Using a conversation analytic approach, this article presents a systematic analysis of the interactional use of the particle ok in the institutional setting of German business meetings. Through an examination of talk-in-interaction with a thorough description of relevant embodied actions, the author analyzes how meeting participants co-construct social roles by employing different uses of free-standing ok. More specifically, the author focuses on two different uses of free-standing ok in business meetings: ok with averted eye gaze and ok with maintained eye gaze. The author addresses the question of how the chairperson uses free-standing ok to accomplish different actions and to perform “doing-being-facilitator.” By describing where the chairperson looks while producing ok, I also discuss how the chair manages both the coordination of face-to-face interaction and the practical task of facilitating the progress of a meeting.
Adegbija, E., & Bello, J. (2001). The semantics of `okay' (OK) in Nigerian English . World Englishes, 20(1), 89-98.
2.
Antaki, C., Houtkoop-Steenstra, H., & Rapley, M. (2000). "Brilliant. Next question...": High-grade assessment sequences in the completion of interactional units. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 33(3), 235-262.
3.
Atkinson, J. M., & Heritage, J. (Eds.). (1984). Structures of social action. Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
4.
Barske, T. (2006). Co-constructing social roles in German business meetings: A conversation analytic study. Unpublished doctorate dissertation , University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana.
5.
Beach, W.A. (1989). Foreword: Sequential organization of conversational activities. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 53, 85-90.
6.
Beach, W.A. (1990a). Language as and in technology: Facilitating topic organization in a Videotex focus group meeting. In M. J. Medhurst et al. (Eds.), Communication and the culture of technology (pp. 197-220). Pullman: Washington State University Press.
7.
Beach, W.A. (1990b). Orienting to the phenomenon. In J. A. Anderson (Ed.), Communication yearbook (Vol. 13, pp. 216-244). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8.
Beach, W.A. (1991a). Avoiding ownership for alleged wrongdoings. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 24(1), 1-36.
9.
Beach, W.A. (1991b). Searching for universal features of conversation . Research on Language and Social Interaction, 24, 351-368.
10.
Beach, W.A. (1993). Transitional regularities for `casual' "okay" usages. Journal of Pragmatics, 19, 325-352.
11.
Beach, W.A. (1995). Preserving and constraining options: "Okay" and "official" priorities in medical interviews. In G. H. Morris & R. J. Chenail (Eds.), The talk of the clinic: Explorations in the analysis of medical and therapeutic discourse (pp. 101-151). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12.
Beach, W.A., & Lindström, A. (1992). Conversational universals and comparative theory: Turning to Swedish and American acknowledgment tokens-in-interaction. Communication Theory, 2, 24-49.
13.
Bergmann, J.R. (1992). Veiled morality: Notes on discretion in psychiatry . In P. Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work. Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 137-162). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
14.
Betz, E., & Golato, A. (2008). Remembering relevant information and withholding relevant next actions: The German token achja. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41(1), 58-98.
15.
Boden, D. (1994). The business of talk. Cambridge , UK: Polity Press.
16.
Bolden, G.B. (2005). Delayed and incipient actions: The discourse markers "-to" and "so" in Russian and English conversation. Unpublished doctorate dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.
17.
Button, G. (1987). Moving out of closings. In G. Button & J. R. E. Lee (Eds.), Talk and social organization (pp. 101-151). Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.
18.
Button, G. (1990). On varieties of closings. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Interaction competence (pp. 93-148). Washington, D.C: International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis & University Press of America.
19.
Cassidy, F.G. (1971). OK-is it African? American Speech , 56(4), 269-273.
20.
Chen, C.W.-Y. (2006). The mixing of English in magazine advertisements in Taiwan. World Englishes, 25(3-4), 467-478.
21.
Condon, S.L. (1986). The discourse functions of OK. Semiotica, 60(1-2), 73-101.
22.
Condon, S.L. (2001). Discourse ok revisited: Default organization in verbal interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 491-513.
23.
Davidson, J. (1984). Subsequent versions of invitations, offers, requests, and proposals dealing with potential or actual rejection. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action. Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 102-128). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
24.
Drew, P., & Heritage, J. (1992). Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work. Interactions in institutional settings (pp. 3-65). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
25.
Duranti, A. (1997). Linguistic anthropology. Cambridge , UK: Cambridge University Press.
26.
Ervin-Tripp, S. (1974). The comprehension and production of requests by children. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development , 8, 188-196.
