UCLA UCLA Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title Technically Speaking: On the Structure and Experience of Interaction Involving Augmentative Alternative Communications Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7vh6c65h Author Engelke, Christopher Robert Publication Date 2013 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles Technically Speaking: On the Structure and Experience of Interaction Involving Augmentative Alternative Communications A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Anthropology by Christopher Robert Engelke 2013 © Copyright by Christopher Robert Engelke 2013 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Technically Speaking: On the Structure and Experience of Interaction Involving Augmentative Alternative Communications by Christopher Robert Engelke Doctor of Philosophy in Anthropology University of California, Los Angeles, 2013 Professor Paul Kroskrity, Co-Chair Professor Alessandro Duranti, Co-Chair Technically Speaking: On the Structure and Experience of Interaction Involving Augmentative Alternative Communications examines the ways that communication is structured and experienced by looking at interactions involving augmented communicators – people with severe speech disabilities who use forms of assistive technology in order to communicate with others. Completed in 2013, and drawing on over two years of fieldwork with people who use, design, manufacture, and prescribe augmentative alternative communications (AAC) devices, this dissertation examines the impacts of AAC on interaction and intersubjectivity. Combining ii ethnographic methods with forms of close discourse analysis, the chapters explore how the architecture of interaction responds to the nuances of mediated forms of communication, and how individuals experience interactional phenomena of intersubjectivity and ‘voice’. The dissertation begins by looking at the ways that augmented and mouth-speaking interlocutors comport themselves at various points in the unfolding of interaction. Combining insights from the fields of conversation analysis, discourse analysis, linguistic anthropology, and phenomenology, the early chapters explore the role of temporality in the creation and maintenance of intersubjectivity. By showing how and when interlocutors experience breakdowns in the tight temporal attunement and sense of collective engagement that characterize face-to-face conversation, the first part of this dissertation explores the impact of AAC technology design on the structures of interaction and the experience of personhood. The second section of this dissertation interrogates the notion of ‘voice’. The chapters in this section examine the how augmented communicators are able to embody a voice that is being produced by a mechanical device, located outside of their physical body, and how individuals with different forms of speech disability relate to the synthetic voice differently, thereby revealing a great deal about their tacit understandings of their bodies and the world around them. By examining communication through and despite mediating forms, this dissertation expands understandings of the nature of intersubjectivity. Moreover, by bringing divergent fields’ perspectives to bear on the topic of interaction within the context of disability, the dissertation provides new ways of approaching communication, suggesting a new model for understanding the experience of sociality. iii The Dissertation of Christopher Robert Engelke is approved. Charles Goodwin Elinor Ochs C. Jason Throop Paul Kroskrity, Committee Co-Chair Alessandro Duranti, Committee Co-Chair University of California, Los Angeles 2013 iv This dissertation is dedicated first to my parents, whose love, support, and commitment to helping others serves as a constant source of inspiration to me. I dedicate it also to my wife, Christina, and daughters, Annika and Lorelei. Your patience made this possible and your love makes every day worthwile. v TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Blinking, Dwelling, Typing: An Introduction……………………………………………1 Finding the Field…2/ The ‘Field’ of Augmentative Alternative Communications (AAC)…4/ Augmented Communicators…5/ AAC Systems and Devices…6/ SLPs: Perspectives on ‘Interaction’…11/ Implications for Design and Terminology…15/ Finding my Way amidst an AAC Revolution…18/ Methods and Data…21/ Kurt…26/ Ted…29/ Jim and Samantha…32/ Tim…33/ Dr. Ron…34/ The ‘AAC Ninjas’…35/ Summary of Chapters…37/ Chapter 2: Not Growing Older Together…37/ Chapter 3: Vulnerable Moments & Repairing the “We”…39/ Chapter 4: Embody-ing the Voice…40/ Chapter 5: Embodiments of Voice: Vocal Reflection, Vocal Potency…41 II. Not Growing Older Together……………………………………………………………43 Introduction – Vignette…43/ Data for Close Analysis…47/ The Participants and Background…47/ Ted (Augmented Communicator)...48/ Other Participants (Mouthspeakers)…50/ The Data…50/ Starting in Sync…51/ “Who’s the Girl that’s with You”…56/ Silence and Attention…58/ “Fellow Men,” Intersubjectivity, and the ‘Mutual Tuning-In” Relationship…60/ Time, Temporality, and Progressivity in Intersubjectivity…66/ Ted’s Response: Monothetic vs. Polythetic Experience…71/ Summary and Conclusions…73 III. Vulnerable Moments & Repairing the ‘We’……………………………………………77 Introduction…77/ Data for Close Analysis: Lines 13-25…78/ Fracturing and Repairing the ‘We’…79/ Further Signs of Fractured Attunement: Off-Stage Behavior and the ‘Disattend Track’…80/ Repairing the ‘We-Relationship’: Two Questions, Two Answers…86/ Vulnerabilities of the Augmented Communicator…90/ Limited Set Questions…91/ ‘Not Now’ Problems…94/ The Out of Context Problem/Problems in vi Understanding…95/ Data for Close Analysis: Lines 26-52…98/ Minding the ‘Gap’: Maintaining Progressivity by Claiming ‘Gaps’ as ‘Pauses’…100/ An Alternative Vulnerability: Mouthspeakers in Silence…106/ Summary and Conclusions…111 Section II: The Embodied Voice……………………………………………………………113 Introduction: The Embodied Voice…113/ Whose Embodiment is it Anyway?...117 IV. Embody-ing the Voice………………………………………………………………….121 Pre-Stored Voices: Questioning the Where-When-Who of Pre- Stored Narratives…122/ Constructing a Participant Framework…128/ ‘On Stage Presence’…133/ Embodied Stance…135/ Renouncing the Voice of a Bygone Author…140/ Summary and Conclusions…145 V. Embodiments of Voice: Vocal Reflection, Vocal Potency……………………………..147 Vocal Ambivalence of Congenitally Disabled Augmented Communicators…149/ The Limits of Ambiguity…157/ Mouthspeakers and the Fixation of Voice to Body…162/ The ‘NOT-Mineness’ of the Synthetic Voice: Remembered Voice and Identity…167/ “I hear me”: AAC and the Voice in My Head…168/ Reproducing the Imaginary: Voice Banking and the Residuum of Mouth-Speaking…172/ Re-Imaging the Body: Claiming the Synthetic Voice…175/ From ‘Body Image’ to ‘Body Schema’…181/ AAC, Body Schema, and ‘the Elevator Problem’…184/ The ‘Phantom Voice’…189/ Summary and Conclusions…194 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………………...196 Endnotes……………………………………………………………………………………207 References Cited……………………………………………………………………………213 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1.A: Room Schematic 48 Figure 2.1.B: Ted Aims Hand at Area of Device 49 Figure 2.1.C: Ted ‘Hits’ Device in Area of Target 49 Figure 2.1.D: Ted Finds Specific Target through Key-Guard 49 Figure 2.2.A: Line 6 52 Figure 2.2.B: Line 7 52 Figure 2.2.C: Line 8 52 Figure 2.2.D: Line 9 52 Figure 2.2.E: Line 9+ 53 Figure 2.2.F: Line 9+ 53 Figure 2.2.G: Line 9+ 53 Figure 2.2.H: Sample Minspeak© Display 55 Figure 2.3.I: Mary Holds Smile 60 Figure 2.3.J: Mary Sticks Out Tongue 60 Figure 2.3.K: Mary Smile/Eyebrow Flash 60 Figure 2.3.L: Mary Smile/Brow Furrow 60 Figure 2.3.M: Mary Snort/Sniffle 60 Figure 2.3.N: Mary Smile/Sigh 60 Figure 2.3.O: Mary Eye Rub 60 Figure 2.3.P: Sharing Temporal Objects 65 Figure 3.1: Ted/Mary Mutual Gaze & Smile on Mary’s Question 82 Figure 3.2: Mary Holds Smile and Gaze, Ted Begins Typing 82 Figure 3.3: Mary Begins to Yawn 82 Figure 3.4: Mary Holds Yawn 82 Figure 3.5: Mary Holds Yawn, Frank Rubs Eye 82 Figure 3.6: Frank Rubs Eye, John Scratches Head 82 Figure 3.7: John Scratches Head, Mary Wipes Nose on Arm 82 Figure 3.8: Mary Asks Question 2 Before Ted Answers Question 1 82 Figure 3.9: Mary and Frank await Ted’s Output 89 Figure 3.10: Mary’s Pitch Across Lines 35-37 102 Figure 4.1: Ted Facing Table 129 Figure 4.2: Ted Facing CRE 129 Figure 4.3: Room Schematic of Fig. 4.1 129 Figure 4.4: Room Schematic of Fig. 4.2 129 Figure 4.5: Asymmetrical Distribution of Resources in Semiotic Ecology 130 Figure 4.6: Prototypical 2-Way Participant Framework 132 Figure 4.7: Offset Side-by-Side Participant Framework with AAC Device 1 133 Figure 4.8: Offset Side-by-Side Participant Framework with AAC Device 2 133 Figure 4.9: Nested & Offset Side-by-Side Participant Framework with AAC Device 133 Figures 4.10 – 4.17: Ted ‘On’ and ‘Off’ Stage 134 Figures 4.18 – 4.23: Ted Embodying Voice 137 Figures 4.24 – 4.29: Ted Reacting to Not Mine-ness of Voice 142 Figures 4.30: Ted Reacting to Not Mine-ness of Voice 143 viii Figure 5.1: Ted’s “don’t worry about it” Gesture 154 Figure 5.2: Kurt’s Room 169 Figure 5.3: Kurt’s Mobile Unit 169 ix LIST OF TRANSCRIPTS Transcript 2.1 51 Transcript 3.1 80 Transcript 3.2 99 Transcript 3.3 100 Transcript 3.4 100 Transcript 4.1 137 Transcript 4.2 142 Transcript 5.1 153 Transcript 5.2 159 Transcript 5.3 163 Transcript 5.4 166 Transcript 5.5 171 x ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS A doctorate degree, like any other milestone, results from the commitments many people make to one individual. Throughout my years in the university I was fortunate to receive advice and inspiration from some of the finest mentors alive. The reality of learning from, and socializing with scholars of such distinction far exceeded my wildest hopes. I am especially grateful for the opportunity to work with my committee members: Sandro Duranti, Paul Kroskrity, Elinor Ochs, Chuck Goodwin, and Jason Throop. I am truly lucky to have had the opportunity to work with each of you.