From Infants' Reacting to Understanding: Grounding Mature Communication and Sociality Through Turn-Taking and Sequencing

• Authors: Domenic Berducci
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

I will investigate a number of pre-linguistic infants interacting with caregivers, and attempt to demonstrate that infants' natural reactions (laughing, crying, gazing) function as incipient interactional turn-taking devices employed to non-cognitively initiate communication with caregivers, fostering infant sociality. To demonstrate my claims, I analyze multiple fragments of infant/caregiver interaction to determine how infants come to participate in the interaction order through their natural reactions. The results demonstrate how interaction between infants and caregivers creates an interactional sequence possibly unique to infant/caregiver interaction1, which grounds more mature interactional sequences. The results provide clues as to how infants become more communicative through being embedded in mature turn-taking, the foundation for social interaction order. The results will further indicate that it is indeed instances when infants' natural reactions are treated as some sort of turn, that ontogenetically ground more mature, conversation-analytic turn-taking, as well as future infant communication and cognition.

Keywords

EN

cognition; conversation analysis; infant/caregiver interaction; infant development; infant sociality; Wittgenstein

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Psychology of Language and Communication
• Year: 2010
• Volume: 14
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 3-28

Dates

published

2010-01-01

online

2010-06-07

Contributors

author

Domenic Berducci

• Toyama Prefectural University

References

• Bennet, M. R., & Hacker, P. M. S. (2007). Philosophical foundations of neuroscience. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Berducci, D. (2004). Vygotsky through Wittgenstein: A New Perspective on Vygotsky's Developmental Continuum. Theory and Psychology, 14, (3), 329-353.
• Coulter, J. (2005). Language without mind. In H. Te Molder & J. Potter (Eds.), Conversation and cognition (pp. 79-92). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Durkheim, E. (1938). The Rules of Sociological Method. Chicago: Free Press.
• Edwards, D. (2008). Language, Culture, and Mind III (LCM III) presentation. Odense, Denmark.
• Erickson, F. & J. Shultz (1981). Counselor as gatekeeper: Social interaction in interviews. New York: Academic Press.
• Filipi, A. (2009). Toddler and parent interaction: The organisation of gaze, pointing, vocalisations and first words in early talk. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
• Garfinkel, H. (2006). Seeing sociologically: The routine grounds of social action. Boulder: Paradigm.
• Goodwin, C. (2003). Conversational frameworks for the accomplishment of meaning in aphasia. In C. Goodwin (Ed.). Conversation and brain damage (pp. 90-116). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Hacker, P. M. S. (1993). Wittgenstein: Meaning and mind. Volume 3 of an analytical commentary on the philosophical investigations. Part I - Essays. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Hacker, P. M. S. (2007). Human nature: The categorical framework. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Levinson, S. C. & Enfield, N. J. (Eds.) (2006). Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition and interaction. Oxford: Berg Publishers.
• Hall, J. K. & Walsh, M. (2002). Teacher-student interaction and language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 186-203.
• Harre, R. & Robinson, D. N. (1997). What makes language possible? Ethological foundationalism in Reid and Wittgenstein. The Review of Metaphysics, 50, 483-498.
• McDonald, H. (1986). The normative basis of culture: A philosophical inquiry. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press.
• Psathas, G. (1993). The structure of direction-giving in interaction. In D. Boden & D. H. Zimmerman (Eds.), Talk and social structure: Studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis (pp. 195-216). Cambridge Polity Press.
• Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50 (4), 696-735.[Crossref]
• Schegloff, E. A. (1992). Discourse as an interactional achievement Some uses of ‘uhhuh’ and other things that come between sentences. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Georgetown University Roundtable on Languages and Linguistics: analyzing discourse: text and talk (pp. 71-93). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
• Schegloff, E. A. (1991). Reflections on Talk and Social Structure. In D. Boden and D. H. Zimmerman (Eds.), Talk and Social Structure (pp. 44-70). Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Sinclair, J. M. & Coulthard, R. M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils. London: Oxford University Press.
• Te Molder, H. & Potter, J. (Eds.) (2005). Conversation and cognition. Cambridge University Press.
• Winch, P. (1958). Idea of a social science and its relation to philosophy. London: Routledge.
• Winch, P. (1997). Can we understand ourselves? Philosophical Investigations, 20 (3), 193-204.[Crossref]
• Wilson, T. P. (1991). Social structure and the sequential organization of interaction. In D. Boden and D. H. Zimmerman (Eds.), Talk and Social Structure (pp. 22-43). Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Wittgenstein, L. (1958). Philosophical investigations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell & Mott.
• Wittgenstein, L. (1981). Zettel. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Wittgenstein, L. (1998). Culture and Value. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Wootton, A. J. (1997). Interaction and the development of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/v10057-010-0001-x