Storytelling across Japanese Conversational Genre

StorytellinB across Japanese Conversational Genre

Storytelling across Japanese Conversational Genre

Studies in Narrative (SiN) The subject of SiN is the study of narrative. Volumes published in the series draw upon a variety of approaches and methodologies in the study of narrative. Particular emphasis is placed on theoretical approaches to narrative and the analysis of narratives in human interaction.

Editor Michael Bamberg Clark University

Advisory Board Susan E. Bell Bowdoin College

RomHarre llnac:re College, Oxford

Jerome S. Bruner

David Herman N ort Carolina State University

New York University

Jennifer Coates Roeharnpton University Michele L. Crossley Edge- Hill University College Carol Gilligan New York University

Janet Holmes Victoria University of Wellington

Allyssa McCabe University of Massachusetts, Lowell Eric E. Peterson University of Maine Catherine Kohler Riessman Boston University

Charlotte Linde Deborah Schiffrin Institute for Research Learning Georgetown University Dan P. McAdams Northwestern University

Volume13 Storytelling across Japanese Conversational Genre

Edited by Polly E. Szatrowski

Margaret Wetherell Open University

Storytelling across Japanese Conversational Genre Edited by

Polly E. Szatrowski The University of Minnesota

John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam I Philadelphia

The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences - Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI z39.48-1984.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Storytelling across Japanese conversational genre I edited by Polly E. Szatrowski.

p. cm. (Studies in Narrative, ISSN 1568-2706; v.13) Includes bibliographical references and index. Japanese language--Prosodic analysis. 1..

Japanese language--Spoken Japanese. 3·

Storytelling--Japan. I. Szatrowski, Polly Ellen. PL544.;7S86

2010

1.010021312

495·6'16--dc22 ISBN 978 90 272 2.653 2

(Hb ; alk. paper)

ISBN 978 90 272 8793 9 (Eb)

© 2010 -John Benjamins B.V. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publisher.

John Benjamins Publishing Co. · P.O. Box 36224 · 1020 ME Amsterdam -The Netherlands John Benjamins North America· P.O. Box 27519 ·Philadelphia PA 19118-0519 · usA

Table of contents

PART 1.

Introduction

CHAPTER 1

Introduction: Storytelling across Japanese conversational genre Pally Szatrowski PART 2.

3

Storytelling in casual conversation

CHAPTER 2

Manipulation of voices in the development of a story: Prosody and voice quality of Japanese direct reported speech Yuriko Sunakawa

23

CHAPTER 3

Ellipsis and action in a Japanese joint storytelling series: Gaze, pointing, and context Chisato Koike

61

CHAPTER 4

Sharing a personal discovery of a taste: Using distal demonstrative& in a storytelling about kakuni 'stewed pork belly' Ma.riko Karatsu PART

113

3. Storytelling in animation narratives

CHAPTER

5

Clausal self-repetition and pre-nominal demonstrative& in Japanese and English animation narratives Fumio Watanabe

147

VI

Storytelling across Japanese Conversational Genre PART

4· Storytelling in talk shows and survey interviews

CHAPTER

6

Storytelling in a Japanese television talk show: A host's responsive behavior as a resource for shaping the guest's story

183

Atsuko Honda CHAPTER

7

Telling about experiences in three-party survey interviews: "Second stories" within the interview participatory framework Tomoko Kumagai & Naoyuki Kitani PART

211

5. Storytelling in university lectures

CHAPTER

8

The functions of narratives in Japanese university lecture discourse

241

Yoshio Takahashi CHAPTER

9

Creating involvement in a large Japanese lecture: Telling the story of a haiku

267

Polly Szatrowski Addresses for contributors to Sto1ytelling across

Japanese Conversational Genre

303

Author index Subject index

305 307

PART 1

Introduction

CHAPTER 1

Introduction Storytelling across Japanese conversational genre Folly Szatrowski University of Minnesota

This book is a collection of papers on storytelling in a variety of Japanese conversational genre. These include casual conversation, narrative retellings of the story of an animation (hereafter, animation narratives), television talk shows, survey interviews, and large university lectures. The book is divided into five parts focusing on storytelling in each genre. Information on the presentation of the conversational data, Japanese Romanization, }apanese/Romanized transcription conventions, abbreviations used in the word-for-word gloss, English translation, and notation for nonverbal behavior is given in the Appendix at the end of this chapter. The chapters in Part 2 Storytelling in Casual Conversation relate to the use of prosody and voice quality in direct reported speech, ellipsis and action, and distal demonstratives (are 'that thing (distal): ano 'that (distal)'). The chapter in Part 3 Storytelling in Animation Narratives is concerned with the use of self-repetition and pre-nominal proximal (kono 'this (proximal): this) and neutral demonstratives (sono 'that (neutral): that) in this genre. The chapters in Part 4 Storytelling in Talk Shows and Survey Interviews focus on how the host's responsive behavior on a television talk show can shape the guest's story; and how respondents can tell "second stories" while observing the participatory framework in sociolinguistic interviews. Finally, the chapters in Part 5 Storytelling in University Lectures focus on the function of narratives in large Japanese lectures, and how a professor was able to create involvement by telling the story of a haiku. The stories themselves represent a wide range of possibilities, and include first person stories of personal experience, third person stories, and "non-person" stories about sequences in logic. The chapters in Part 2 Stmytelling in Casual Conversa.tion analyze a third person story by one woman to another about their friend and her henpecked fiance (Sunakawa. Chapter 2), three men's successive stories about a shared experience (two third person, and one first person story about how one of the men stood up a female friend with whom he had arranged to go rollerblading

4

Polly Szatrowski

in order to have a drink and go out to dinner) (Koike, Chapter 3), and a first person story told to two other women by a woman about her experience eating kakuni 'stewed pork belly' (Karatsu, Chapter 4). The chapter in Part 3 Storytelling in Animation Narratives, focuses on 15 Japanese and 18 English third person narratives of the story of an animated video (Watanabe, Chapter 5). The chapters in Part 4 Storytelling in Talk Shaws and Survey Intervie·ws concern a female guest's story told to a female talk show host about what happened when she was filmed from the back for television after having become accustomed to being photographed as a model (Honda, Chapter 6), and two female and two male interview respondents' stories about their personal experiences related to difficulties in using polite language in two sociolinguistic survey interviews (Kumagai & Kitani, Chapter 7). The chapters in Part 5 Storytelling in University Lectures investigate first person, third person, and non-person narratives/stories. These include three third person lecture narratives (about historical events, bullying in schools, and the sequence of the content in previous lectures), one non-person narrative about a logical probability sequence, and one first person lecture narrative about an argument the professor had with his wife about bullying in schools (Takahashi, Chapter 8). Finally, the story of a haiku told by a professor in a large lecture class is analyzed. This story has a multi-layering of third person events involving the character in the haiku, and contrasting hypothetical events involving hypothetical characters, often overlaid with the professor's personal evaluation (Szatrowski, Chapter 9). In the present chapter, I will give an overview of previous linguistic research on Japanese oral narrative and storytelling, summarize the definitions and approaches to storytelling used in this volume, and present the themes focused on across the chapters. In particular the chapters address questions of how stories shape genre and genre shape stories, how stories are fitted into the preceding and following discourse, and how story tellers and story recipients use verbal behavior (including prosody) and nonverbal behavior to make stories tellable, create involvement, negotiate shared knowledge, and show their personal selves.