27.
Farnell, B. (2004). Developments in the study of "gesture" in language . Anthropological Linguistics, 46(1), 100-115.
28.
Flowerdew, J., & Tauroza, S. (1995). The effect of discourse markers on second language lecture comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition (SSLA), 17(4), 435-458.
29.
Golato, A. (2000). An innovative German quotative for reporting on embodied actions: Und ich so/und er so "And I'm like/and he's like." Journal of Pragmatics, 32(1), 29-54.
30.
Golato, A., & Betz, E. (2008). German ach and achso in repair uptake: Resources to sustain or remove epistemic asymmetry. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft (ZS), 27(1), 7-38.
31.
Golato, A., & Fagyal, Z. (in press). Comparing single and double sayings of the German response token ja and the role of prosody: A conversation analytic perspective. Research on Language and Social Interaction.
32.
Goodenough, D.R., & Weiner, S.L. (1978). The role of conversational passing moves in the management of topical transitions. Discourse Processes, 1(4), 395-404.
33.
Goodwin, C. (1979). The interactive construction of a sentence in natural conversation. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language. Studies in ethnomethodology (pp. 97-121). New York: Irvington.
34.
Goodwin, C. (1980). Restarts, pauses, and the achievement of a state of mutual gaze at turn-beginning. Sociological Inquiry, 50(3-4), 272-302.
35.
Goodwin, C. (1986). Gestures as a resource for the organization of mutual orientation. Semiotica, 62(1/2), 29-49.
36.
Goodwin, C. (1987). Forgetfulness as an interactive resource. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50, 115-130.
37.
Greco, F.A., & Degges, M. (1975). The etymology of OK again. American Speech, 50(3-4), 333-334.
38.
Guthrie, A.M. (1997). On the systematic deployment of okay and mmhmm in academic advising sessions. Pragmatics, 7(3), 397-415.
39.
Heath, C. (1992). The delivery and reception of diagnosis in the general practice consultation. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work. Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 235-267). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
40.
Heath, C. (2002). Demonstrative suffering: The gestural (re)embodiment of symptoms. Journal of Communication, 52(3), 597-616.
41.
Heflin, W.A. (1941). `O.K.'-but what do we know about it? American Speech, 16, 89-95.
42.
Heisler, T. (1996). OK-a dynamic discourse marker in Montreal French . In J. Arnold et al. (Eds.), Sociolinguistic variation: Data, theory, and analysis, selected Papers from NWAV 23 at Stanford (pp. 293-312). Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
43.
Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
44.
Heritage, J., & Sefi, S. (1992). Dilemmas of advice: Aspects of the delivery and reception of advice in interactions between health visitors and first-time mothers. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work. Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 359-417). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
45.
Heritage, J., & Sorjonen, M.-L. (1994). Constituting and maintaining activities across sequences: And-prefacing as a feature of question design . Language in Society, 23(1), 1-29.
46.
Jefferson, G. (1984). Transcript notation. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action. Studies in conversation analysis (pp. ix-xvi). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
47.
Jefferson, G. (1993). Caveat speaker: Preliminary notes on recipient topic-shift implicature. Research on Language and Social Interaction , 26(1), 1-30.
48.
Kendon, A. (1995). Gestures as illocutionary and discourse structure markers in Southern Italian conversation. Journal of Pragmatics , 23(3), 247-279.
49.
Levinson, S.C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
50.
Lindström, A. (1994). Identification and recognition in Swedish telephone conversation openings. Language in Society, 23(2), 231-252.
51.
Macintyre, B. (2004, June 19). Know yuse complaining - it's orl korrect for our language to change [Comment]. Retrieved August 5, 2007 , from http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/ben_macintyre/article447308.ece
52.
Mandelbaum, J. (1989). Interpersonal dimensions of conversational storytelling . Western Journal of Speech Communication, 53, 114-126.
53.
Maynard, D.W. (1991). The perspective-display series and the delivery and receipt of diagnostic news. In D. Boden & D. H. Zimmerman (Eds.), Talk and social structure. Studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis (pp. 164-194). Berkeley: University of California Press.
54.
McNeill, D. (Ed.). (2000). Language and gesture (Vol. 2). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
55.
Mencken, H.L. (1936). The American language (4th ed.). New York: Knopf.
56.
Mencken, H.L. (1945). The American language (Supplement 1). New York: Knopf.
