What is a spoken word event

National News

This article covers everything that you need to know about “Spoken Words.”

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about a performance art. For recordings of books or dialog, see Audiobook. For the 2009 film, see Spoken Word (film).

Spoken word refers to an oral poetic performance art that is based mainly on the poem as well as the performer’s aesthetic qualities. It is a late 20th century continuation of an ancient oral artistic tradition that focuses on the aesthetics of recitation and word play, such as the performer’s live intonation and voice inflection. Spoken word is a «catchall» term that includes any kind of poetry recited aloud, including poetry readings, poetry slams, jazz poetry, and hip hop music, and can include comedy routines and prose monologues.^[1] Unlike written poetry, the poetic text takes its quality less from the visual aesthetics on a page, but depends more on phonaesthetics, or the aesthetics of sound.

History[edit]

Spoken word has existed for many years; long before writing, through a cycle of practicing, listening and memorizing, each language drew on its resources of sound structure for aural patterns that made spoken poetry very different from ordinary discourse and easier to commit to memory.^[2] «There were poets long before there were printing presses, poetry is primarily oral utterance, to be said aloud, to be heard.»^[3]

Poetry, like music, appeals to the ear, an effect known as euphony or onomatopoeia, a device to represent a thing or action by a word that imitates sound.^[4] «Speak again, Speak like rain» was how Kikuyu, an East African people, described her verse to author Isak Dinesen,^[5] confirming a comment by T. S. Eliot that «poetry remains one person talking to another».^[6]

The oral tradition is one that is conveyed primarily by speech as opposed to writing,^[7] in predominantly oral cultures proverbs (also known as maxims) are convenient vehicles for conveying simple beliefs and cultural attitudes.^[8] «The hearing knowledge we bring to a line of poetry is a knowledge of a pattern of speech we have known since we were infants».^[9]

Performance poetry, which is kindred to performance art, is explicitly written to be performed aloud^[10] and consciously shuns the written form.^[11] «Form», as Donald Hall records «was never more than an extension of content.»^[12]
Performance poetry in Africa dates to prehistorical times with the creation of hunting poetry, while elegiac and panegyric court poetry were developed extensively throughout the history of the empires of the Nile, Niger and Volta river valleys.^[13] One of the best known griot epic poems was created for the founder of the Mali Empire, the Epic of Sundiata. In African culture, performance poetry is a part of theatrics, which was present in all aspects of pre-colonial African life^[14] and whose theatrical ceremonies had many different functions: political, educative, spiritual and entertainment. Poetics were an element of theatrical performances of local oral artists, linguists and historians, accompanied by local instruments of the people such as the kora, the xalam, the mbira and the djembe drum. Drumming for accompaniment is not to be confused with performances of the «talking drum», which is a literature of its own, since it is a distinct method of communication that depends on conveying meaning through non-musical grammatical, tonal and rhythmic rules imitating speech.^[15][16] Although, they could be included in performances of the griots.

In ancient Greece, the spoken word was the most trusted repository for the best of their thought, and inducements would be offered to men (such as the rhapsodes) who set themselves the task of developing minds capable of retaining and voices capable of communicating the treasures of their culture.^[17] The Ancient Greeks included Greek lyric, which is similar to spoken-word poetry, in their Olympic Games.^[18]

Development in the United States[edit]

Vachel Lindsay helped maintain the tradition of poetry as spoken art in the early twentieth century.^[19] Robert Frost also spoke well, his meter accommodating his natural sentences.^[20] Poet laureate Robert Pinsky said, «Poetry’s proper culmination is to be read aloud by someone’s voice, whoever reads a poem aloud becomes the proper medium for the poem.»^[21] «Every speaker intuitively courses through manipulation of sounds, it is almost as though ‘we sing to one another all day’.»^[9] «Sound once imagined through the eye gradually gave body to poems through performance, and late in the 1950s reading aloud erupted in the United States.»^[20]

Some American spoken-word poetry originated from the poetry of the Harlem Renaissance,^[22] blues, and the Beat Generation of the 1960s.^[23] Spoken word in African-American culture drew on a rich literary and musical heritage. Langston Hughes and writers of the Harlem Renaissance were inspired by the feelings of the blues and spirituals, hip-hop, and slam poetry artists were inspired by poets such as Hughes in their word stylings.^[24]

The Civil Rights Movement also influenced spoken word. Notable speeches such as Martin Luther King Jr.’s «I Have a Dream», Sojourner Truth’s «Ain’t I a Woman?», and Booker T. Washington’s «Cast Down Your Buckets» incorporated elements of oration that influenced the spoken word movement within the African-American community.^[24] The Last Poets was a poetry and political music group formed during the 1960s that was born out of the Civil Rights Movement and helped increase the popularity of spoken word within African-American culture.^[25] Spoken word poetry entered into wider American culture following the release of Gil Scott-Heron’s spoken-word poem «The Revolution Will Not Be Televised» on the album Small Talk at 125th and Lenox in 1970.^[26]

The Nuyorican Poets Café on New York’s Lower Eastside was founded in 1973, and is one of the oldest American venues for presenting spoken-word poetry.^[27]

In the 1980s, spoken-word poetry competitions, often with elimination rounds, emerged and were labelled «poetry slams». American poet Marc Smith is credited with starting the poetry slam in November 1984.^[18] In 1990, the first National Poetry Slam took place in Fort Mason, San Francisco.^[28] The poetry slam movement reached a wider audience following Russell Simmons’ Def Poetry, which was aired on HBO between 2002 and 2007. The poets associated with the Buffalo Readings were active early in the 21st century.

International development[edit]

Outside of the United States, artists such as French singer-songwriters Léo Ferré and Serge Gainsbourg made personal use of spoken word over rock or symphonic music from the beginning of the 1970s in such albums as Amour Anarchie (1970), Histoire de Melody Nelson (1971), and Il n’y a plus rien (1973), and contributed to the popularization of spoken word within French culture.

In the UK, musicians who have performed spoken word lyrics include Blur,^[29] The Streets and Kae Tempest.

In 2003, the movement reached its peak in France with Fabien Marsaud aka Grand Corps Malade being a forerunner of the genre.^[30][31]

In Zimbabwe spoken word has been mostly active on stage through the House of Hunger Poetry slam in Harare, Mlomo Wakho Poetry Slam in Bulawayo as well as the Charles Austin Theatre in Masvingo. Festivals such as Harare International Festival of the Arts, Intwa Arts Festival KoBulawayo and Shoko Festival have supported the genre for a number of years.^[32]

In Nigeria, there are poetry events such as Wordup by i2x Media, The Rendezvous by FOS (Figures Of Speech movement), GrrrAttitude by Graciano Enwerem, SWPC which happens frequently, Rhapsodist, a conference by J19 Poetry and More Life Concert (an annual poetry concert in Port Harcourt) by More Life Poetry. Poets Amakason, ChidinmaR, oddFelix, Kormbat, Moje, Godzboi, Ifeanyi Agwazia, Chinwendu Nwangwa, Worden Enya, Resame, EfePaul, Dike Chukwumerije, Graciano Enwerem, Oruz Kennedy, Agbeye Oburumu, Fragile MC, Lyrical Pontiff, Irra, Neofloetry, Toby Abiodun, Paul Word, Donna, Kemistree and PoeThick Samurai are all based in Nigeria. Spoken word events in Nigeria^[33] continues to grow traction, with new, entertaining and popular spoken word events like The Gathering Africa, a new fusion of Poetry, Theatre, Philosophy and Art, organized 3 times a year by the multi-talented beauty Queen, Rei Obaigbo ^[34] and the founder ^[35] of Oreime.com.