Overview of linguistic research on Japanese oral narrative/storytelling Japanese linguistic research on oral narrative/storytelling began in the 1980's strongly influenced by Labov's (1972) approach to narrative elicited from interviews as a "transformation of experience:' Chafe's (1980) approach to narratives elicited using a film as a deployment of consciousness in The Pear Stories, and Hopper & Thompson's (1980) study of transitivity and fore grounding. Overall, the research on Japanese narratives in this early era focused on the use of specific linguistic forms, including forms for participant identification and topic continuity

Chapter 1. Introduction

in narratives in natural conversation (Hinds & Hinds, 1979; Hinds, 1983, 1984), referential forms (ellipsis, pronouns, noun phrases) and lexical choice in experimentally collected narratives of a film (Clancy; 1980, 1982; Downing, 1980), the topic marker wa in experimentally collected narratives of cartoon strips (Clancy & Downing, 1987), and tense/aspect (Saga, 1983, 1984; Szatrowski, 1985, 1987) in naturally occurring conversational narratives. Subsequent work by Maynard (1989) on casual narratives in conversation moved the field towards interaction. Studies in the early 1990's focused on linguistic forms related to wake 'the reason (is)' (Suzuki, 1992), subjectivity (Iwasaki, 1993), simau 'end up doing' (Yoshida, 1994), and topic (Takasaki, 1994) in stories from natural conversations. Current research on narrative/storytelling began in the late 1990's and 2000's with a gradual shift from a focus on linguistic form to questions of how verbal and nonverbal behavior shapes and is shaped by the activity of narrative/storytelling. Research on animation/cartoon narratives has focused on the use of referring expressions (Watanabe, 1998, 2003, 2005b, 2009), clausal self-repetition (Watanabe, 1999, 2007a, 2007c), discourse units (Szatrowski, 2002a; Watanabe, 2007b, 2007d), gesture (Kimbara, 2000; Kita, 2002; Szatrowski, 2002a, 2002b; Watanabe, 2007c), adjustment strategies (Sawa, 2004), and topic particle wa (Watanabe, 2005a). Studies of conversational storytelling have included the story recipient in investigations of alignment (Mayes, 1996), back channel utterances (Iwasaki, 1997), conversational patterns (Iwasaki and Horie (1998), and conversational management (Lee, 2000). More recent studies have investigated the role of verbal and nonverbal behavior in relation to participation roles and story recipients' questions (Koike, 2001, 2009), tellership (Hayashi, Mori, & Takagi, 2002; Koike 2008), sequential organization, tellability; and presentation of the self (Karatsu, 2004a, 2004b ), and the dynamic process of emotion/evaluation (Szatrowski, 2005a) in storytelling in conversational interaction. In addition, there has been a study of devices used in narratives in lecture discourse (Takahashi, 2002). Many of the researchers who participated in this thematic shift are contributors to the present volume. The chapters in this volume build on a wide range of linguistic research, including research by grammarians of Japanese and grammarians of English. Referring to studies on Japanese, English, German, and other languages, they shed light on devices such as quotation, reported speech and style shifting; demonstratives, deictic and referring expressions, prospective inde.'cicals and recognition searches; ellipsis; eo-construction, collaboration, and conjoined participation; laughter, repetition, responsive forms and fillers; connectives and discourse markers; prefaces, confirmation and final particles, not merely as linguistic forms, but as resources in the storytelling interaction. The chapters in this volume also build on research on a variety of conversational genres including interviews, talk shows, and lecture discourse. One chapter

5

6

Polly Szatrowski extends traditions in narrative research related to narrative retellings of a film/ animation/book. Many of the others incorporate conversational analytic approaches to storytelling in English and Japanese, including research by scholars of conversation analysis on turn-taking, assessment, and emotion. Others are concerned with conversational units and text structure, participation framework, and participatory framework. Finally, many chapters make reference to recent research on prosody, gesture, gaze, head nodding, etc.

Definitions and approaches to storytelling/narrative The question of how to define a storytelling or narrative is approached in each chapter. The term narrative is used in this volume to refer to monologic and less interactive animation narratives and lecture narratives. In contrast. we use the term storytelling to refer to stories involving more interaction among participants, including storytelling in lectures with high involvement. The definitions and framework used for storytelling in this study come from research on narrative (Labov & Waletzky, 1967; Labov,1972; Polanyi, 1979, 1989; Ochs, 1997; Ochs & Capps, 2001; Takahashi, 2002) and storytelling (Sacks, 1992; Jefferson, 1978; Norrick, 2000, 2004, 2005; Karatsu, 2004a, 2004b; Georgakopoulou, 2007, Koike 2008). Some studies focus on Labov's approach, while others take a wider view including changes in perspective out of the here-and-now, that is, sequences of clauses reflecting the order of imaginary/hypothetical/future events (Maynard, 1989; Norrick, 2000). Sunakawa (Chapter 2) identifies her data as a story because it has an overall structure including the necessary elements ofnarrative proposed by Labov ( 1972) ("abstract," "orientation:' "complicating action:' "evaluation:' "resolution" and "coda"). Focusing on the story teller's use of prosody and voice quality in direct reported speech, she analyzes the story teller's use of"internal evaluation" to involve the recipient in the story world and encourage her to become more active and cooperative in constructing the story. Koike (Chapter 3) analyzes a series of three "joint storytelling" sequences, that is, "storytelling where two or more story tellers who have shared knowledge through firsthand or secondhand experience collaboratively tell a coherent story, shifting teller ship to depict an event" (Koike, 2008, p. 394). She focuses on how the participants assist one other in telling a shared story, and how they use gaze and pointing gestures to disambiguate ellipted referents while publicly negotiating responsibility and conflict. Karatsu (Chapter 4) analyzes the use of distal demonstratives (are 'that thing (distal); ano 'that (distal)') in a storytelling about the discovery of a new taste. She considers a storytelling to be an event in conversational interaction in which one or more participants may orient toward a story before it is told, and the story is

Chapter 1. Introduction achieved methodically and sequentially through the interaction (Jefterson, 1978; Karatsu, 2004a, 2004b ). She views the story as a discursive and cognitive product with a temporal sequence of events that are told from a particular perspective (Labov & Waletzky, 1967; Ochs & Capps, 2001). She notes that after the story, participants may appreciate and/or negotiate its meaning, and the storytelling reaches closure as the participants' orient away from the story. Watanabe (Chapter 5) analyzes clausal self-repetition and pre-nominal demonstratives in animation narratives, viewing narrative as a reproduction of past experiences in time and space, and focusing on how the narrators verbalize their memories of an animated video lacking human language. The experimental nature of the study creates a narrative setting in which the hearer does not share any knowledge about the objects or characters in the animation with the narrator. Honda (Chapter 6) takes the stance that talk is inherently interactive, rather than the product of a single speaker, in a study of a story told on a Japanese talk show. She identifies her data as a story not only because it reports past events initiated by the guest showing an orientation to a time in the past, but also because it constitutes a social practice, involving eo-authorship with the guest and host creating the story together. Contrary to the belief that storytelling on talk shows is performed by a guest to a host who remains a passive listener, she demonstrates how the host's contributions influence the story development, and can improve the audience's understanding of the story. Kumagai & Kitani (Chapter 7) focus on "second stories" in which one respondent's story about a past experience related to the use of polite language occasions a similar story by the other respondent in sociolinguistic survey interviews. The second story teller shows his/her understanding of and in some cases his/her involvement and appreciation of the prior story. They demonstrate how the respondents accommodate the participatory framework of the interview by designing their stories to be answers to the interview question or to contribute to the overall topic of the interview. Takahashi (Chapter 8) defines narratives in large university lectures as a verbal sequence of clauses following the order of real or inferred past, imaginary, or future events. His approach to narrative as a shift in viewpoint from the present hereand-now includes professors' recounting of things they have heard or read, fantasies, and dreams, as well as personal past experiences. His analysis focuses on how these narratives are fit into the preceding and subsequent parts of the lecture. Szatrowski (Chapter 9) analyzes how a professor tells the story of a haiku to a large lecture class in which the students are silent throughout The analysis focuses on how the professor fits her story into her lecture, designs her story for her students, and involves them in her storytelling using devices previously documented in conversational storytelling (topical coherence, knowledge questions, groundwork confirming circumstances, and evaluation, and casual style).

