Graphics Reference
In-Depth Information
achieve the global aim of the project, i.e. to better understand how
the different linguistic levels interact, several steps were necessary,
among which the specification of a standardized way of representing
multimodal information, the development of generic and reusable
annotated resources based on the elaboration of a multimodal
annotation schema, the development and/or the adaptation of different
annotation tools (see http://www.lpl-aix.fr/~otim/ for details of
conventions, tools and annotations).
Drawing on the Corpus of Interactional Data (CID, Bertrand et al.,
2008), the project involved different steps, from the development of the
various coding schemes in the different modalities to the annotation
and analysis. The corpus itself is an audiovisual recording of 8 hours of
French conversational dialogs. The recording of the corpus was born out
of an interest in human interaction based on a very fi ne-grained analysis
of each linguistic domain and their relationships. Such an analysis in
the phonetic domain requires a semi-experimental setting with a high
quality of recordings enabling the acoustic analysis of speech. In the
same way, the gestural level requires a particular setting, both in terms
of lighting, framing and placement of the speakers in respect to each
other and to the camera. The various recordings should be comparable
and the frame chosen for the recording should allow good visibility of
fi ne movements as well as larger ones made by the speakers. At the
same time, conversational analysis requires yet to consider other criteria
such as the level of (in)formality, the symmetric or complementary
status between participants, the absence of pre-determined discursive
role of participants, the presence/absence of a third party to regulate
turn-taking, etc. This corpus affords a good balance between the elicited
and very controlled corpora usually used by phoneticians or prosodists
until recently and 'natural' conversational data analyzed in the fi eld of
Conversational Analysis (Couper-Kuhlen and Selting, 1996) on which
the present study on repetition is drawing.
In this latter framework, the authors claim that every aspect of talk-
in-interaction is collaboratively accomplished through participants'
ongoing negotiations in situ (Szczepek Reed, 2006:8). In the same way,
the collaborative model of Clark (1996) defines conversation as a joint-
action implying a coordination of actions by participants at the level
of content and at the level of process. Joint-action is achieved through
different phenomena in interaction, among which backchannel signals,
but also collaborative or competitive turn completion. Repetition
naturally contributes to the co-construction of interaction as it
supposes that one of the participants is taking into account what has
been produced by the other at a certain time. Repetition then supposes
some kind of adaptation in between participants to an interaction.
Search WWH ::




Custom Search