In Trinidad and Tobago, this art form is widely used as a form of social commentary and is displayed all throughout the nation at all times of the year. The main poetry events in Trinidad and Tobago are overseen by an organization called the 2 Cent Movement. They host an annual event in partnership with the NGC Bocas Lit Fest and First Citizens Bank called «The First Citizens national Poetry Slam», formerly called «Verses». This organization also hosts poetry slams and workshops for primary and secondary schools. It is also involved in social work and issues.

In Ghana, the poetry group Ehalakasa led by Kojo Yibor Kojo AKA Sir Black, holds monthly TalkParty events (collaborative endeavour with Nubuke Foundation and/ National Theatre of Ghana) and special events such as the Ehalakasa Slam Festival and end-of-year events. This group has produced spoken-word poets including, Mutombo da Poet,^[36] Chief Moomen, Nana Asaase, Rhyme Sonny, Koo Kumi, Hondred Percent, Jewel King, Faiba Bernard, Akambo, Wordrite, Natty Ogli, and Philipa.
The spoken word movement in Ghana is rapidly growing that individual spoken word artists like MEGBORNA,^[37] are continuously carving a niche for themselves and stretching the borders of spoken word by combining spoken word with 3D animations and spoken word video game, based on his yet to be released poem, Alkebulan.

In Kumasi, the creative group CHASKELE holds an annual spoken word event on the campus of KNUST giving platform to poets and other creatives. Poets like Elidior The Poet, Slimo, T-Maine are key members of this group.

In Kenya, poetry performance grew significantly between the late 1990s and early 2000s. This was through organisers and creative hubs such as Kwani Open Mic, Slam Africa, Waamathai’s, Poetry at Discovery, Hisia Zangu Poetry, Poetry Slam Africa, Paza Sauti, Anika, Fatuma’s Voice, ESPA, Sauti dada, Wenyewe poetry among others. Soon the movement moved to other counties and to universities throughout the country. Spoken word in Kenya has been a means of communication where poets can speak about issues affecting young people in Africa. Some of the well known poets in Kenya are Dorphan, Kenner B, Namatsi Lukoye, Raya Wambui, Wanjiku Mwaura, Teardrops, Mufasa, Mumbi Macharia, Qui Qarre, Sitawa Namwalie, Sitawa Wafula, Anne Moraa, Ngwatilo Mawiyo, Stephen Derwent.^[38]

In Israel, in 2011 there was a monthly Spoken Word Line in a local club in Tel-Aviv by the name of: «Word Up!». The line was organized by Binyamin Inbal and was the beginning of a successful movement of spoken word lovers and performers all over the country.

Competitions[edit]

Spoken-word poetry is often performed in a competitive setting. In 1990, the first National Poetry Slam was held in San Francisco.^[18] It is the largest poetry slam competition event in the world, now held each year in different cities across the United States.^[39] The popularity of slam poetry has resulted in slam poetry competitions being held across the world, at venues ranging from coffeehouses to large stages.

Movement[edit]

Spoken-word poetry is typically more than a hobby or expression of talent. This art form is often used to convey important or controversial messages to society. Such messages often include raising awareness of topics such as: racial inequality, sexual assault and/or rape culture, anti-bullying messages, body-positive campaigns, and LGBT topics. Slam poetry competitions often feature loud and radical poems that display both intense content and sound. Spoken-word poetry is also abundant on college campuses, YouTube, and through forums such as Button Poetry.^[40] Some spoken-word poems go viral and can then appear in articles, on TED talks, and on social media sites such as Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

Further reading[edit]

• «5 Tips on Spoken Word». Power Poetry.org. 2015.

External links[edit]

• Poetry aloud – examples

Cheyenne Johnson
Writer

Spoken word, a form of poetry designed for onstage performance, first became popular in the 1960s due to the poetry and political group “Last Poets,” and has since grown across the country. In recent years, the art of spoken word has taken hold of the University of California Santa Barbara, grabbing attention in both campus and downtown venues while uniting poets and performers together in a mix of theater and literature. Events dedicated to exhibiting the stylish art form have become more and more of a common occurrence here at UCSB, shown by this week’s schedule of several spoken word events on campus, as well as many others throughout the quarter.

“We recognize that it’s a form of expression for the community that we serve,” said Satya Chima, officer manager of the MultiCultural Center, a key sponsor of most on-campus spoken word events. “I remember it being popular when I was in college… I feel like it’s kind of been here for a while.”

The MCC recently co-sponsored “An Evening of Spoken Word” at the downtown Coffee Cat, where poets from UCSB and the community could perform their works.

“The last event we had in downtown Santa Barbara was packed. A ton of students came from the campus,” said Chima. “It felt like a really awesome event in a large city. We hope to do that kind of thing again, where we can bridge the community and the campus together.”

The UCSB community is far from lacking talented spoken word poets. A Poetry Slam Showcase rocked the Hub in January, featuring eight UCSB poets, including second-year literature major, Demi Anter. Anter said spoken word poetry has a life other written forms of expression can’t match.

“I think a big part of it is the fact that it’s live, rather than reading a poem on the page,” said Anter. “You have the experience of interacting with an audience.”

As for the recent explosion of interest in the genre, Anter said it’s to be expected considering the younger age of nationally known poets.

“People get more exposed to it right now, and it just happens that the focus is now on a lot of young performers,” said Anter. “Maybe there’s something impressive about people that are that young and have mastered it already.”

The evolutionary nature of spoken word seems to be a key component of its existence, Anter believes.

“I think it has continued and will continue into the future,” said Anter. “There will probably always be changes to it, but I think this desire to see a live show and watch and appreciate, will always be there.”

Otha Cole, the marketing associate at the MCC, got into spoken word while he was still a student at UCSB. The now-Los Angeles resident said spoken word on campus has changed since his college years.

“Especially on this campus, there’s more group spoken word,” said Cole. “More students have heard of it. It’s definitely picked up a lot of steam and I think that’s because for the most part, it’s pretty new as a part of pop culture. I’m not surprised it’s getting bigger.”

Cole said that spoken word involves an emotional response that written poetry doesn’t necessarily possess.

“There’s a lot of tension in spoken word, even if it’s a light hearted poem,” said Cole. “The way it’s even said is, I don’t want to say aggressive, but there’s a tension.”