7

8

Polly Szatrowski

Themes in this volume The chapters in this volume address the questions of how stories can shape genre and how genre can shape stories. They also address a variety of themes, including how stories fit into the preceding and following discourse, involvement, negotiating shared knowledge, the role of the story recipient, and prosody and nonverbal behavior.

How stories shape genre and how genre shape sto1·ies This book offers insight into how narrative/storytelling is achieved in casual conversation and other genres. The contributors demonstrate that it is often necessary to make adjustments in storytelling to accommodate the genre, and the use of devices can vary depending on the number and nature of participants, type of story, and so on. In Part 2 Storytelling in Casual Conversation, Koik.e's (Chapter 3) analysis of joint storytelling sequences in three-party conversation shows that successive story tellers present their side of the story, ellipting information that they assume the other participants can understand and using gaze and pointing gestures to indicate ellipted referents, include unaddressed recipients, and negotiate responsibility and conflict. In Part 4 Storytelling in Talk Shows and Survey Interviews, Honda (Chapter 6) demonstrates how a talk show host goes beyond the passive role of a listener by using repetition and laughter to clarify the guest's utterances for the audience as well as preserve the guest's face, and back channel utterances to indicate her subjective attitude while maintaining an unbiased stance. Kumagai & Kitani (Chapter 7) show how respondents can use the participatory framework of the sociolinguistic survey interview as a resource for telling "second stories." For example, they manage to take a second responsive turn by designing their "second story to serve as an answer to the survey question, or tell a "second story that does not answer the survey question by showing that it contributes to the overall theme of the interview. Finally, in Part 5 Storytelling in University Lectures, Takahashi (Chapter 8) categorizes 60 narratives in 4 university lectures on Buddhism, Statistics, History and Education based on the way they fit into the preceding and following discourse. He demonstrates that narratives are used for three textual functions (illustration, Elaboration, Presentation of Topic/Problem), and one interpersonal function (Rapport). S:zatrowski (Chapter 9) shows how a professor tells the story of a haik:u, adapting many devices used to create involvement in casual conversation to the large lecture genre. For example, the professor asks for a show of hands in order to assess the students' knowledge of the haiku story, leaves some of her utterances incomplete to allow students to eo-construct the story silently, and uses gestures that are large enough to be visible to everyone in the lecture hall She also uses a multiple of voices to create

Chapter 1. Introduction

contrasting interpretations and does not make the point of the story explicit until the end in order to allow her students to participate in creating the meaning of the story.

Involvement Many of the chapters in this work focus on the use of verbal and nonverbal devices to involve the story recipient. They show that a story teller can vary her prosody and voice quality in direct reported speech and use onomatopoeia and laughter to create solidarity and involve her recipient in the story (Sunakawa, Chapter 2), a professor can use repetition, eo-construction, onomatopoeia, direct style, prosody and laughter to involve and appeal to her students and show her personal emotional side (Szatrowski, Chapter 9), and hosts can show their appreciation and agreement with their guest's utterances using lengthened aizuti 'back channel utterances' (Honda, Chapter 6). Gaze and gestures can also create involvement. For example, pointing gestures can be used to include an unaddressed recipient as a character in the storytelling (Koike, Chapter 3), shifts in gaze can display shared versus independent knowledge (Karatsu, Chapter 4), a talk show host can repeat the guest's utterance while pulling their body back. distancing herself from the content of the utterance in order to maintain the guest's face (Honda, Chapter 6), and pictorial, iconic, deictic, and beat gestures can be used and repeated to create images in the air and emphasize points in order to involve students in a lecture storytelling (Szatrowski, Chapter 9). Finally, respondents to interview questions may tell "second stories" to indicate their appreciation and involvement in another respondent's story and redefine previous individual stories/answers as shared common experience (Kumagai & Kitani, Chapter 7), and professors may tell personal narratives to create rapport with their students (Takahashi, Chapter 8).

Negotiating shared knowledge How shared knowledge is negotiated in storytelling and narrative is approached on micro and macro levels. On the micro level two chapters focus on the use of Japanese demonstratives (ko- 'this (proximal): so- 'that (medial): a- 'that (distal)' demonstratives). Karatsu (Chapter 4) demonstrates how two uses of the a- 'that (distal)' demonstrative (to refer to an entity which is solely in the speaker's mind, or to refer to an entity which the speaker and hearer have eo-experienced) can converge in conversational storytelling. Previous grammatical accounts draw a clear line between shared and unshared knowledge, and claim that a- 'that (distal)' can be used either to refer to an entity which is solely in the speaker's mind, or to refer to an entity which the speaker and hearer have eo-experienced. Karatsu shows how participants in storytelling can use distal demonstratives to refer to

9

10

Polly Szatrowski

lrnowledge that is both individual and mutually shared. Watanabe (Chapter 5) focuses on the functions and motivations for using kono N'this (proximal) N: sono N'that (medial) N' in Japanese and this Nand that Nin English in animation narratives to refer to people and objects in the animation. On a more macro level Koike (Chapter 3) shows how two or more story tellers who have shared lrnowledge through firsthand or secondhand experience can tell their side of a story while assisting one another in telling the story to justify each other's actions, and negotiate responsibility for these actions. Both Karatsu (Chapter 4) and S:zatrowski (Chapter 9) show how story tellers confirm information and assess the lrnowledge of potential story recipients before telling their stories, and use the information they gain about their recipients' lrnowledge to design their stories. S:zatrowski (Chapter 9) also shows how a professor uses information and lrnowledge that the students are likely to possess to get them to call to mind information necessary to understand her story of a haiku. This reference to shared information in the students' community raises the "tellability" of her story.

The role of the story recipient All of the chapters on storytelling, demonstrate that story recipients play a central role in the development of the story. Sunakawa (Chapter 2) shows how a story recipient becomes more involved in a story with increasing laughter in response to the story teller's use of prosody in direct reported speech, and this in turn contributes to the construction of the story. Koik.e (Chapter 3) demonstrates how story recipients become eo-tellers when they share lrnowledge of the story events, and how a recipient's role in the story varies with the story teller's gaze and pointing gestures. Karatsu (Chapter 4) notes that the response of prospective recipients prior to a story can influence the way in which the story teller designs her story, and demonstrates how story recipients are able to appreciate as well as add their own independent contribution to the story using distal demonstratives and changes in gaze direction. Honda (Chapter 6) shows how a talk show host maintains an objective stance while at the same time displaying disalignment (using E- 'What?' and A 'Oh'), repeats a part or all of the guest's preceding utterance for clarification, repeats the guest's self-deprecating utterances with laughter and posture changes to promote a positive image of the guest, and uses lengthened back channel utterances to show appreciation and agreement. In sociolinguistic survey interviews, Kumagai & Kitani (Chapter 7) demonstrate how the interviewer and one of the respondents respond in such a way to give the other respondent the go -ahead to tell a story or a "second story.' They also note that the respondent who is a story recipient observes the participatory framework by responding minimally in order to allow the other respondent to tell his/her story and not disrupt the respondent's answer.

