(2), 161-175.

Donahue, M. (1985). Communicative style in learning disabled children: Some implications for classroom discourse. In D. N. Ripich & F. M. Spinelli (Eds.), School discourse problems (pp. 97- 124). San Diego: Singular.

Ehmer, O. (2011). Imagination und Animation. Die Herstellung mentaler Räume durch animierte Rede. Berlin: de Gruyter.

Eujen, B., Vaskova, A., Walzbug, A., & Bos, W. (2015). Armutsgefährdete Schülerinnen und Schüler mit einem Förderbedarf im Förderschwerpunkt Lernen am Beispiel von PARS-F und KESS-7-F. In P. Kuhl, P. Stanat, B. Lütje-Klose, C. Gresch, H. Pant & M. Prenzel (Eds.), Inklusion von Schülerinnen und Schülern mit sonderpädagogischem Förderbedarf in Schulleistungserhebungen (pp. 101-128). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Goodwin, C. (2018). Co-Operative Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hausendorf, H. (1995). Deixis and Orality: Explaining Games in Face-to-Face Interaction. In U. M. Quasthoff (Ed.), Aspects of Oral Communication (pp. 181-197). Berlin: de Gruyter.

Haviland, J. (2000). Pointing, gesture spaces, and mental maps. In D. McNeill (Ed.), Language and gesture (pp. 13-46). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Heller, V. (2019). Embodied displacements in young children’s narratives: Layering of spaces, voices, and bodies. Research on Children and Social Interaction, 3(1).

Ingold, T. (2001). Beyond art and technology: the anthropology of skill. In H. Schiffer (Ed.), Anthropological perspectives on technology (pp. 17–33). Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.

Kern, F. (2003). Bedeutung und Interaktion: Spielerklärungen bei Kindern. In S. Haberzettl & H. Wegener (Eds.), Die Rolle der Konzeptualisierung im Spracherwerb (pp. 257-270). Frankfurt a. M.: Lang.

Kotthoff, H. (2009). Erklärende Aktivitätstypen in Alltags- und Unterrichtskontexten. In J. Spreckels (Ed.), Erklären im Kontext. Neue Perspektiven aus der Gesprächs- und Unterrichtsforschung (pp. 120-146). Baltmannsweiler: Schneider.

Lyons, J. (1975). Deixis as the source of reference. In E. L. Keenan (Ed.), Formal semantics of natural language (pp. 61-83). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

McNally, L. (2016). Existential sentences cross-linguistically: Variations in form and meaning. Annual Review of Linguistics, 2, 211-231.

Murphy, K. M. (2005). Collaborative imagining: The interactive use of gestures, talk, and graphic representation in architectural practice. Semiotica, 156(1-4), 113-145.

Morek, M. (2012). Kinder erklären: Interaktionen in Familie und Unterricht im Vergleich. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.

Ningelgen, A. & Auer, P. (2017). Is there a multimodal construction based on non-deictic so in German? Linguistics Vanguard 3(s1) (DOI 10.1515/lingvan-2016-0051).

Nippold, M. A., Hesketh, L. J., Duthie, J. K., & Mansfield, T. C. (2005). Conversational versus expository discourse: A study of syntactic development in children, adolescents, and adults. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48, 1048-1064.

Quasthoff, U., Heller, V., & Morek, M. (2017). On the sequential organization and genre-orientation of discourse units in interaction. An analytic framework. Discourse Studies, 19(1), 84-110.

Rehbein, J. (1984). Beschreiben, Berichten und Erzählen. In K. Ehlich (Ed.), Erzählen in der Schule (pp. 67-124). Tübingen: Narr.

Roth, F. P., & Spekman, N. J. (1986). Narrative discourse: Spontaneously generated stories of learning-disabled and normally achieving students. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 51, 8-23.

Roth, F. P., Spekman, N. J., & Fye, E. C. (1995). Reference cohesion in the oral narratives of students with learning disabilities and normally achieving students. Learning Disability Quarterly, 18(1), 25-40.