For Cole, spoken word stands unique against other forms of expression, and isn’t just about reading aloud. Spoken word offers a rare form of expression where speakers are allowed to interact with their audience.

“I wouldn’t be able pick up a Robert Frost poem and say it in a cool cadence and all of a sudden it’s spoken word,” said Cole. “You’re able to really tell the difference.”

The MCC is hosting another evening of spoken word this Thursday, May 17 at 6575 Seville. MCC staff welcome all “conscious poets to the stage” to artistically express themselves, and add more spoken life to our community.

This month I performed at two of Edinburgh’s monthly spoken word events, Blind Poetics and Ten Red. Inviting friends involved me trying to explain what spoken word is. I don’t think I did it justice so I hope this blog will help. A typical conversations went like this:

Me: I’m doing a spoken word gig on Monday at the Blind Poet if you happen to be about?

Friend: What is spoken word?

Me: Some people call it performance poetry…

Friend: Ohhh it’s poetry, so people actually perform poetry? (slightly amused / disbelieving face)

Me: Yeah, there’s a really active spoken word scene in Edinburgh.

Friend: So do people read poems they’ve written or do they remember them?

Me: Monday’s gig includes open mic slots so it’s a whole range, lots of people do read but others remember them…

Friend: Do you read your poems or do you remember them?

Me: I remember them. I’m the featured poet this month (slightly amused / disbelieving face)

Friend: Featured poet, so what does that mean?

Me: Well I have a twenty minute slot. I get paid. The featured poet is meant to be really good (I don’t make eye contact). Last month they were on tour from Berlin. This month it’s me.

Friend: I’m sure you’ll be grand, my wife’s got an exam the next day so I won’t be doing anything, I should be able to make it. Blind Poet Right? Spoken word (smiles, nods).

Thinking about it, I have friends who’ve never been to any of my gigs or any spoken word gig ever. For some of them, the idea of a night out watching someone perform poetry sounds at best dull and at worst, embarrassing. For those people and for anyone else who’s not heard of or been to a spoken word gig, I wanted to try to explain a bit about what spoken word is and what I love about it.

My first exposure to ‘performance poetry’ was watching the film ‘So I Married an Axe murderer’, it was entertaining and intriguing but nothing like seeing it live. A few years later I saw Phillip Attmore, a Broadway actor and dancer perform a poem he’d written called ‘Move’. It included a tap dance, as ridiculous as that sounds it was and is amazing. It wasn’t just the quality of the performance, the clever lines, the rhymes and the rhythm. It was more than that, it made me want to get up and do something with my life. To write, to move, to speak, to express. Here’s a video of this year’s world poetry slam champion Harry Baker, it’s along the same lines. He’s performing a poem about bees but it speaks to the heart, it makes me want to do something, to be something, to change something. Words have power and we can listen and move on or we can listen and move. Here’s Harry with the bees:

That’s a bit about why I love about watching spoken word but what’s it like on the other side of the microphone, what’s it like to perform?

Performing solo for 45 minutes in a packed out book shop during the West Port Book Festival last year was wonderful and intimate and totally different to being part of an evening like TenRed earlier this month. At Ten Red ten poets share ten minutes each in a cosy back room in a pub in Leith. Every other person was a writer and it was as much about sharing a pint, as a poem. I loved being part of a team of performers and the performances I saw were entertaining, challenging and inspirational. This was the line up,

It’s not all good, I feel physically sick before a spoken word gig. Once I’m performing I’m fine. I like to involve the audience, I love chatting to them, for me it’s about connecting, sharing and having fun together. I know spoken word artists who feel energized when they perform, for me it’s the opposite. I feel totally drained afterwards, I’ve given a part of myself and it takes me a day to recover. I love to get feedback, especially from people I don’t know and I’m always really encouraged by it and glad I performed (despite dreading the gig beforehand and wondering why in the world I’d agreed to it).

There are so many brilliant spoken word artist in Edinburgh, if you live here I totally recommend checking out the scene. Why not write something and consider taking part too? Here are just a few of Edinburgh’s amazing selection of spoken word events:

TenRed: Ten Poets perform ten minuets each at the Persevere Bar, Leith. Poets invited to perform in advance by host Kevin Cadwallinder. Cosy back room atmosphere. Check out the facebook page.

Inky Fingers:: Monthly writers group, monthly open mic and a whole host of brilliant special events. Check out their blog, twitter or facebook group for details.

Neu Reekie: Monthly meeting of avant-garde poetry-music-film fusions. Last Friday of the month at the Scottish Book Trust. Supported by Creative Scotland. Check out their blog, twitter or facebook page.

Blind Poetics: Monthly spoken word and performance, first Monday of the Month at the Blind Poet, Newington. Includes 5 min open Mic Slots, introducing slot and featured poet. Big bar, always packed out and a variety of levels of experience. Check out their facebook page.

Illicit Ink: Themed Spoken Word events with food treats and funky badges. Regular events are prose but after a successful ‘happy verse night’ more spoken word events will follow. Check out their website, facebook and twitter.

If you’d like to hear some of my poetry here’s an audio clip of Starling My Darling, a poem about starlings and physics. If you want something longer there’s a 45 minute podcast of my Author Talk at the West Port Book Festival.

I’m the featured performer for child themed poetry event for adults (fundraiser for Theater Paradok) at a new bookshop in Edinburgh, Looking Glass Books on Friday 13th July. Hope to see you there, it’s called Pea Green Poetry. Check out the ‘gigs‘ page on this blog for more info.

12 Oct 2017 9:10 AM

By: Tcontrer

   
poetry, spoken word, Tiffany

Looking for all Articles by Ross McCleary?

Organising a spoken word event is a lot of work, but it’s also a lot of fun. Whether you’re looking to put on your own show or host a cabaret of other performers, there are a few things you can do to make your life a little easier.

Work with others

«Find someone you can trust and work with them»

The first time I applied to do a fringe show, as part of the PBH Free Fringe, one of the first suggestions I was given by an organiser was: consider teaming up with someone. After a short consideration of my options, I decided to do it and I think it’s the single best piece of advice I’ve ever been given.

Find someone you can trust, someone you respect, and work with them. It will mean there is someone to share the workload and to bounce ideas off of. It will make your night better. Two of you also means you will have two sets of friends to invite to your event. You will have someone else to celebrate your triumphs and, when there are difficult times, you won’t be alone.

Attend local events

The best way to see how it’s done is to go attend local events. At all levels, there is due consideration given to the number of performers, the length of their sets, and the price of admission at the door. Attending other events will help you figure out the balance between what you want to do and what will work.

Attending other events is also an opportunity to meet people. It opens you up to a pool of potential performers and to a network of organisers who, if you ask nicely, can give you advice and assistance.

Be clear about what you can offer performers

«Be clear about what you are doing and what you can offer»

One of the most important parts of any spoken word night is booking the right acts. The right act might be you — you might be looking to put on your own show — but when you approach other people it is important to be clear about what you are doing and what you can offer. You need to tell them when the event it is, where it is, what you are looking for them to do, and how much (if anything) you can afford to pay them. These details might change over time and that’s fine, just be sure to update your performers if they do.

