Refining Musical Performance through Overlap

Whilst the focus of attention in an instrumental music lesson is refinement of the student’s musical performance, conversation plays an essential role; not just as a way to analyse the student’s musical contributions, but to organise them within the lesson flow. Participants may respond to talk through performance and vice versa, or even spend periods of time exchanging purely musical contributions. The short musical fragments exchanged by the participants are managed within lesson dialogue in ways analogous to conversational turn-taking. Problems in the student’s performance are refined through both student self-initiated and tutor other-initiated repair, initiated by embodied action and play. A fundamental part of turn-taking is managing the transition to a new speaker. The presence of musical contributions allows for additional types of transition, for example from a turn at talk, to a musical contribution. In conversation, there is generally a preference for a short pause at the transition to a new speaker, and overlap tends to be minimised when it occurs. Through detailed qualitative video analysis of a one-to-one clarinet lesson, we find differences in the preferences regarding overlap when purely musical contributions are being exchanged, and that the duration of overlap during these exchanges of fragments of music are significant

PDF

___

Brugman, H. (2004). Annotating multimedia/multi-modal resources with ELAN. In In Proceedings Fourth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC ’04). (pp. 2065–2068). Portugal.
Button, G. (1987). Answers as interactional products: Two sequential practices used in job interviews. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50(2), 160–171.
Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning (2nd Edition). Portsmouth: Heinemann.
Couper-Kuhlen, E., & Selting, M. (1996). Towards an interactional perspective on prosody and a prosodic perspective on interaction. In Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen & M. Selting (Eds.), Prosody in conversation: Interactional studies (pp. 11–56). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Duffy, S. (2015). Shaping musical performance through conversation. Queen Mary University of London.
Duffy, S., & Healey, P. G. T. (2013). Using music as a turn in conversation in a lesson. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2231–2236). Berlin: Cognitive Science Society.
Duffy, S., & Healey, P. G. T. (2014). The conversational organisation of musical contributions. Psychology of Music, 42(6), 888–893. http://doi.org/10.1177/0305735614545501
Farr, F. (2003). Engaged listenership in spoken academic discourse: the case of student–tutor meetings. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2(1), 67–85. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1475-1585(02)00035-8
Gabrielsson, A. (2003). Music performance research at the millennium. Psychology of Music, 31(3), 221–272. http://doi.org/10.1177/03057356030313002
Gabrielsson, A., & Juslin, P. N. (1996). Emotional expression in music performance: Between the performer’s intention and the listener’s experience. Psychology of Music, 24(1), 68–91. http://doi.org/10.1177/0305735696241007
Healey, P. G. T., Leach, J., & Bryan-Kinns, N. (2005). Inter-play: Understanding group music improvisation as a form of everyday interaction. In Proceedings of Less is More — Simple Computing in an Age of Complexity. Cambridge: Microsoft Research.
Heath, C., Hindmarsh, J., & Luff, P. (2010). Video in qualitative research: Analysing social interaction in everyday life. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Heldner, M., & Edlund, J. (2010). Pauses, gaps and overlaps in conversations. Journal of Phonetics, 38(4), 555–568. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2010.08.002
Jefferson, G. (1973). A case of precision timing in ordinary conversation: Overlapped tag-positioned address terms in closing sequences. Semiotica, 9(1), 47–96. http://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1973.9.1.47
Jefferson, G. (1986). Notes on “latency” in overlap onset. Human Studies, 9, 153–183.
Kasper, G. (1985). Repair in foreign language teaching. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7(2), 200–215.
Lerner, G. H. (1995). Turn design and the organization of participation in instructional activities. Discourse Processes, 19(1), 111–131. http://doi.org/10.1080/01638539109544907
Levelt, W. J. (1983). Monitoring and self-repair in speech. Cognition, 14(1), 41–104.
Levinson, S. C. (2012). Action formation and ascription. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 103–130). John Wiley & Sons.
Limberg, H. (2010). The Interactional organization of academic talk: Office hour consultations. John Benjamins Publishing.
Macbeth, D. (2004). The relevance of repair for classroom correction. Language in Society, 33(5), 703–736. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404504045038
McHoul, A. (1978). The organization of turns at formal talk in the classroom. Language in Society, 7(2), 183–213. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500005522
Nishizaka, A. (2006). What to learn: The embodied structure of the environment. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 39(2), 119–154. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi3902_1
Palmer, C., & Hutchins, S. (2006). What is musical prosody? Psychology of Learning and Motivation - Advances in Research and Theory, 46, 245–278. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(06)46007-2
Reed, D., & Reed, B. S. (2014). The emergence of learnables in music masterclasses. Social Semiotics, 24(4), 446–467. http://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2014.929391
Ruiter, J. De, Mitterer, H., & Enfield, N. (2006). Projecting the end of a speakers turn: A cognitive cornerstone of conversation. Language, 515–535.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735.
Schaller, F., & Müller, H. (2013). The contribution of speech-rhythm to end-of-utterance detection. In Proceedings of the 17th Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue.
Schegloff, E. A. (1982). Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of “uh huh”and other things that come between sentences. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Analyzing discourse: Text and talk (pp. 71–93). Washington: Georgetown University Press. http://doi.org/10.2307/324165
Schegloff, E. A. (1992). Repair after next turn : The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology, 97(5), 1295–1345.
Schegloff, E. A. (2000). Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language in Society, 29(1), 1–63.
Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53(2), 361–382.
Schegloff, E. A., Koshik, I., Jacob, S., & Olsher, D. (2002). Conversation analysis and applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 3–31.
Sidnell, J., & Stivers, T. (Eds.). (2013). The handbook of conversation analysis (Paperback). West Sussex: WileyBlackwell.
Stivers, T., Enfield, N. J., Brown, P., Englert, C., Hayashi, M., Heinemann, T., & Levinson, S. C. (2009). Universals and cultural variation in turn-taking in conversation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(26), 10587–92. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0903616106
Szczepek Reed, B., Reed, D., & Haddon, E. (2013). NOW or NOT NOW: Coordinating restarts in the pursuit of learnables in vocal master classes. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 46(1), 22–46. http://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2013.753714
Wells, B., & Macfarlane, S. (1998). Prosody as an interactional resource: Turn-projection and overlap. Language and Speech, 41(3–4), 265–294. http://doi.org/10.1177/002383099804100403
Wells, G. (1993). Reevaluating the IRF sequence: A proposal for the articulation of theories of activity and discourse for the analysis of teaching and learning in the classroom. Linguistics and Education, 5(1), 1–37. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0898-5898(05)80001-4