Chapter 1. Introduction

Prosody/nonverbal behavior This book represents a major contribution to research on conversational interaction by suggesting ways in which less-researched nonverbal behaviors such as geshue, gaze, head nods, etc. can be used, and how they are crucial for the interpretation of the linguistic forms that they accompany or replace. Many of the contributors take into account prosody and nonverbal behavior in their analyses by making use of recent developments in computer software. In addition to the focus on how these behaviors contribute to the storytelling, the contributors also present new ways to analyze and present findings in this area. Some studies use acoustic software including Wavesurfer (Sunakawa, Chapter 2) and Praat (Szatrowski, Chapter 9) to demonstrate dramatic changes in pitch, loudness, and voice quality. The role of gaze is demonstrated through written transcription and video frame grabs annotated with arrows (Koike, Chapter 3), and gestures are shown with annotated (Koike, Chapter 3; Karatsu, Chapter 4; Szatrowski, Chapter 9) and unannotated frame grabs (Watanabe, Chapter 5) using Quicktime Pro and Photo shop. Koike (Chapter 3) analyzes how story tellers use gaze and pointing gestures not only to disambiguate ellipted referents, but also to include a participant in the storytelling as the implicitly addressed recipient and to mitigate conflicting actions. Karatsu (Chapter 4) shows how the story recipient can distinguish in her use of gaze at the story teller (to share and show appreciation of the story teller's evaluation of a new taste) and gaze at another story recipient (to indicate her own individual experience of the taste). Watanabe (Chapter 5) suggests that the tendency to repeat both the gesture and the words of preceding utterances in clausal self-repetition indicates that clausal self-repetition may be unintentional. He also notes that although English narrators frequently used indefinite this N to introduce new referents without an antecedent, Japanese narrators rarely used kono N'this (proximal) N' in this context, but when they did they accompanied this pre-nominal demonstrative with an iconic gesture. Szatrowski (Chapter 9) demonstrates how a professor uses large pictorial gestures and deictics (pointing at parts of the drawings that she had made in the air) to establish the circumstances of her story, and repeats large iconic gestures together with onomatopoeia and beat gestures for emphasis to involve students in her story. These studies provide support for C. Goodwin & M. H. Goodwin's (1986) claim that nonverbal behavior such as gaze, gesture, etc. is a "constitutive feature of the social organization of the activities they [the participants] are engaged in, (p. 51). By approaching storytelling/narrative as a multi-modal activity in which verbal and nonverbal behavior obtains its meaning from its placement in this activity, the studies in this volume usher in a new era of research on Japanese storytelling/narrative.

11

12

Polly Szatrowski

In summary, this book demonstrates the central role of the recipient in the development of Japanese storytelling across a variety of genres. Story tellers across genre use linguistic/paralinguistic (prosody, reported speech, style shifting, demonstratives, repetition, ellipsis, eo-construction, connectives, final particles, onomatopoeia) and nonverbal (gesture, gaze, head nodding) devices to involve their recipients, and recipients also use a multiple of devices (laughter, repetition, responsive forms, posture changes) to shape the development of the stories. Assessing the recipient's knowledge and the negotiation of shared knowledge can influence how story tellers design their stories for their recipients on the micro and macro level. Prosody and nonverbal behavior prove to a rich resource and a constitutive feature of storytelling and narratives that can modify the meaning of verbal forms. The analyses also shed new light on grammar across genre (ellipsis, demonstratives, clause combining), and illustrate a variety of methods for studying genre. The genre itself can be a resource for telling a story. Despite the necessity for a talk show host to remain objective, for survey respondents to give only one answer that addresses the interviewer's question, and for students in a large lecture to remain silent, story tellers and recipients accommodate to and make use of these characteristics of genre to make stories tellable, create interpersonal involvement, and show their personal selves.

References Atklnson, J.M., & Heritage, J. (Eds.) (1984). Structure of social action: Studies In conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chafe, W.L. (Ed). (1980). The pear stories: Cognitive, cultural, and linguistic aspects of narrative production. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing CorporatioiL Clancy, P.M. (1980). Referential choice in English and Japanese narrative discourse. In W.L. Chafe (Ed), The pear stories: Cognitive and linguistic aspects of narrative production (pp. 127-202). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Clancy, P.M. ( 1982). Written and spoken style in Japanese narratives. In D. Tannen (Ed), Spoken and written language: Exploring orality and literacy (pp. 55-76). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Clancy, P., & Downing, P. 1987. The use of wa as a cohesion marker in Japanese oral narratives. In J. Hinds, S. K. Maynard, & S. Iwasald (Eds.), Perspectives on tapicalization: The case of Japanese 'WA' (pp. 3-56). Amsterdam: John Benjamtns. Downing, P. ( 1980). Factors influencing lexical choice in narrative. In W.L. Chafe (Ed), The pear stories: Cognitive, cultural, and linguistic aspects of narrative production (pp. 89-126). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Georgakopoulou, A (2007). Small stories, interaction and identities. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Goodwin, C., & Goodwin, M.H. ( 1986). Gesture and coparticipatton in the activity of searching fora word. Semiotica, 62(1-2), 51-75. Hayashi, M., Mori, J., & Takagi, T. (2002). Contingent achievement of eo-tellership in a Japanese conversation: An analysis of ta]k, gaze. and gesture. In B. Fox & S. Thompson (Eds.), The language of turn and sequence (pp. 81-122). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Chapter 1. Introduction Hinds, J. (1983). Topic continuity in Japanese. In T. Giv6n (Ed. ), Topic continuity in discourse: A quanNtive cross-language study (pp. 43-93). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Hinds, J. (1984). Topic maintenance in Japanese narratives and Japanese conversational interaction. Discourse Processes, 7( 4), 465-482. Hinds, J., & Hinds, W. (1979). Participant indentification in Japanese narrative discourse. In G. Bedell E. Kobayashi, & M. Muraki (Eds.) Exploration in linguistics: Papers in honor of Kazuko Inoue (pp. 201-212). Tokyo: Kenk:yuusha Hopper, P.J., & Thompson, S.A (1980). Transitivity in grammar and dlscourse. Language, 56(2), 251-299. Ikuta, S. (1983). Speech level shift and conversational strategy in Japanese discourse. Language Sciences, 5(1), 37-53. Iwasaki, S. (1993). Subjectivity in grammar and discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Iwasaki, S. (1997). The Northridge earthquake conversations: The fioor structure and the 1oop' sequence in Japanese conversation. Joun1al ofPragmatics, 28, 661-603. Iwasaki. S., & Horte, P.I. (1998). The 'Northridge earthquake' conversations: Conversational patterns in Japanese and Thai and their cultural significance. Discourse and Society, 9(4), 501-529. Jefferson, G. (1978). Sequential aspects ofstorytelling in conversation. In J. Schenkein (Ed.), Studie.s in the organization ofconversational interactio11 (pp. 219-248). New York: Academic Press. Karatsu., M. (2004a). A study ofstorytelling in Japa11ese conversation (Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolls, MN, USA.). Dissertation Abstracts b1ternatio11al, 65, 1345. Karatsu., M. (2004b). Verbal and nonverbal negotiation in Japanese storytelling. In P. Szatrowski (Ed.), Hidden and ope11 conflict in Japanese conversational interaction (pp. 125-161 ). Tokyo: Kurosio Publlshers. Kimbara, I. (2000). Gengo hyoogen no kurlkaesi ni tomonau zyesutyaa ni tuite [On gestures accompanying repetition of linguistic expressions]. Gengo Zyoohoo Kagaku Ke11A:yuu [Research on Linguistic Informational Science], 5, 83-102. Kita, S. (2002). Zyesutyaa [Gesture]. Tokyo: Kaneko Shoboo. Koike, C. (2001). An analysis of shifts in participation roles in Japanese storytelling in terms of prosody, gaze, and body movements. Proceedings of the twe11ty-seventh am1ual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 381-392. Koike, C. (2008). Shift in tellershlp in joint storytelling: An analysis of story recipients' questions. Proceedings of the sixth Annual Hawaii b1ten1atlonal Conference on Arts a11d HumaJ~ities, 394-409. Koike, C. (2009). b1teract1on 111 storytelling in Japanese conversations: A11 analysis ofstory recipients' questions. (Doctoral dissertation, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA., USA). Labov, W. (1972). The transformation of experience in narrative syntax. Language in the Inner city: Studies In the Black English vernacular (pp. 354-396). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Labov, W., & Waletzk.y, J. (1967). Narrative analysis: Oral versions of personal experience. In J. Helm (Ed.), Essays on the verbal and visual arts (pp. 105-120). Seattle, Wk University of Washington Press. Lee, L. (2000). Nihongo bogowasya no zatudan nl okeru "monogatarl" no kenkyuu: Kaiv.•a kanrl no kanten kara [Study on storytelling in spontaneous conversations by Japanese native speakers: From the perspective of conversational management]. Tokyo: Kurosto Publishers. Levtnson, S. (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