Regardless of the specifics, giving a possible performer as much information as you can will help inform their decision to work with you. You’ll surprised how far you’ll get by simply coming across in a friendly and professional manner.

Pick the right venue

Inky Fingers is a free night and one with an audience of around 30-50, including around 12 open mic performers a month. We have no budget to hire a space, and we need our space to be a certain size to accommodate the performers and attendees. We’ve hosted it in pubs, cafés, art spaces, and we are now in Lighthouse Books. Other nights are hosted in theatres, night clubs, and libraries. Going to events which are similar to your own will give you an idea of what venues suit certain types of event.

Make a plan and stick to it

Inky Fingers runs to a set schedule every month. We do this because it works and because it makes it easier to run. Having a plan will make your life easier and it will look good. Even if it does not go exactly to plan, if you have a plan you will be better prepared to deal with unexpected events.

Also, you will only have your venue space for a set amount of time and you will need to programme accordingly. Hosting a successful event takes hard work, a lot of planning, but when it goes right it’s the best feeling in the world.

Lecture notes

Course: Spoken English

Week: 3

Lecturer: Keith Richards

Topic: The Speech Event

These notes are extracts only and do not include the arguments developed in the lectures. Neither do they include handouts or workshop activities. They are an additional resource designed primarily for those who attended the relevant lectures.

Important note

The subject of these notes is the speech event rather than the ethnography of communication, which is the broader field of which it is a part. My choice has been determined partly by considerations of time and practicality but also by a consideration of the place that the speech event plays in the ethnography of communication. It is generally accepted as the central concept and in my view represents the best introduction to the field. Duranti sums up the situation succinctly:

For many researchers, the speech event still represents a level of analysis that has the advantage of preserving information about the social system as a whole while at the same time allowing the researcher to get into details of the personal acts

Duranti 1988:219

In view of this, I strongly advise you to follow up the lecture and workshop by reading either Saville-Troike’s excellent brief introduction to the broader field in the McKay collection (1996) or her earlier book (1989) dedicated to the subject. Alternatively, or in addition, you could read Keating (2001).

Review and introduction

In the first week we looked at aspects of communicative competence at the broadest level. This week we’ll move on to attempt to identify appropriate models for describing specific instances of language in use. Just by way of a general reminder and as an indication of the task ahead, here is one attempt to capture the range of relevant components:

Components of communication

1 Linguistic knowledge

(a) Verbal elements

(b) Nonverbal elements

(c) Patterns of possible variants (in all elements and their organization)

(e) Meanings of variants in particular situations

2 Interaction skills

(a) Perception of salient features in communicative situations

(b) Selection and interpretation of forms appropriate to specific situations, roles, and relationships (rules for the use of speech)

(c) Discourse organization and processes

(d) Norms of interaction and interpretation

(e) Strategies for achieving goals

3 Cultural knowledge

(a) Social structure

(b) Values and attitudes

(c) Cognitive maps/schemata

(d) Enculturation processes (transmission of knowledge and skills)

(Saville-Troike 1989: 24)

If we listen to the way people speak, it soon becomes apparent that there are certain activities where interaction seems to be organised in recognisable ways, with rules about what can and cannot be said. We know, for example, that there are accepted ways of issuing and accepting invitations, of making a toast, of making introductions, and so on. This is what lies behind the idea of a speech event, the subject of this week’s sessions.

Speech events in everyday talk

In fact, we use terms which refer to speech events all the time, and these carry a useful semantic load; for example, each of the following utterances refers to a specific speech events. Decide what the relevant interactional rules are:

Sometimes we take for granted that others know the relevant rules and therefore leave them unstated. If I say, W didn’t have much of a conversation — all he wanted to talk about was his model soldiers,’ I take it as understood that topics of conversation are normally negotiated by participants and that as a result they usually cover different subjects.

The interesting thing about speech events is that they bring together social and linguistic aspects, as Hymes noted:

A general theory of the interaction of language and social life must encompass the multiple relations between linguistic means and social meaning. The relations within a particular community or personal repertoire are an empirical problem, calling for a mode of description that is jointly ethnographic and linguistic.

Hymes 1986:39

Towards a definition

Various definitions of speech events have been offered, and the following discussion is based on those taken from core texts. We begin with three that, taken together, provide a reasonable overview:

The basic unit for the analysis of verbal interaction in speech communities is the speech event … The speech event is to the analysis of verbal interaction what the sentence is to grammar. When compared with the sentence it represents an extension in size of the basic analytical unit from single utterances to stretches of utterances, as well as a shift in focus from emphasis on text to emphasis on interaction. Speech event analysis focuses on the exchange between speakers

Gumperz 1986: 16-17

At the level of ethnographic description, verbal behavior in all societies can be categorized in terms of speech events: units of verbal behavior bounded in time and space. Events vary in the degree to which they are isolable. They range from ritual situations where behavior is largely predetermined to casual everyday talk. Yet all verbal behavior is governed by social norms specifying participant roles, rights and duties vis-?-vis each other, permissible topics, appropriate ways of speaking and ways of introducing information. Such norms are context and network specific, so that the psycholinguistic notion of individuals relying on their own personal knowledge of the world to make sense of talk in context is an oversimplification which does not account for the very real interactive constraints that govern everyday verbal behavior.

Gumperz 1982: 164-5

A single event is defined by a unified set of components throughout, beginning with the same general purpose of communication, the same general topic, and involving the same participants, generally using the same language variety, maintaining the same tone or key and the same rules for interaction, in the same setting.

Saville-Troike 1989: 27

Gumperz’s comment on the way in which social norms govern verbal behaviour is particularly important, since this is the relationship upon which the concept is based. It is also the reason why the analysis of speech events has played such a central role in the ethnography of communication. Notice, too, his emphasis on the interactive nature of such events within what is a very wide range, from the entirely predictable (ritual) to the more or less open (casual talk). Valuable as these insights are, however, when we look for a definition of the speech event, Gumperz is able to offer nothing more specific than, ‘units of verbal behavior bounded in time and space.’ Taken with the proviso that such events may not be isolable, this leaves the issue of definition pretty much in the air. For a more positive formulation we need to turn to Saville-Troike, whose repetition of the term ‘same’ makes her definition nothing if not consistent. Even so, working from this definition alone, I’m not sure that it would be easy to provide examples of speech events.

Duranti’s comments are worth noting because of their reminder that speech is central to so many of the social activities we engage in, to the extent that some are actually constituted through talk:

The basic assumption of a speech-event analysis of language use is that an understanding of the form and content of everyday talk in its various manifestations implies an understanding of the social activities in which speaking takes place … Such activities, however, are not simply ‘accompanied’ by verbal interaction they are also shaped by it: there are many ways, that is, in which speech has a role in the constitution of a social event. The most obvious cases are perhaps gossip sessions and telephone conversations, neither of which could take place if talk were not exchanged. But even the most physically oriented activities such as sport events or hunting expeditions rely heavily on verbal communication for the participants’ successful coordination around some common task.

