ASLAN | En bref > Recherche

WP3. Task 2. Modelling language use and interactions in context



  • Offer a comprehensive conceptual framework for the study of language use, grammar and linguistic change in social interaction
  • Describe various forms of interactional organization and their influence on language choices, language adjustments, 'bricolages', and the emergence of new linguistic forms
  • Develop the articulation between interaction, cognition, and situated action



Significant work has been carried out by ASLAN members in the field of interactional linguistics. The way in which language emerges from interaction has been discussed and empirically explored (Mondada, 2001), linguistic varieties and their interactional uses have been described (Traverso, 2006), as well as the use of multimodal resources in interaction (Mondada, 2007).
Moreover, a rich diversity of interactional settings (everyday conversations, professional settings, institutions - Détienne & Traverso, 2009), interactional sequences and formats (Mondada & Schmitt, 2010, Traverso, 2009; Mondada, 2009) and interactional activities (e.g. argumentation, Plantin, 2005, Lund, Molinari, Séjourné, Baker, 2007) have been studied. Moreover, the relations between interaction and cognition have been explored in various frameworks (Stivers, Mondada, Steensig, in press; Lund, 2007). Intercultural pragmatics and comparisons on interactions have been also carried out (Traverso, 2006).


Description of work and criteria of achievement

  • Development of a conceptual framework for the understanding of language emergence in interaction; development of an incremental and online conception of grammar in interaction
  • Modelling of grammatical phenomena in interaction, including their synchronic variations and diachronic change
  • Development of comparative studies of language in interaction focusing on intercultural aspects
  • Study of multimodality in interaction, integrating various levels of embodiment (gesture, gaze, facial expressions, body postures, movement, object manipulation); development of methodologies for video analysis
  • Analysis of language use in various interactional sequences, with a focus on the linguistic resources systematically exploited in these sequential environments
  • Description of various situated ecologies, and modelling of the way in which language adjusts to them and contributes to their shape
  • Analysis of professional and institutional interactional contexts
  • Analysis of technologically mediated interactions, including computer-­‐‑supported activities, in professional, learning and everyday settings (e.g. video games)
  • Analysis of linguistic and social practices in medical and health care settings, with a double focus on interactions between polyexpert medical staffs and interactions between patients and medical personnel
  • Analysis of argumentation in spoken interaction and its specificity
  • Development of technologically enhanced fieldwork methods for the naturalistic study of language in context and for the study of multimodality


Some recent works

Jouin-Chardon E., Mondada L., Niccolai G., Traverso V. (2010) Contraintes technologiques sur les enregistrements de corpus et analyse des cadres de participation. Pratiques 147-148 "Interactions et corpus oraux", 53-83.
Fréard D., Denis A., Détienne F., Baker M., Quignard M., Barcellini F. (2010) The role of argumentation in online epistemic communities: the anatomy of a conflict. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics - European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics - ECCE 2010. Pays-Bas (2010)
Groupe ICOR (M. Bert, S. Bruxelles, C. Etienne, L. Mondada, V. Traverso). (2008) Tool-assisted analysis of interactional corpora: "voilà" in the CLAPI database. Journal of French Language Studies 18:01, 121-145.
Heinemann T., Traverso V. (2009) Complaining in interaction (editorial). Journal of Pragmatics (special issue on Complaining in interaction, Heinemann & Traverso, éds)
Lund, K., Prudhomme, G., & Cassier, J.L. (forthcoming). Pivotal moments for decision making in collaborative design: are they teachable? In (Eds.) S. Goggins, I. Jahnke & V. Wulf. CSCL@Work: Case Studies of Collaborative Learning at Work (Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Series). New York: Springer.
Lund, K., Molinari, G., Séjourné, A. & Baker, M.J. (2007). How do argumentation diagrams compare when student pairs use them as a means for debate or as a tool for representing debate?. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. 2, 273–295.
Mondada, L. (2011). The organization of concurrent courses of action in surgical demonstrations. In: Streeck, J., C. Goodwin, C. LeBaron (eds.), Embodied Interaction, Language and Body in the Material World (pp. 207-226). Cambridge : Cambridge University Press,
Mondada, L. (2012). The dynamics of embodied participation and language choice in multilingual meetings. Language in Society 41/2, 213-235
Prudhomme, G., Pourroy, F., & Lund , K. (2007). An empirical study of engineering knowledge dynamics in a design situation. Journal of Design Research 6(3), 333-358
Vacherand-Revel, J., Bobillier Chaumon, M.E & Bouvier, E. (2011). Analyse de l’activité d'une équipe de projet multiculturelle concevant à distance. In A.M.Vonthron, S. Pohl & P. Desrumaux (Eds) : Développement des identités, des compétences et des pratiques professionnelles (pp 225-233). Paris : l’Harmattan.