Sacks, H. (1995). Lectures on Conversation: Volumes I & II, ed. Jefferson J. Oxford: Blackwell.

Schegloff, E., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The Preference for Self-Correction in the Organization of Repair in Conversation. Language, 53(2), 361–382.

Schneider, P., Williams, B., & Hickmann, M. (1997). The awareness of referential cohesion in children with and without language/learning disabilities. Journal of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, 21(1), 8-16.

Selting, M. et al. (2011). A system for transcribing talk-in-interaction: GAT 2. Gesprächsforschung, 12, 1-51.

Sidnell, J. (2011). The epistemics of make-believe. In T. Stivers, L. Mondada, & J. Steensig (Eds.), The morality in knowledge of conversation (pp. 131-156). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sorsana, C., Guizard, N., & Trognon, A. (2013). Preschool children’s conversational skills for explaining game rules: Communicative guidance strategies as a function of type of relationship and gender. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28(4), 1453-1475.

Spekman, N. J. (1981). Dyadic verbal communication abilities of learning disabled and normally achieving fourth- and fifth-grade boys. Learning Disability Quarterly, 4, 139-151.

Streeck, J. (2008). Depicting by gestures. Gesture, 8(3), 285-301.

Streeck, J. (2011). The changing meaning of things: Found objects and inscriptions in social interaction. In J. Streeck, C. Goodwin & C. D. LeBaron (Eds.), Embodied interaction. Language and body in the material world (pp. 67-78). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Streeck, J., Goodwin, C., & LeBaron, C. D. (2011). Embodied interaction in the material word: an introduction. In J. Streeck, C. Goodwin & C. D. LeBaron (Eds.), Embodied interaction. Language and body in the material world (pp. 1-26). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Stude, J. (2005). Mündliche und schriftliche Spielerklärungen von Grundschulkindern. Erste Analysen des OLDER-Korpus. Projektpapier Nr. 3. Universität Dortmund.

Stukenbrock, A. (2014). Take the words out of my mouth: Verbal instructions as embodied practices. Journal of Pragmatics, 65, 80-102.

Stukenbrock, A. (2017). Intercorporeal Phantasms: Kinesthetic alignment with imagined bodies in self-defense trainings. In C. Meyer, J. Streeck & S. Jordan (Eds.), Intercorporeality. Emerging socialities in interaction (pp. 237-263). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Toe, D., & Paatsch, L. (2018). Communicative competence of oral deaf children while explaining game rules. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 23(4), 369-381.

Uccelli, P., Demir-Lira, Ö. E., Rowe, M. L., Levine, S., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2018). Children’s Early Decontextualized Talk Predicts Academic Language Proficiency in Midadolescence. Child Development, 1-14.

Vygotsky, L. S. (2004). Imagination and Creativity in Childhood. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 42(1), 7-97.

Ward-Lonergan, J. M. (2010). Expository Discourse in School-Age Children and Adolescents with Language Disorders. In M. A. Nippold & C. M. Scott (Eds.), Expository discourse in children, adolescents, and adults. Development and disorders (pp. 155-189). New York: Psychologie Press.

Weissenborn, J. (1988). Von der ‘demonstratio ad oculos’ zur ‘Deixis am Phantasma’. Die Entwicklung der lokalen Referenz bei Kindern. In A. Eschbach (Ed.), Karl Bühler’s Theory of Language (pp. 257-276). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Westerveld, M. F., & Moran, C. A. (2011). Expository language skills of young school-aged children. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, 42(2), 182-193.

World Health Organization (2018). International Classification of Diseases. https://www.who.int/classifications/icd/en/ [11.04.2019].

Published

2020-07-21

How to Cite

Kinalzik, N., & Heller, V. (2020). Establishing joint imagined spaces in game explanations: Differences in the use of embodied resources among primary school children. Research on Children and Social Interaction, 4(1), 28-50. https://doi.org/10.1558/rcsi.12417