Duranti 1988: 218.

Although it does not mention this issue, one of the questions this raises is that of definition because while some of the activities we engage in are very easy to label and to describe, others are more problematic. The same might be said of speech events.

An example

I’ve chosen the following because I found it amusing when I first read it and because it raises the interesting question of how precise our labels need to be. It could just be categorised as ‘small talk’, but in this case it’s clear that certain extra rules are in play that apply to talking to royalty, so I suppose we might characterise it as ‘making small talk with the reigning monarch’. Try to work out the rules yourself and compare your conclusions with mine.

01 Q: Have you been riding today, Mr Greville?

02 G: No, Madam, I have not.

03 Q: It was a fine day.

04 G: Yes, Ma’am, a very fine day.

05 Q: It was rather cold though.

06 G: (Like Polonius) It was rather cold, Madam.

07 Q: Your sister, Lady Francis Egerton, rides, I think, does she not?

08 G: She does ride sometimes, Madam.

09 (A pause, when I took the lead, though adhering to the same

10 same topic.)

11 G: Has your Majesty been riding to-day?

12 Q: (With animation) Oh, yes, a very long ride.

13 G: Has your Majesty got a nice horse?

14 Q: Oh, a very nice horse.

Brett, S. (ed). 1987. The Faber Book of Diaries. London: Faber & Faber.

One way of checking the rules you’ve identified is to find an example where they’re broken and see what the interactional consequences of this are. The following is just such a case, and you might like to see which of the rules you’ve identified are being violated here.

The exchange in question took place in 1960s in England and involved a very popular comedian, Tommy Cooper. Traditionally, the monarch would attend a number of ‘important’ national events, including the Royal Variety Performance and, a few weeks later, the (football) Cup Final. At the end of the former, stars of the show would line up to meet the Queen, having first been informed of the relevant interactional rules (identical to those which applied in the above exchange). Upon being told by the Queen that she had found him very funny, Cooper asked her whether she had really found him funny and, receiving a positive reply, sought further confirmation, to the noticeable discomfort of her attendants and others in the party. At this point, the conversation developed along these lines:

Cooper: May I ask your majesty a personal question?

(Awkward silence)

Queen: (Frostily) So far as I may allow.

Cooper: Do you enjoy football, ma’am?

Queen: No, as a matter of fact I don’t.

Cooper: Well in that case can I have your Cup Final tickets?

(General laughter)

Goffman (1974) has described such behaviour in terms of ‘frames’, which answer the question ‘What is happening here’ and represent the way in which we structure our experience. In the example above Tommy Cooper is ‘breaking frame’. The awkward silence here and the frosty reception are significant both socially and as part of the setting up of the punchline, but the joke has already been prepared for in the earlier establishment of Cooper’s role as a ‘funny man’. We can see a contrast between his behaviour here and that of Greville, whose tortuous efforts to keep to the rules make the earlier example so amusing. It seems to me that the rules in the Queen Victoria example (which don’t seem to have changed) are pretty straightforward: let the Queen take the lead unless a pause in the conversation indicates that a switch is permissible, but make sure you keep to the same topic — and whatever happens, don’t disagree. Tommy Cooper not only takes the lead but selects his own topic (and marks this as a ‘personal’ one).

The SPEAKING model

This is the best known model for analysing speech events. Hymes, who developed it, referred to it as an etic grid and explained the need for such descriptive apparatus as follows:

Even the ethnographies that we have, though almost never focused on speaking, show us that communities differ significantly in ways of speaking, in patterns of repertoire and switching, in the roles and meanings of speech … Since there is no systematic understanding of the ways in which communities differ in these respects, and of the deeper relationships such differences may disclose, we have it to create. We need taxonomies of speaking, and descriptions adequate to support and test them

Hymes (1986:42-43)

Situation 3 Setting

4 Scene

Participants 5 Speaker, or sender

6 Addressor

7 Hearer, or receiver, or audience

8 Addressee

Ends 9 Purposes — outcomes

10 Purposes — goals

Act sequence 1 Message form

2 Message content

Key 11 Key

Instrumentalities 12 Channels

13 Forms of speech

Norms 14 Norms of interaction

15 Norms of interpretation

Genres 16 Genres

The order here is based on the acronym, but numbers refer to the order in which these components are introduced in Hymes (1986).

Speech event components

One of the things which has always impressed me about Hymes’ SPEAKING model is the subtlety of the distinctions within it: the beauty of the description lies in the divisions within each of the main components. The following comments highlight the main points I made in the lecture:

Situation

Hymes’ distinction between setting and scene is an important one. Setting refers to the physical context in which the interaction takes place and may influence the sort of talk that is allowable (e.g. religious building vs bar or caf?). Scene is also part of the situation but its locus is psychological rather than physical. Hymes points out that the same physical setting might be the location for different psychological scenes. Within the same setting participants may move from formal to informal, festive to serious etc.

Participants

The distinctions here are along the same lines as Goffman’s ‘production format’ involving the ‘animator’, who produces talk, the ‘author’, who creates talk, and the ‘principal’, who is responsible for talk. The first distinction is between speaker (or sender) and addressor. The former is responsible for the message while the latter is the person who physically delivers it. Normally these are the same, but not always. For example, when in the United States the presidential spokesperson delivers an unpalatable message, nobody points the finger of blame towards the deliverer: it is the President who must bear the brunt of any backlash. The second distinction, which parallels the first, is that between the hearer (or receiver, or audience) and the addressee. The receiver of ‘Now do this in pairs’ in a coursebook may be the students but the main addressee is the teacher.

Ends

The distinction which Hymes draws here between outcomes and goals is perhaps less easy to pin down in practice. Outcomes refers to what is conventionally expected or publicly stated as the object of the event from the point of view of the community, whereas the reference to goals recognises that the parties involved may have purposes which are related but not identical to this. Hymes is careful to point out that, for both outcomes and goals, we must be careful to distinguish what is conventionally recognised from what is purely personal or situational.

Act sequence

This refers to the sequence of acts which makes up a speech event. Hymes draws a distinction between message form and message content offering an example of this distinction in terms of ‘He prayed saying “….”’ (where the words appearing between double quotation marks represent the form) and ‘He prayed that he would get well’ which reports the content only. Presumably the difference between the two could be much greater. For example, the message form, ‘Have you seen the time?’ would, in the right context, have a message content which would be represented as, ‘He said it was time they were going.’ This seems to be essentially the same as the locutionary form and illocutionary force distinction originally made by Austin and a key distinction in Speech Act Theory.

Key

The term is used in its conventional sense, to refer to ‘the tone manner, or spirit in which an act is done’ (Hymes 1986:62).

