Interaction ritual and the body in a city meat market

ABSTRACT Service encounters are often fleeting interactions between strangers, which are beset with trip wires and obstacles. The potential for instability in such encounters is often countered by ritual interaction – small ceremonies in which civility is freely given, and transgression is accounted for and forgiven. Service encounters are not conducted through speech alone, but through embodied communication, in which interactants do not only speak, but point, smile, shrug, nod, gesture, grimace, and so on. In this paper, we consider the deployment of embodied communication, including but not limited to speech, as supportive and remedial interaction in a service encounter between a team of city centre butchers and a customer. The example is from extensive field work conducted in a four-year ethnographic research project across four cities in the UK. The analysis finds that in seeking to understand how people communicate in encounters with strangers, we must pay close attention not only to speech, but also to the ritual deployment of the body as a resource for communication.

[1]  Emi Otsuji,et al.  Metrolingualism , 2020, The International Encyclopedia of Linguistic Anthropology.

[2]  J. Streeck Self-Making Man: A Day of Action, Life, and Language , 2017 .

[3]  Annelies Kusters,et al.  “Our hands must be connected”: visible gestures, tactile gestures and objects in interactions featuring a deafblind customer in Mumbai , 2017 .

[4]  E. Tapio,et al.  Beyond languages, beyond modalities: transforming the study of semiotic repertoires , 2017 .

[5]  Lorenza Mondada,et al.  Challenges of multimodality: Language and the body in social interaction , 2016 .

[6]  K. Trehan,et al.  Working Papers in Translanguaging and Translation Paper 1 Language , Business and Superdiversity : An overview of four case studies , 2016 .

[7]  David Eichelberger,et al.  Speech Genres And Other Late Essays , 2016 .

[8]  Christin Wirth,et al.  Analyzing Multimodal Interaction A Methodological Framework , 2016 .

[9]  A. Pennycook,et al.  Metrolingualism: Language in the City , 2015 .

[10]  S. Vertovec,et al.  Urban markets and diversity: towards a research agenda , 2015 .

[11]  G. Kress,et al.  Touch: A resource for making meaning , 2014, The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy.

[12]  Charles Goodwin,et al.  Embodied Interaction: Language And Body In The Material World , 2014 .

[13]  B. Rampton Dissecting Heteroglossia: Interaction Ritual or Performance in Crossing and Stylisation? , 2014 .

[14]  Lorenza Mondada,et al.  The dynamics of embodied participation and language choice in multilingual meetings , 2012, Language in Society.

[15]  S. Watson The Magic of the Marketplace: Sociality in a Neglected Public Space , 2009 .

[16]  Jürgen Streeck,et al.  Gesturecraft: The manu-facture of meaning , 2009 .

[17]  S. Watson Brief Encounters of an Unpredictable Kind: Everyday Multiculturalism in Two London Street Markets , 2009 .

[18]  F. Ferri,et al.  Analyzing Multimodal Interaction , 2009 .

[19]  Kate Pahl Language in late modernity , 2007 .

[20]  Sigrid Norris,et al.  Analyzing Multimodal Interaction: A Methodological Framework , 2004 .

[21]  F. Farmer,et al.  Saying And Silence , 2001 .

[22]  C. Goodwin Gestures as a resource for the organization of mutual orientation , 1986 .

[23]  D. McNeill So you think gestures are nonverbal , 1985 .

[24]  E. Goffman The Interaction Order: American Sociological Association, 1982 Presidential Address , 1983 .

[25]  J. Baxter Relations with the public , 1976 .

[26]  Erving Goffman,et al.  The Neglected Situation , 1964 .

[27]  E. Goffman Behavior in public places : notes on the social organization of gatherings , 1964 .