57.
Mencken, H.L. (1963). The American language (One-volume abridged ed.) . New York: Knopf.
58.
Merritt, M. (1984). On the use of `O.K.' in service encounters. In J. Baugh & J. Scherzer (Eds.), Language in use (pp. 139-147). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
59.
Mirivel, J.C., & Tracy, K. (2005). Premeeting talk: An organizationally crucial form of talk. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 38(1), 1-34.
60.
Mori, J., & Hayashi, M. (2006). The achievement of intersubjectivity through embodied completions: A study of interactions between first and second language speakers . Applied Linguistics, 27(2), 195-219.
61.
Olsher, D. (2004). Talk and gesture: The embodied completion of sequential actions in spoken interaction. In R. Gardner & J. Wagner (Eds.), Second language conversations (pp. 221-245). London: Continuum.
62.
Rawson, H. (2002). Why do we say that? American Heritage , 53(3), 10.
63.
Read, A.W. (1941, July 19). The evidence of `O.K.' Saturday Review of Literature, pp. 3-4, 10-11.
64.
Read, A.W. (1963a). The first stage in the history of `O.K. ' American Speech, 38, 5-27.
65.
Read, A.W. (1963b). The second stage in the history of `O.K. ' American Speech, 38, 83-87.
66.
Read, A.W. (1964a). The folklore of `O.K.' American Speech, 39, 5-25.
67.
Read, A.W. (1964b). Later stages in the history of `O.K. ' American Speech, 39, 83-101.
68.
Read, A.W. (1964c). Successive revisions in the explanation of `O.K .' American Speech, 39, 243-267.
69.
Sacks, H. (1974). An analysis of the course of a joke's telling in conversation. In R. Bauman & J. Sherzer (Eds.), Explorations in the ethnography of speaking (pp. 337-353). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
70.
Sacks, H. (1986). Some considerations of a story told in ordinary conversation. Poetics, 15, 127-138.
71.
Sacks, H. (1992a). Lectures on conversation (Vol. 1). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
72.
Sacks, H. (1992b). Lectures on conversation (Vol. 2). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
73.
Schegloff, E.A. (1968). Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist, 70, 1075-1095.
74.
Schegloff, E.A. (1979). Identification and recognition in telephone conversation openings. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language. Studies in ethnomethodology (pp. 23-78). New York: Irvington.
75.
Schegloff, E.A. (1986). The routine as achievement. Human Studies, 9, 111-151.
76.
Schegloff, E.A. (1991). Reflections on talk and social structure. In D. Boden & D. H. Zimmerman (Eds.), Talk and social structure. Studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis (pp. 44-70). Cambridge , UK: Polity Press.
77.
Schegloff, E.A. (1992a). On talk and its institutional occasions. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work. Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 101-134). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
78.
Schegloff, E.A. (1992b). Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology, 97(5), 1295-1345.
79.
Schegloff, E.A., & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica , 8(4), 289-327.
80.
Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge , UK: Cambridge University Press.
81.
Streeck, J. (1993). Gesture as communication I: Its coordination with gaze and speech. Communication Monographs, 60(4), 275-299.
82.
Streeck, J., & Kallmeyer, W. (2001). Interaction by inscription. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 465-490.
83.
Taleghani-Nikazm, C., & Vlatten, A. (1997). Instruction-receipt in face-to-face interaction. Issues in Applied Linguistics. Special Issue: Proceedings from the Third UCLA Conference on Language, Interaction, and Culture: Embodiment in Discourse, 8(2), 119-131.
84.
Tiittula, L. (2007). Blickorganisation in der side-by-side-Positionierung am Beispiel eines Geschäftsgesprächs [Organization of eye gaze during side-by-side positioning demonstrated at the example of a sales conversation]. In R. Schmitt (Ed.), Koordination: Analysen zur multimodalen Interaktion [Coordination: Analyses of multimodal interaction] (pp. 225-262). Tübingen: Narr Verlag.
85.
Vincent, D., Votre, S., & Laforest, M. (1993). Grammaticalisation et post-grammaticalisation [Grammaticalization and post-grammaticalization]. Langues et Linguistique, 19, 71-103.
Wootton, A.J. (1988). Remarks on the methodology of conversation analysis . In D. Roger & P. Bulls (Eds.), Conversation: An Interdisciplinary Perspective (pp. 238-258). Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.