Instrumentalities

These are, again, conventional. Channel is used in the conventional sense, so it would be important, for example, to distinguish face-to-face communication from talk on the telephone. Forms of speech Hymes identifies as language and dialect, codes, and varieties and registers. It is interesting to note that Saville-Troike includes non-verbal elements under message form, which is surely legitimate. But to represent these (e.g. 1989:166; 169; 173) in general terms as ‘kinesics’ or ‘proxemics’ or ‘eye gaze’ is less acceptable, even when specific examples are provided in the analysis itself. Research in the area of non-verbal communication has demonstrated conclusively that it is an important feature of all face-to-face communication, and detailed studies (e.g. Goodwin 1981 on gaze direction) have revealed that its role is a subtle and complex one. The dilemma for speech event analysis is that this aspect cannot be ignored but there is simply not the space to do it full justice. Selection of ‘relevant’ non-verbal features is therefore inevitably, to some extent, arbitrary.

Norms

The two components under this head are particularly important, and many cross-cultural comparisons tend to focus on these areas. Norms of interaction refer to the conventional rules relating to the conduct of the speech event. These will include rules about floor holding, turn-taking, delivery, topic etc. Norms of interpretation are also of crucial importance in speech events and in cross-cultural interaction generally. These refer to the rules which determine the interpretation of particular acts. A failure to understand relevant norms of interpretation was responsible for some very expensive mistakes when the US first engaged in large scale business negotiations in Japan.

Genres

The final element is genre, which is not necessarily an element at all. This is not Hymes’ stated position, and he explicitly argues (1986:65) that genres can be invoked within specific events, as when the ‘sermon’ is invoked for humorous purposes within another event. However, it seems to me that this is a special case, and that unless a genre is exploited in this way, it is more likely to be a super-ordinate descriptive category. This is, in fact, how Hymes himself uses it, as the genre (‘Scoring’) within which certain events (shaman’s retribution, girl’s puberty rite, testing of children) are located (1986:67-68).

The model in Perspective

‘The spirit of the model is heuristic, that is, it is designed as an aid to noticing, formulating and organizing materials, and it is designed so as to become itself an object of data- and experience-based critique.’

Philipsen, G. & Coutu, M. 2005. The ethnography of speaking. In K. L. Fitch & R. E. Sanders (eds.), Handbook of Language and Social Interaction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Pages 355-379. (Page 365)

Basic elements

A number of other writers have developed similar models, all very similar. There’s no need to explore these in depth, but it’s worth noting that the common elements seem to be the first three in Hymes’ list (situation, participants and ends), so you could say these are the core elements, though as far as I know nobody has actually claimed that.

To see how these elements might work when it comes to interpreting an utterance, try working out the purpose (ends) of the following utterance, given the situation and the setting:

Utterance

Do you know where today’s paper is?

Contexts

1. Participants: colleague → colleague

Setting: Senior Common Room.

2. Participants: master → servant

Setting: breakfast table

3. Participants: husband → wife

Setting: living room

You should have found the first two very straightforward, but the last one is more problematic, as we saw in the first week:

Husband: Do you know where today’s paper is?

Wife: I’ll get it for you.

Husband: That’s OK Just tell me where it is. I’ll get it.

Wife: No, I’LL get it.

(Gumperz 1982: 135)

This is not an issue we need to explore, but it does serve as a reminder of the points I covered in the first week about the many dimensions of spoken language, which means that it often resists a priori categorisation. As we’ll see next week, this is a position that conversation analysis takes up.

Situation and Event

So far I’ve concentrated on the defining characteristics of the speech event, but the event itself is part of a hierarchy of descriptive terms used by those in the field. Hymes himself offers a fairly extensive list of ‘social units’, but I’ll like to concentrate on the three main elements. Two of these, situation and event, seem to me to be fairly unproblematic, but the speech ‘act’ does throw up a number of problems. For the purpose of discussion we’ll use a slightly adapted example from Saville-Troike (1989:28-29):

In this example, the element in italics is carried on to the next level, where it is broken down, so that the situation religious service is represented by the list of events, and from these prayer is chosen as the element to be broken down into acts.

The distinction between (speech/communicative) situation and (speech) event is a straightforward one. The term situation here is used in its conventional sense to stand for the general social context in which communication occurs. A situation is not defined by speaking, although speaking may normally be expected to occur within it. So, for example, speaking would be expected to occur at a party (although it is just about possible to imagine a party where the loudness of the music makes speaking ‘at’ the party impossible), but there will also be other activities, such as dancing, where speaking may not feature. A speech event, however, is defined in terms of speaking, at least in the sense of being governed by the norms relating to this:

The term speech event will be restricted to activities, or aspects of activities, that are directly governed by rules or norms for the use of speech.

Hymes 1986:56

So within the speech situation ‘religious service’, prayer may be a speech event. Obviously, there are forms of prayer which do not involve speech, but the focus here is on ‘spoken’ or ‘public’ prayer. For obvious reasons, Saville-Troike has chosen a clear cut example, and I’ve followed her, but this is not to say that speech events are always so easy to identify, and, as Gumperz notes (1982:164), they may not be easy to isolate. It may also be possible to find one event embedded within another (e.g. an announcement within a lecture) and they may be discontinuous (the lecture may be briefly interrupted as other business is transacted). They can also range from single utterances (‘Fire!’) to extended sequences (e.g. a lecture).

Gumperz’s observation (1982:164) that speech events can range from ritual situations to casual talk seems particularly relevant to TESOL, where coursebooks seem to be to be guilty all too often of ignoring this continuum. We often find them treating as ritual — and therefore subject to precise specification — what properly belongs to the more open end of the range.

Speech Act

Despite these minor reservations, the concept of the speech event is reasonably well-defined, and as an analytical unit it has proved its worth. However, the status of ‘speech act’ is much more problematic. In the end, I think we probably have to accept that the concept of an ‘act’ in EC is far from clear, but it does represent a unit of description below the level of the event. For this reason it seems safest, and perhaps most sensible, to think of acts as part of an ‘act sequence’, which is what Saville-Troike does in her book (e.g. 1989:163). In this way attention is drawn to the fact that they are essentially descriptive units. Having said this, I’d now like to point to what is problematic about the concept, starting with Hymes’ own acknowledgement of the difficulty of labelling acts:

The labelling of the acts is unavoidably somewhat arbitrary.

Hymes 1986:68

The most serious problem associated with the speech act is that its status is by no means clear. Saville-Troike (1996:371) says that it is ‘generally coterminous with a single interactional function, such as a referential statement, a request, or a command, and may be either verbal or nonverbal.’ The problem with this is that the idea of a single interactional function is pretty vague, and ‘generally’ coterminous allows plenty of space for alternatives. The situation isn’t helped by the fact that Hymes states that a joke can be a speech act within a conversation:

The term speech event will be restricted to activities, or aspects of activities, that are directly governed by rules or norms for the use of speech. An event may consist of a single speech act, but will often comprise several. Just as an occurrence of a noun may at the same time be the whole of a noun phrase and the whole of a sentence (e.g. ‘Fire!’), so a speech act may be the whole of a speech event, and of a speech situation (say, a rite consisting of a single prayer, itself a single invocation). More often, however, one will find a difference in magnitude: a party (speech situation), a conversation during the party (speech event), a joke within the conversation (speech act). It is of speech events and speech acts that one writes formal rules for their occurrence and characteristics. Notice that the same type of speech act may recur in different types of speech event, and the same type of speech event in different contexts of situation. Thus, a joke (speech act) may be embedded in a private conversation, a lecture, a formal introduction. A private conversation may occur in the context of a party, a memorial service, a pause in changing sides in a tennis match.

