Language in interaction: turn-taking patterns in conversations involving individuals with schizophrenia.

Individuals with schizophrenia generally show difficulties in interpersonal communication. Linguistic analyses shed new light on speech atypicalities in schizophrenia. However, very little is known about conversational interaction management by these individuals. Moreover, the relationship between linguistic features, psychopathology, and patients' subjectivity has received limited attention to date. We used a novel methodology to explore dyadic conversations involving 58 participants (29 individuals with schizophrenia and 29 control persons) and medical doctors. High-quality stereo recordings were obtained and used to quantify turn-taking patterns. We investigated psychopathological dimensions and subjective experiences using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale for Schizophrenia (PANSS), the Examination of Anomalous Self Experience scale (EASE), the Autism Rating Scale (ARS) and the Abnormal Bodily Phenomena questionnaire (ABPq). Different turn-taking patterns of both patients and interviewers characterised conversations involving individuals with schizophrenia. We observed higher levels of overlap and mutual silence in dialogues with the patients compared to dialogues with control persons. Mutual silence was associated with negative symptom severity; no dialogical feature was correlated with anomalous subjective experiences. Our findings suggest that individuals with schizophrenia display peculiar turn-taking behaviour, thereby enhancing our understanding of interactional coordination in schizophrenia.

First Encounters: Repair Sequences in Cross-Signing.

Most human communication is between people who speak or sign the same languages. Nevertheless, communication is to some extent possible where there is no language in common, as every tourist knows. How this works is of some theoretical interest (Levinson, ). A nice arena to explore this capacity is when deaf signers of different languages meet for the first time and are able to use the iconic affordances of sign to begin communication. Here we focus on other-initiated repair (OIR), that is, where one signer makes clear he or she does not understand, thus initiating repair of the prior conversational turn. OIR sequences are typically of a three-turn structure (Schegloff ), including the problem source turn (T-1), the initiation of repair (T0), and the turn offering a problem solution (T+1). These sequences seem to have a universal structure (Dingemanse et al. 2013). We find that in most cases where such OIR occur, the signer of the troublesome turn (T-1) foresees potential difficulty and marks the utterance with "try markers" (Moerman, ; Sacks & Schegloff, ) which pause to invite recognition. The signers use repetition, gestural holds, prosodic lengthening, and eyegaze at the addressee as such try-markers. Moreover, when T-1 is try-marked this allows for faster response times of T+1 with respect to T0. This finding suggests that signers in these "first encounter" situations actively anticipate potential trouble and, through try-marking, mobilize and facilitate OIRs. The suggestion is that heightened meta-linguistic awareness can be utilized to deal with these problems at the limits of our communicational ability.

Turn-timing in signed conversations: coordinating stroke-to-stroke turn boundaries.

In spoken interactions, interlocutors carefully plan, and time their utterances, minimizing gaps and overlaps between consecutive turns. Cross-linguistic comparison has indicated that spoken languages vary only minimally in terms of turn-timing, and language acquisition research has shown pre-linguistic vocal turn-taking in the first half year of life. These observations suggest that the turn-taking system may provide a fundamental basis for our linguistic capacities. The question remains, however, to what extent our capacity for rapid turn-taking is determined by modality constraints. The avoidance of overlapping turns could be motivated by the difficulty of hearing and speaking at the same time. If so, turn-taking in sign might show greater toleration for overlap. Alternatively, signed conversations may show a similar distribution of turn-timing as spoken languages, thus avoiding both gaps and overlaps. To address this question we look at turn-timing in question-answer sequences in spontaneous conversations of Sign Language of the Netherlands. The findings indicate that although there is considerable overlap in two or more signers' articulators in conversation, when proper allowance is made for onset preparation, post-utterance retraction and the intentional holding of signs for response, turn-taking latencies in sign look remarkably like those reported for spoken language. This is consistent with the possibility that, at least with regard to responses to questions, speakers and signers follow similar time courses in planning and producing their utterances in on-going conversation. This suggests that turn-taking systems may well be a shared cognitive infrastructure underlying all modern human languages, both spoken and signed.