13

14

Polly Szatrowski Mayes, P. (1996, July). Storytelling as a means for re-establishing alignment in Japanese conversation." Paper presented at the 5th International Pragmatics Conference, Mexico City, Mexico. Maynard, S.K. (1989). Japanese conversation: Selfcontextualization through structure and interactional management. Nmwood, NJ: Ablex. McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press. Norrick, N. (2000). Conversational narrative: Storytelling in everyday talk. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Norrick, N. (2004). Hwnor, tellability, and conarration in conversational storytelling. Text 24(1), 79-111. Nor rick, N. (2005). Interaction in the telling and retelling of interlaced stories: The eo-construction of humorous narratives. In U.M. Quasthoff & T. Becker (Eds.), Narrative interaction (pp. 263-283). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Ochs, E. (1997). Narrative. In T. van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as structure and process (pp. 185-207). London: Sage. Ochs, E. & Capps, L. (2001). Living narrative: Creating lives in everyday storytelling. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Polanyi, L. (1979). So what's the point? Semiotica, 25(3/4), 207-241. Polanyi, L. ( 1989). Telling the American story: A structural and cultural analysis ofconversational storytelli11g. Cambridge, MA: The MIT press. Sacks, H. (1992). Lecture.s 011 conversatio11 (Vols. I & 11). Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers. Sawa, E. (2004). Nihongo bogowasya to hibogowasya no 'lyoosee" no sutoratezil.: Sutoorii o kataru bamen o toosite ["Adjustment" strategies of]apanese native speakers and non-native speakers: In a storytelling situation]. Yamagata Daigaku Daigakuin Syakai Bunka Sisutemu Kenkyuuka Kenkyuu Ronbunsyuu [Research Papers of the Graduate School ofSoctal & Cultural Systems at Yamagata University], 6, 43-62. Soga, M. (1983). Te,ISe and aspect 111 modern colloquial Japanese. Vancouver, BC: University of Colwnbia Press. Soga, M. (1984). Nihongo no danwa ni okeru zisee to soo ni tuite (On tense and aspect in Japanese discourse). Gelckan Ge11go, 13(4), 120-127. Suzukl, R 1992. A study of wake in Japanese narrative discourse. Kotoba 110 mozaiku: Okuda Natuko meeyoo kyoozyu koki kinen ro11bunsyuu [Mozaic of words: Papers to celebrate Professor Emeritus Natsuko Okud.a's seventieth birthday] (pp. 124-137). Tokyo: Japan Women's University Mejiro Linguistics Society. Szatrowski. P.E. (1985). The use of] apanese tense-aspect forms for vividness effect and participant tracking in conversations about past experiences. Journal of Asian Cultures, 10, 102-124. Szatrowski, P.E. (1987). "Fastness" and "narrative events" in Japanese conversational narratives. In R Tomlin (Ed.), Coherence and grounding In discourse (pp. 409-433). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Szatrowskl. P. (1993). Nihongo no danwa no koozoo bunselci-Kanyuu no danwa no sutoratezil no koosatu [Structure of Japanese co!IVersation: Invitation strategies]. Tokyo: Kurosio Publishers. Szatrowski, P. (2000a). Kyoodoo hatuwa ni okeru sankasya no tatiba to gengo!higengo k.oodoo no kanren ni tutte [Relation between participant status and verbal/nonverbal behavior in eo-construction]. Nlhongo Kagaku [Japanese Linguistics], 7, 44-69. Szatrowski, P. (2000b). Relation between gaze, head nodding, and alzuti 'back channel' at a Japanese company meeting. Proceedings of the TWenty-sixth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 283-294.

Chapter 1. Introduction Szatrowski, P. (2002a). Animeesyon no sutoorii o kataru sal no wadan to tyuusin hatuwa [Wadan 'stages' and central utterances in animation film narratives]. Hyoogen Kenkyuu [Expression Research], 76, 33-39. Szatrowski, P. (2002b). Nitibee in okeru animeesyon no sutoorii no katarlkata to hlgengo koodoo no sooi [Differences in American and Japanese nonverbal behavior and retellings of the story of an animation]. In 0. Mizutani & D.B. Yi (Eds.), Soogooteki nihongo kyooiku o motomete [In search of integrated Japanese l.a.nguage education] (pp. 187-201). Tokyo: Kokusyo Kankookai Szatrowski, P. (2003). Gaze, head nodding and aizuti 'back channel utterances' in information presenting activitles. In P. Clancy (Ed.), Japanese/Korean linguisNcs (Vol. 11, pp. 119-132). Stanford, CA:. Center for the Study of Language and Information. Szatrowski, P. (Ed.). (2004). Hidden and open conflict in Japanese conversational interaction. Tokyo: Kurosio Publishers. Szatrowski, P. (2005a). Danwa to buntai-Kanzyoo hyooka no dooteki na katee ni tuite- [Discourse and Style: On the dynamic process of emotion/evaluation]. In A Nakamura, M. Nomura, M. Sakuma, & C. Komiya (Eds.), Hyooge11 to buntai [Expression and style] (pp. 469-480). Tokyo: Meiji Syoin. Szatrowski, P. (2005b). Zyoohoo syori, soogo sayoo, danwa koozoo kara mita tooti to higengo koodoo to no kankee [The relation between postposing and nonverbal behavior from the point of view of information management, interaction and discourse structure]. In H. Kushida, T. Sadanobu, & Y. Den (Eds.), Katudoo to site no bun to hatuwa [Sentences and utterances as activities] (pp.159-208). Thkyo: HituziSyoboo. Szatrowski, P. (2006). 20-daino zyosee no danwani okeru sizitek:i na miburi to hyoositeki na miburi note no katati tokinoo [Forms and functions ofdeictic and beat gestures in Japanese conversations between women in their 20's]. Hyoogen Ktm1.:yuu [Expression Research], 84, 67-77. Szatrowski, P. (2007). Koogi no danwa no higengo koodoo [Nonverbal behavior in university lecture discourse]. Research report for Grant-in-Aid for Sctenttlic Research (C) 2005-2007 (Research Theme No. 16520319) Gakusaiteki apurooti ni yoru daigakusee ,10 koogi rikai nooryoku ikusee no tame no karikyuramu kaihatu [Curriculum development for nurturing undergraduate students' lecture understanding capabilitles through interdisciplinary approach]. Research representative Miki Saijo, 108-117. Tokyo: Tokyo Institute of Technology. Szatrowski, P. (201 0). Chapter 10: Koogi no danwa no higengo koodoo [Nonlinguistic behavior in university lecture discourse]. In M. Sakuma (Ed..), Koogi no hyoogen to rikai [Expression and comprehension ofJapanese lecture discourse], (pp. 187-204). Tokyo: Kurosio Publishers. Takahashi, Y. (2002). Koogi ni okeru "monogatari" ni kansuru iti-koosatu [Some notes on narratives in university lectures]. Hitotsubasi Daigaku Ryuugakusee Sentaa Kryoo, 5, 51-76. Tokyo: Hitotsubashi University. Takasaki., M. (1994). Sutooriiteki topikku to ippanronteki topikku no retorikku [Rhetoric of story topics and general topics]. In Gendai Nihongo Kenkyuukai [Modern Japanese Research Society] Syokuba ni okeru zyosee no hanasi kotoba: Sizen danwa rokuon siryoo ni motozulte [Women's language in the workplace: Based on natural recorded data] (pp. 61-69). Zaidan hoozin Tookyoo Zyosee Zaidan 1993 Zyosee Kenkyuu Hookokusyo [Tokyo Women's Foundation 1993 Grant-in-Aid Research Report]. Watanabe, F. (1998). Sizi hyoogen no keesiki to kikite ni yoru kaisyaku no katee [Forms of referring expressions and hearers' process of interpretation]. Yamagata Daigaku Nihongo Kyooiku Ronsyuu [Yamagata University Working Papers in Japanese Language Education], 1, 25-38.