Hymes 1977: 52

I have to admit that I’m not at all comfortable with the idea that a joke is a speech act because jokes can be very extended affairs. There’s also the disturbing possibility that a speech event (e.g. an announcement) might find itself embedded, albeit artificially, within a speech act (it’s easy to imagine it featuring as part of a joke, for example). This is why I feel that the much looser term ‘act sequence’ is useful, since it recognises — perfectly reasonably, it seems to me — that events can sometimes be broken up into a sequence of acts (‘phases’ or ‘stages’ might serve just as well to capture this idea). The precise status of such elements then does not need to be spelt out.

There is another problem with the use of the term ‘speech act’ which arises from its better known use within a related but distinct field. Speech Act Theory developed from the work of the philosopher, Austin, who recognised that certain utterances are used to do more than convey information. He demonstrated that they also perform particular acts. Subsequently, a great deal of work in pragmatics centred on the analysis of such ‘speech acts’, which are always specific utterances. Such work is related indirectly to the concerns of the ethnography of communication, but its treatment of isolated examples, often invented, marks it as coming from a different tradition. Duranti summarises the essential differences between the two fields:

What usually distinguishes the ethnographic approach from pragmatic analysis is a stronger concern for the socio-cultural context of the use of language, with the specific relationship between language and local systems of knowledge and social order, and a lesser commitment to the relevance of logical notation to the strategic use of speech in social interaction.

Duranti 1988:213

Where two traditions use exactly the same term for a central concept, the potential for confusion is considerable, and its not helped when the key figures in each tradition (Austin and Hymes) choose examples which could easily be interchanged. This seems to provide a very good reason for referring to an ‘act sequence’ or following Saville-Troike in using the term ‘communicative act’.

Acts and events

While there is potential for confusion in the use of the term ‘speech act’, it’s also true to say that the connection between event and act is an intimate one. The best way of illustrating this is to ask you to match the following ‘acts’ to the events in which they might occur:

The first thing to notice in these examples is that the form of the utterance is different in each case. It would be very odd, for example, to find someone in a conversation giving the time as 10.05. Perhaps more importantly in view of the issue of acts and their function, it seems clear that a knowledge of the relevant speech event enables us to identify quite clearly the ‘message content’ of these utterances (what Speech Act Theory would call their ‘illocutionary force’). In the first case we know that lectures begin and end at specified times, that the speaker and audience are expected to remain in situ throughout, and that the lecturer is expected, within reasonable limits, to keep to the subject of the lecture. So when Mr James arrives five minutes late and the lecturer reminds him of the time, we know that this is not part of the lecture as such but is an aside which serves as an admonition. In the case of the announcement, which is designed to present information, a bare statement of the precise time achieves the necessary communicative end.

The relationships in the examples are therefore as follows:

Lecture: “It is five minutes past ten, Mr James.”

Chat: “Five past ten — is that the time!”

Announcement: “It is 10.05.”

The ‘chat’ example is perhaps a little more subtle than the others because conversation is the least predictable (in terms of content at least) of all events. However, we know that conversations have to open and close, and if we reflect we will realise that sometimes speakers signal that a conversation has to come to an end (using ‘pre-closers’). In this case the speaker expresses surprise — even alarm — about the time, and from what we know of conversations we can safely assume that it announces that something needs to be done which will either interrupt or end the conversation.

There is, then, a relationship between the interpretation of specific acts within a speech event and the event itself as a representation of shared understandings of the relevant social context; and whatever the shortcomings of the notion of ‘act’ as Hymes represents it, these shouldn’t blind us to the fact that his etic grid offers is a subtle and insightful representation of the components which make up a speech event.

In fact, I think it’s well worth making an effort to get to grips with this concept and with the use of etic grids, but I’m less convinced by some of the more general claims of the ethnography of communication. If you’d like to pursue this (and this very much depends on where your particular interests lie), you’ll need to read Saville-Troike’s 1996 paper in the light of my suggestions in the next section.

Issues in the ethnography of communication

If you’re interested in exploring this field further, Saville-Troike (1996) makes a very good starting point. You might like to read this, noting the following:

• any apparent contradictions in the statements the author makes;
• definitions or descriptions which seem to you to be vague or very general in scope;
• proposals which seem to you to be optimistic;
• any other problems.

You might also consider how much of what she says here is relevant to TESOL as opposed to TESL or first language teaching.

If you’re interested in my own thoughts on the subject, these can be accessed at:

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/celte/staff/richards_k/se2lecturenotesrichards_k/issuesinec/

References

Duranti, A. 1988. Ethnography of speaking: towards a linguistics of praxis. In F. Newmeyer (ed), The Cambridge Linguistic Survey, Part IV, pp.210-28. Cambridge: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gumperz, J. 1982. Discourse Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gumperz, J. 1986. Introduction. In Gumperz & Hymes (eds), pp.1-25.

Gumperz, J. J. and Hymes, D. (eds). 1986. Directions in Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.

Hymes, D. 1977. Foundations in Sociolinguistics. London: Tavistock.

Hymes, D. 1986. Models of the interaction of language and social life. In Gumperz. and Hymes (eds), pp.35-71.

Keating, E. 2001. The ethnography of communication. In P. Atkinson, A, Coffey, S. Delamont, J. Lofland and L. Lofland (eds), Handbook of Ethnography, pp.285-301. London: Sage.

Saville-Troike, M. 1989 The Ethnography of Communication (Second Edition). Oxford: Blackwell.

Saville-Troike, M. 1996. The ethnography of communication. In S.L. McKay (ed), Sociolinguistics and Language Teaching, pp.351-80. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

The story

I suggest that you approach this in the following way:

1. Read Labov’s treatment of the subject, either in his book or in the extract reprinted in Joworski and Coupland.

2. Read my brief notes below to check that you have identified the essential elements.

3. Study my analysis of the ‘James Bond’ story.

4. Study the ‘Students as villains’ story and identify any interesting elements in it. Compare your findings with mine in my 1999 paper.

If you plan to write your assignment on this topic, you should explore the papers that appear in the Reading section below (Thornbury & Slade includes a useful chapter). You could also search the Journal of Pragmatics to see whether there have been any studies of narrative in your own language.

Some definitions

We define narrative as one method of recapitulating past experience by matching

a verbal sequence of clauses to the sequence of events which (it is inferred)

actually occurred. Labov 1999: 225

• A minimal narrative is a sequence of two narrative clauses that are temporally ordered.

