Reflecting on reading

Tuesday 4.11.08 – Reflective writing

Having read ‘Talking Voices’ and reviewed the transcription of the ‘beach’ and ‘Ken’ audio I have started to apply my findings directly into the transcription.

I have spent more time analysing the words and how they were said and have utilised transcription conventions. It has been interesting to revisit the audio after a long break. As I applied the linguistic symbols I realised that there were small parts of the audio I had omitted or misheard, even though the recording was so familiar.
Another difference in my approach for this series of work is to include the narrator (my voice) and not ignore it. The main reason for this has been reading and reflecting on the importance of the interaction of one voice with another. I have recognised that the personal interaction and intertwined dialogue is inseparable, there is a subtle dance between interviewer and interviewee, on cannot exist without the other.

Scollon believes the following;
“As musicians use the term, ensemble refers to the coming together of the performers in a way that either makes or breaks a performance. It is not just the being together, but the doing together.” (p.19) Tannen, D Talking Voices (1989) Cambridge University Press

This research has opened up more directions and themes to explore relating to typography and language. Increasingly, details within speech and patterns within dialogue are becoming more apparent. I am also aware that the study of language in relation to typography is limitless and has proven to be a rich and engaging subject that will sustain my research beyond the MA.

I was not aware, in the field of linguistics, that symbols to express intonation and emphasis existed.

Examples of these devices are as follows;

. indicates sentence final falling intonation
, indicates clause
?! denotes exclamatory tone
CAPS reflect emphatic stress.

The transcription conventions could appear in the animation almost as a faint blueprint. However, in my opinion changes in voice quality by the speaker can be reflected directly by type scale, colour or composition more clearly than including the visual clutter of transcription conventions. This thinking is also echoed in a similar comparison by Tannen.

“ writers used print conventions to identify dialogue, speakers had even more effective inexplicit means to do so: changes in voice quality and prosody which marked entire utterances as representing, literally, a different voice.” (Tannen, D (1989) p126


In terms of process, I have redrafted the PGD presentation and am cogent that elicitation needs to take place. With this in mind, I have organised a meeting with ESOL (English for Speakers of Other Languages) to review previous work and discuss the merits of showing the work to a small group of students for their reactions and feedback.