15

16

Polly Szatrowski Watanabe, F. (1999). Naratibu disukoosu ni okeru setu no kurikaesi [Clausal self-repetition in narrative discourse]. Yamagata Daigaku Nihongo Kyooiku Ronsyuu [Yamagata University Working Papers in Japanese Language Education], 2, 53-68. Watanabe, F. (2003). Nihongo gakusyuusya to bogowasya nokatarino danwa niokeru s.lzi hyoogen siyoo ni tuite no kenkyuu [Research on the use of referring expressions in narrative discourse by Japanese learners and native speakers]. Research report for Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C) (2) 2001-2003. (Research Theme No. 13680348). Yamagata: Yamagata University. Watanabe, F. (2005a). Katari no danwa ni okeru "wi' no tukawarekata ni tuite [On use of"wi' in Japanese narrative discourse]. Syakai Bunka Sisutemu Kenkyuuka Ktyoo [Bulletin of the Graduate School of Social & Cultural Systems at Yamagata University], 1, 3-15. Watanabe, F. (2005b). Nihongo no katari no danwa ni okeru sizi hyoogen no aimaisa to wakariyasusa ni tuite [On ambiguity and accessibility of referring expressions in Japanese narrative discourse]. In M. Minami (Ed.), Gengo to nihongo kyooiku [Linguistics and Japanese language education] (VoL rv, pp. 125-136). Tokyo: Kurosio Publishers. Watanabe, F. (2007a, March). Bogowasya to hibogowasya ni yoru katari no danwa ni okeru setu 110 kurikaesi ni tuite [Clausal self-repetition in native and non-native narrative discourse]. Paper presented at the Association of Teachers of Japanese 2007 Seminar, Boston, USA. Watanabe, F. (2007b). Nihongo bogowasya to hibogowasya no katari no da11wa ni okeru "'wadan" 111 tuite no kenkyuu [Research on "story units" in the narrative discourse of native and nonnative Japanese speakers]. Research report for Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C) 2004-2006. (Research Theme No. 16520311). Yamagata: Yamagata University. Watanabe, F. (2007c). Nihongo no danwa ni okeru setu no kurikaesi to zyesutyaa ni tuite [On clausal self-repetition and gestures in Japanese discourse]. In M. Minami (Ed..) Ge11gogaku to 11ihongo kyooiku [Linguistics and Japanese language education] (VoL V, pp. 231-243). Tokyo: Kurosio Shuppan. Watanabe, F. (2007d). Katari no danwa ni okeru "wadalf to sono nintee kizyun ni tuite [Story units in narrative discourse and their recognition criteria]. Yamagata Daigaku Kiyoo (Zinbun Kagaku) [Bulletin ofYamagata University (Humanities)], 16(2), 109-120. Watanabe, F. (2009). Eego oyobi nihongo no katari no danwa bunsyoo ni okeru sizisi [Demonstratives in English and Japanese narrative discourse]. Yamagata Daigaku Zinbun Gakubu Kenkyuu Ne11poo [Faculty of Literature & Social Sciences, Yamagata University Annual Research Report], 6, 1-13. Yoshida, E. 1994. Speaker's subjectivity and the use of shimau in Japanese spoken narratives. Japanese/Korean linguistics VoL 4, ed. by N. Akatsuka, 183-199. Stanford, CA: CSLI.

Appendix

Data The data in the chapters in this volume are cited using three or four lines for each utterance: the first line gives the utterance in Japanese orthography, second line the Romanized transcription, an optional third line with a word-for-word gloss for each word in the Romanized utterance, and the last line, an English translation. In the Romanization, the first letter of proper nouns and utterances after a falling

Chapter 1. Introduction

sentence-final intonation are capitalized, except in the case of postposed noun phrases and postposed clauses in which the first letter is not capitalized.

Japanese Romanization (Szatrowski 2004, p. viii) The Romanization given in Table 1 is used in the Japanese examples in this book, and is an adaptation of Shin-kunrei-shiki 'New Official System' which follows Jorden with Noda (1987) for the most part 1 This Romanization reflects Japanese phonology and the Japanese writing system. Each of the syllable-like units in the following chart constitute a 'mora' which gets one beat and is pronounced with approximately the same unit of time as the other mora in a given utterance. For readers who are less familiar with Japanese phonology, it may be helpful to think of the following approximate correspondences when pronouncing these sounds: si= shi, sya = sha, syu = shu, syo = sho, zi = ji, zya =ja, zyu =ju. zyo = jo, ti =chi, tya. = cha, tyu =chu, tyo =cho, hu = fu. For more precise information on Japanese pronunciation and romanization, refer to Jorden with Noda (1987:1-23). Table 1. Romanization of Japanese Mora

a u e 0

ki ku

ga gi gu

sa

za zi su zu ke se ze ge ko go so zo kya gya sya zya kyu gyu syu zyu kyo gyo syo zyo ka

si

ta ti tu te to tya tyu tyo

da

de do

na ni nu ne no eya nyu nyo

ha

hi hu he ho hya hyu hyo

pa ba pi bi pu bu pe be po bo pya bya pyu byu pyo byo

ya mi mu yu me mo yo mya myu myo ma

ra ri ru re ro rya ryu ryo

wa

k s t p n

Japanese/Romanized Transcription Conventi.ons2 (Chafe, 1980; Levinson, 1983; Atkinson & Heritage, 1984; Szatrowski, 1993, 2004)

D o /.

?/?

Boxes are used to highlight important forms referred to in the text falling sentence-final intonation. rising intonation, not necessarily a question.

Unlike Jorden with Noda, we do not distinguish between hard 'g' and nasalized 'g' and do not indicate the syllabic nasal with a micron.

1.

2. Whenever possible, these conventions are also indicated in the English translation, unless they obscure the meaning or would be misleading (as is sometimes the case in indicating overlap with 11 and ll,laughter over the utterance with @ @, etc. because Japanese word order differs from English.)

17

18

Polly Szatrowski

'/, ---+

t .hh

hh @@ 0

0

(7.7) (.) oisii

11 11

-/:

= {}

(())

IJ/'"' If' .11 I"

continuing intonation followed by a slight pause. flat intonation. slight rise in intonation. in-breath, number of'h's' indicate the length of the in-breath in relation to the length of mora in the preceding talk. out-breath, number of'h's' indicate the length of the out-breath in relation to the length of mora in the preceding talk. utterance between the @ @is said in a laughing voice. utterance between the 0 0 is said in a quieter voice. indecipherable or slightly audible speech is indicated in < >. (However, are used to indicate the beginning and end of non-gestura! movements in Chapter 9, Szatrowski.) length of pause/silence in seconds, (0.7) indicates a pause of7-tenths of a second, relative to the speed of the preceding utterance. micro-pause bold letters indicate louder voice (Karatsu, Chapter 5 only) Double slashes 11 mark the place an utterance starts to overlap with the following utterance. Double vertical lines 11 indicate the end of an overlap with the following utterance. indicates lengthening of the preceding vowel or syllabic nasal in the Japanese/romanized version of the transcript. cut-off(Japanese Jh > words implied but left unsaid in the Japanese. Notation for nonverbal behavior To make the descriptions of nonverbal behavior more dear, figures giving sketches (Honda, Chapter 6), and annotated (Koike, Chapter 3; Szatrowski, Chapter 9) or unannotated frame grabs (Watanabe, Chapter 5) from the original video are