• A narrative clause is confined by temporal juncture. This means that if the order is changed the inferred temporal sequence is changed.

• A free clause is not confined by any temporal juncture.

Here is an example from Labov 1977/1999. Identify the narrative clauses then check your answer against Labov’s analysis:

a. I know a boy named Harry.

b. Another boy threw a bottle at him right in the head

c. and he had to get seven stitches.

Labov 1999: 227

Story Structure

Labov describes the elements in narratives, then sums these up in terms of the questions to which they respond: 

Abstract What was this about?

Orientation Who, when, what, where?

Complicating Action Then what happened?

Evaluation So what?

Result What finally happened?

Coda

Note that the coda is a signal that the narrative has finished and therefore does not respond to a question. Labov says that if you ask the question, ‘And then what happened?’ after a coda, the only possible response is, ‘Nothing; I just told you what happened.’

Types of Story

Narrative As above

Anecdote Notable event and reaction

(resolution not expected)

Exemplum Told to make a moral point

(typically incident and interpretation)

Recount Essentially expository

(record of events)

(Thornbury and Slade 2006: 152-158)

Here is the story on the handout (but note that the alignment on this webpage version is less accurate than on the original):

(3.0) Annette: Because I just let something happen then that I shouldn’t have let happen.	Abstract
E:r (.) the:: (.) they’ve been doing a story about-reading about James Bond, and then >we were-< answering some questions on it, and one of the questions said em:: (0.5) er (.) >I can’t remember what the que- >the exactly< question was but it started with Bond, (.) Bond (.) did such and such and they were (.) to say whether it was true or false.= Keith: =Right.	Orientation
Annette: And e:m (.) Shafie got out his dictionary and was looking up (.) what I thought was an important word in the question that he didn’t understand, (.) and he was looking up ‘bond’. (.) Keith: HA! ┌Hahahah	Complicating action 1
Annette: └Because it came at the beginning of the sentence, (.) er (.) ┌he therefore ┐ Keith: └Right right ri┘ght. Annette: didn’t realise that that capital letter meant that it ┌was ┐ a name, (.) Keith: └Yes.┘	Embedded orientation 1
Annette: and he’s (.) he s- he showed me in his dictionary	Complicating action 2
Annette: because I- I thought I’d better go and check what he was ┌looking ┐ up. Keith: └Oh right.┘	Embedded orientation 2
Annette: And then he said ‘It’s this ‘bond’, it says ‘money’ and ‘stocks and shares’ or something. °And° lots of meanings.’ Keith: Hahaha::h=	Complicating action 3
Annette: And I said ‘No no, Keith: ( )= Annette: =it’s it’s (.) James Bond,’ >I mean< I pointed to the name on the board and he said ‘O::h yes.’ Heheheh Keith: Beautiful.	Result
Annette: But I thought I should have picked up on that earlier. Keith: It’s nice though. Real confusions. Annette: Yes. Keith: Yeah. Mmm. (.) Heh (3.0)	Evaluation

Reading

All of the following are available from Warwick library:

Jefferson, G. 1978. Sequential aspects of storytelling in conversation. In J. Schenkein (ed.), Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction, pp.219-248.
New York: Academic Press.

Johnstone, B. 2003. Discourse analysis and narrative. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen and H. E. Hamilton (eds), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, pp.635-649. Oxford: Blackwell.

Labov, W. 1977. Language in the Inner City. Oxford: Blackwell. Reprinted in A. Jaworski and N. Coupland (eds), The Discourse Reader, London: Routledge, 1999. Pages 221-235.

Norrick, N. R. 2001. Discourse markers in oral narrative. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(6): 849-878

Norrick, N. R. 2005. Interactional remembering in conversational narrative. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(11): 1819-1844.

Schiffrin, D. 1981. Tense variation in narrative. Language, 57 (1): 45-62.

Tannen, D. 1982. Oral and literate strategies in spoken and written narratives. Language, 58(1): 1-21.

Thornbury, S. and Slade, D. 2006. Conversation: From Description to Pedagogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Toolan, M. J. 2001. Narrative: A Critical Linguistic Introduction (2^nd Edition). London: Routledge.

Wolfson, N. 1979. The conversational historical present alternation. Language, 55(1): 168-182.

The following is available from the Applied Linguistics Resources Centre:

Richards, K. 1999. Working towards common understandings: Collaborative interaction in staffroom stories. Text, 19(1): 143-174.

Last week I took part in two regular Spoken Word events I attend as often as I can, Mouth & Music and Worcester’s SpeakEasy.

Tuesday 9th saw Ben Norris headlined Mouth & Music also headlining this month were Heather Wastie and Sarah Tamar.

It was funny seeing Ben again – last Thursday I saw him perform at Cherry Reds as part of the Naked Lungs event, then again on Saturday in his one man show The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Family at the MAC and then just a few days after at the BHG. This happens often with artists who will be booked for events within the same month, however, Ben Norris may have had other reasons for this last blow out in and around Birmingham… he has since moved to Cardiff (tissues passed around the Midlands), he is gained by Wales. Off on his next exciting adventure.

I finally managed to buy Ben’s pamphlet book, I hope he gets more published in the future, it is a great little press which publishes 6 poems and has several BIG name performance poets on there list, such as: Elvis McGonagall (who I see next Wednesday at The Hive, organised by Worcester Lit Fest) and Martin Newall, who I performed with in Essex about 15 years ago!

I usually write to theme, this month has been busy & I didn’t have time. Instead I found suitable age poems to perform. It was a great night with fantastic and touching performances some poetry about war, others about Dementia. Heather Wastie also bravely attempted group poems, three of them! They can be seen on the Mouth & Music Blog here.

It was a great night. We also had 2 poet laureates, Tom Wyre – Staffordshire’s Poet Laureate and Fergus McGonigal Worcester’s Poet Laureate. They both performed War Poetry.

Photographs © Peter Williams 2014

Chrissy Velveteen

 Nina Lewis

 Hinge & Bracket

On Thursday 11th I went to SpeakEasy in Worcester. Headlined this month by Peter Wyton.

Peter Wyton is a ‘poet of page and performance’ who has published a number of books and who has appeared on BBC Radio. He is a widely published and prize-winning poet who has appeared at venues as diverse as Cheltenham Literature Festival, Glastonbury Festival and Ledbury Poetry Festival.

It was a good night and I was delighted to be performing just before the headline act.

Brenda Read-Brown also treated us to a set, she won the WLF (Worcester LitFest) POETRY SLAM and collected her poetry trophy.

Performers included Kevin Brooke, who’s new book is being launched on the 26th September at The Hive, Charley Hammond, Maggie Doyle, John Lawrence and Mike Alma as well as open mic spots.

I always enjoy a night at SpeakEasy and this week was no exception – and next month they are celebrating the first year of the event, what a success it has been, delightful to have started when the re-launch of Worcester Lit Festival spoken word event, I even remember voting on what it should be called on the website.