20

Polly Szatrowski

supplied. Annotations in the frame grabs include arrows to show the direction of gaze and pointing gestures (Koike, Chapter 3), and lines showing the movement of gestures in the frame grab (Szatrowski, Chapter 9). In addition, descriptions of the gaze and body movements are often described in the text and in the transcription of examples as follows. Koike (Chapter 3) arrows (that correlate with the Romanized version of the Japanese transcript) indicate the speaker's gaze. dotted underlines in the Japanese, the Romanization, and the English translation indicate the parts of utterances where gaze and pointing gestures are sustained. Karatsu (Chapter 4) (( )) description of gestures, shift in gaze direction, etc. ((Demo 'but'/H__..-+M..!-down)) Utterance on the left of the I is the location where a shift in gaze direction occurs. Following Szatrowski (2000a), underlines indicate participants whose gaze shifts, boxes indicate the speaker of the utterance, and arrows indicate gaze direction. Szatrowski (Chapter 9) (Szatrowski 2000a, 2000b, 2002,2003, 2005a, 2005b, 2006, 2007, 2010) [] marks the beginning and end of gestural movements of the hands, neck, etc. marks the beginning and end of non -gestural movements, e.g., preening. Subscript numbers indicate the start of a gesture (the time when the speaker begins moving her hands, often in preparation for the gesture stroke). Numbers in the frame grab indicate that the gesture stroke shown in the frame grab occurred in the section of the utterance beginning with the corresponding subscript number. Underline indicates the stroke (main part) of the gesture (McNeill1992). Lines in the frame grabs indicate the gesture stroke accompanying the underlined words in the part of the utterance with the same gesture subscript number. Bold underline indicates the mora where a beat gesture occurs.

PART 2

Storytelling in casual conversation

CHAPTER 2

Manipulation of voices in the development of a story Prosody and voice quality of Japanese direct reported speech Yuriko Sunakawa University of Tsukuba

In this paper I analyze how a storyteller manipulates the prosody and voice quality in her direct reported speech in a Japanese story about her girlfriend and her henpecked fiance. While supporting Giinthner's (1999) theory that speakers make use of voicing, prosodic, and voice quality features to achieve various interactive goals, I also demonstrate that these goals do not necessarily apply to every use of direct reported speech in a story. Based on data from an audiotaped story in a naturally occurring conversation between two female friends in their late twenties, I demonstrate how the way that the storyteller changed her voice to enact her direct reported speech varied according to the developmental stage of the story. Although there was no marked prosody or change in voice quality in the initial stage, the story teller's direct reported speech showed increased emotion and pitch movement from the middle to the final stages. I also demonstrate how this draws the recipient into the story world, and encourages the recipient to become an active and cooperative participant in constructing the story.

In this paper, I will analyze how storytellers manipulate the prosody and voice quality of direct reported speech in Japanese. 1 In particular, I will focus on the changes in voice used by a storyteller during the development of a humorous story, and describe how these changes affect the involvement of both the storyteller and I would like to thank those who gave me their insightful and critical comments on the earlier versions of this paper. I am especially indebted to Polly Szatrowski, Toshiyuki Sadanobu and Kikuo Maekawa My gratitude also goes to Marnie Jorenby for her help with the English in this paper, and Tomoko Iizuka for her assistance in annotating Figures 1-9. 1.

24

Yuriko Sunakawa

her recipient in the story world. The data for this study come from a naturally occurring conversation between two women who are close friends. I analyze these data using both perception and sound analysis software (WaveSurfer 1.8.5). I will analyze the storyteller's changes in voice quality according to the development of the story and describe how these changes affect the involvement of both the storyteller and the story recipient in the story world.

Previous research on direct reported speech in conversation Direct reported speech in Japanese conversation is accompanied by the use of quotation markers such as to iu, ttutte, and toka, etc. after a quoted phrase to indicate that it is a person's thought or utterance (Sunakawa, 2003, 2006). The following excerpt is from a conversation between two male university students. Storyteller A is reproducing a conversation he had in the past with the owner of a restaurant where he worked as a part-time employee.2 (1) Conversation between two male students

A

'!0)-JtJ~, 12~1J\~-

r A:f!f*HeA.nJ:-?JC:n'~-.:>·c

r~.&t;t

:t.3 -? J C: :QYg '? L ~' Kinoo mo sa, 12-zi goro sa, "A-kun kyuukee ireyoo" toka itte, "Mesi kuoo" toka itte~. Yesterday too, you know, around 12 o'clock, you know, "Mr. A, let's take a break': (he) said, and "Let's eat': (he) said.

y {777} {Huhuhu} {LAUGH}

A

-c

rfiiJ:f;t~.@ J e: i'J'"g '? ·c r-lt7?f'L.> "' ~_,, ~ '9 J e: i'J' -g- '? ~, "Nani taberu" toka itte, "Sarada de ii desu" toka itte~. "What will (you) eat?" (he) said, and "Just salad is fine," (I) said, and

y {777} {Huhuhu} {LAUGH} A

r:filii& v' 61d:: v' 0), r\ ::;.; v' 61d:: v' 0) J e: i'J' '? -c r"' IJ £ -tt 1-v J ":::> '? 'L~,

"Gohan iranai no, pan iranai no" toka tte "Irimasen''

tutte~,

2. The Appendix in Chapter 1 gives information about the Romanl.zation, transcription conventions, and the English translation used in the examples. A full transcription of the story analyzed here is given in the Appendix of this chapter.

Chapter 2. Manipulation of voices in the development of a story "Is it that (you) don't need rice? Is it that (you) don't need bread?" (he) said, and "(No, I) don't need (any)," (I) said, and

Y ? - Jv. ~ Jv n' t;;, ~~ U:n, nanka ne~, U:hm, like, you know? The phrases enclosed by r J in the Japanese and"" in the Romanization and English translation are direct reported speech. They may appear to be a faithful reproduction of the original utterances, but actually, the storyteller is not reproducing the conversation verbatim. Storytellers interpret utterances through their own filters, reconstruct scenes from their own point of view, and reenact conversations in such a way that they create an effect desired by the storyteller. Therefore, direct reported speech does not necessarily reproduce the original conversation in the strict sense, but rather creates what Tannen (1986) refers to as "reconstructed conversation.: In (1), short and repetitive requests and questions such as Mesi kuoo 'Let's eat: Nani taberu 'What will (you) eat?: Gohan iranai no 'Is it that (you) don't need rice?: and pan iranai no 'Is it that (you) don't need bread?' show the restaurant owner's good will, and the blunt answers such as Sarada de ii desu 'Just salad is fine' and Irimasen '(No, I) don't need (any)' show X.s irritation towards the owner's unwelcome interference. In this way; storytellers use direct reported speech in ways that appear to reproduce the original conversation faithfully, but actually alter the depiction of the characters to make their voices suitable for the story they are narrating. At the same time, the storytellers reveal their own evaluation of and attitude towards the characters they are depicting (Tannen, 1986; Besnier, 1993; Maynard, 1996; Gi.inthner, 1997a, 1997b, 1999; Halt, 2000; Kamada, 2000). Characters' personalities and the storyteller's evaluation of the character are expressed by the words and grammar contained in direct reported speech. In addition, the prosody and voice quality of direct reported speech also play an important role. Giinthner (1999) points out that "speakers make use of voicing and prosodic, as well as voice quality features to achieve various interactive goals'' (p. 704), which she summarizes as follows: i. to contextualize whether an utterance is anchored in the reporting world or the storyworld; ii. to animate the quoted characters and to differentiate between the quoted characters; iii. to signal the speech activities and the affective stance of the reported characters; iv. to comment on the reported speech as well as on the quoted characters. Gi.inthner (1999, p. 704)

25

26

Yuriko Sunakawa

Over all this paper supports Giinthner's claims about direct reported speech. I also demonstrate that these goals do not necessarily apply to every instance of direct reported speech in a conversation. In particular, I found that in conversational storytelling, direct reported speech tends not used for these goals in the orientation stage, before the story reaches its climax. I will show how storytellers manipulate their prosody and voice quality in direct reported speech in order to involve storytellers and recipients in the story world. This, in turn, enables both storytellers and recipients to deepen their interaction, and to develop the storytelling cooperatively.

Analysis of a storytelling between two friends The data for this study come from a naturally occurring conversation between two female university graduates, A and B. who are close friends in their late twenties. A brings up the fact that their mutual friend K henpecked her fiance M by making him serve as her chauffeur. Subsequently; she begins telling a story that she had heard from Kin which the event ofK's fiance M punching Kin the face developed into a big scene ending with him starting to cry during a humble apology to K. Thus, this unexpected episode ends with the humorous twist of M reverting back to his henpecked position. I identified this episode as a storytelling because it has the overall structure of narrative proposed by Labov (1972). 3 The storytelling lasts for 2 minutes and 50 seconds. A contributes most of the substantive content, with B responding only with back channel utterances or laughter most of the time. Therefore, initially this conversation seems to be a oneway communication of hearsay with limited interaction between the storyteller and recipient. However, as the story proceeds from the beginning to the middle, and from the middle to the end, both the storyteller and recipient contribute cooperatively to the development of the story. This deepens A and B's solidarity with each other through their shared feelings about the characters and increases their involvement in the story world. This interaction also increases their enjoyment of the storytelling as it progresses, as evidenced by an increase in their laughter.

Structu1-e of the story The structure of the story chosen for analysis satisfies all of the elements that Labov ( 1972) deemed necessary for narrative structure: "abstract; "orientation," "eom plieating action," "evaluation:' "resolution" and "coda': I divide the story into the following three stages, based on the amount of laugher by the storyteller and her 3·

A complete transcription of the storytelling is given in the Appendix.

Chapter 2. Manipulation of voices in the development of a story 27 recipient; the Beginning Stage, where no laughter occurs (1A-34A), the Middle Stage, where light laughter occurs (35A-48A), and the Final Stage, where the laughter is loud and hearty (49A-70A). I. Beginning Stage (no laughter) 1A-34A II. Middle Stage (light laughter) 35A-48A Ill. Final Stage (heavy laughter) 49A-70A

In this section I will analyze a portion of the Beginning Stage and the Final Stage of the story, describing how the storyteller structures the story and uses direct reported speech, and how laughter affects the storytelling. I will also analyze the "internal evaluation" expressed through the direct reported speech, and examine how it affects the interaction between the storyteller and recipient. The goal is to clarify my perspective on the analysis of prosody and voice quality of direct reported speech in a conversation with a storytelling. (2) is the first part of the Beginning Stage of the story. I indicate elements of Labov's narrative structure in bold letters on the right. (2) Beginning Stage (first part) 1 A K t:J~ ~ iJ: !v f:J' - M ~;:: -[!!) tnt- ~ ~ tc. c t:J~ ki ."@ ; L- v, 1v :G ?

;n

e:

Abstract

K ga, nanka: M ni ik-kai dake:. nagurareta koto ga aru rasii n ne? It's that apparently K somehow was punched by M just once, you know?

2 B ? fvo Un. Uhhuh.

3 A ..'f tl. ""f~ I;Jo:toJ C:iJ1 , -~ff ~;i'J: t·•, ;:: (}) J 1J: fv t.J•,

Orientation

r llL:1111f- J 2:: i:J'@~··-? ~ ~ "'0- ~@, II{Hahaha.haha }I I nanka, K mo, "Zettai yurusana.i, issyoo yurusana.i, kono" nanka, "Ranboomono:" toka @iu kanzi de:-')@, //{LAUGH}! I Somehow, @it's like@ K also says "(I) will absolutely never forgive (you) (I) won't forgive (you), for my whole life, this like "(You) bastard!~ and 63 B {'"'"'"'''"'"}

{Hahaha.ha.haha} {LAUGH}

64 A

t -? '9 ;::• t.J...._-:dl:f fv (: t -rtUI!i:Sli!.t•W-::> -r- ~'

sorede: nanka (1.4)"Zya, moo ii" toka itte denwa otagai kitte:~, and then, somehow (1.4), saying like "Okay, that's enough" they both hung up the phone, and 18 A ~ ~, 7J:: Jv iJ• ~ ~C.: M iJ.. *1 ~to Complicating action Demo, nanka tugi ni M ga mata kaketa wake. But, somehow, next it's that M called (her) again.

In (4), A quotes K and M's utterances when they hung up on each other, with her direct reported speech in 17A Zya, moo ii 'Okay, that's enough'. This is the second example of direct reported speech used by A in this storytelling to report the utterances of the characters. The first example was in 9A Asobu na 'Don't play around: The feature that these two examples of direct reported speech have in common is that there is no difference in prosody and voice quality between the direct reported speech and the surrounding narration. Figures 1 and 2 give the wave form, sound spectrogram, and pitch curve for 9A and 16A-17A, respectively. The direct reported speech in these utterances is shown in the white area between the two vertical lines. AS direct reported speech in 9A and 17A, shown in Figures 1 and 2, respectively, is pronounced with a volume andnarrowpitchrange (131-198Hzand 140199Hz, respectively), similar to that of the surrounding narration. There are no marked prosodic features in these two audio segments. The direct reported speech

33

34

Yuriko Sunakawa

9 A M wa, motiron

'.t\sobu na" tte itte ite:-+, M TOP of course play NP Q say-PROG-GER M was saying "Don't play around': and

Figure 1. Wave form, sound spectrogram, and pitch curve for 9A

0

11!!"1

11

16 A Demo maa M mo okottyatte:-+,

but well M also end up getting angry-GER But, well, M ended up getting angry too, and 17 A sorede: nanka (1.4) "Zya, moo ii" toka itte denwa then somehow okay already good like say-GER phone otagai kitte:-+, mutually hang up-GER and then, somehow (1.4) saying like "Okay, that's enough" they both hung up the phone, and Figure 2. Wave form, sound spectrogram, and pitch curve for 16A-17A

Chapter 2. Manipulation of voices in the development of a story in Figure 2 is only slightly higher in pitch than the surrounding narration, but it is not particularly high. Next, I will examine the other examples of direct reported speech in the Beginning Stage of /f.s story. In (5), the continuation of Xs story in (4), A tells about what happened when M came to K's home. (5) Beginning Stage (cont.)

19 A i" 0) ~if K tt 16. fvt.J', :t5 M 8 i.J' 1J: fvi.J' A-::> -c tc6 G lt' OJ :G?

Orientation

Sono toki K 1va nanka, ohuro ka nanka haitte ta rasii no ne? At that time it's that K was like taking a bath or something, you know? 20 A \! 1J: fv i:i', ~ ~ #: fv #: fv lt' ;t 0) A

Orientation

tl :h ~/:Hid.< -c -,), De nanka, moo zenzen ie no hito dare mo denakute-,),

So nobody at K's home answered his phone call. 21 A ..'f ? G tc 6 M iJ"'\ ~l~"tc,

Complicating action

K fv!i *~*t.::G G ~·~ OJ:G? Soositara M ga. mata, K n ti made kita. rasii no ne? And then, it's that appparently M came over to K's home, you know?

*

;!& 3l[ lt' -::> !> ~ - 3l[ lt' fv tn.t ~ lt' ;t ti - , 1/..'f :h ~ -,)11, N maa tikai ttya: tikai n da kedo ie 1va:, 1/Sorede-,)11,

22 A fv

Orientation

Uhm, it's that (it) is nearby, but, (his) house is, //andll 23 B 1/ . 't 1"t?.> 11