1. Outline Project markers and backchanneling – statistics and functions of new tokens secondary functionality of certain tokens as project markers Nonconventional language coordination resolution of contextuality within the nature of the task adapting and evolving language conventions Miscommunication causes ways of resolution effect on sensemaking and common ground

2. Navigating joint projects with dialogue (Bangerter & Clark) - Specialized project markers for horizontal and vertical transitions - Statistical corpus analysis of markers to infer division of labor - ‘System of contrasts’ – relative strengths and functions of project markers - Types of backchanneling tokens (yes, right, uh-huh)… indicative of type of commitment - Dialogue pairs – first part not explicit, second part backchanneling token - Difference in project marker use… difference in conceptualizing task Background: Project Markers

3. Observe Other Project Markers… Statistical analysis with reference to backchanneling function, project transitions, group coordination, etc of observed tokens like cool (and variations), k or alright (as opposed to ok), sure, ah, hm, etc Function as project markers of - words like thanks, or commiserating tokens like uh-oh (not just courtesy, also implicit acknowledgment. And at what level of commitment?) - tokens of humor/sarcasm (distract from project? level transition? Group division?)

4. Background: Nonconventional Coordination Joint Actions (Clark) - Ambiguity, contextuality, indexicality, layering - Precedent, perceptual salience - Phases in conversation, synchrony: continuous coordination

5. Get Coordination Device Statistics From transcripts, observe - Occurrences of contextual and indexical phrases. Success of resolution. Relationship to nature of task. - Setting of language precedents – who tends to set them? Group’s adaptability to new language use. Relationship to general common ground establishment. - Clark: Common ground of mental processing time of speech. What about CG of processing time of completing tasks, along with processing of the speech directions? Which one do speakers tend to take into account more when timing their responses?

6. Sources of Miscommunication - Failure to backchannel hp: can you guys see the pages i made? Static-Nomad: 3 hour evening lectures are good for that. hp: i made a main and reqs pages so far Static-Nomad: yes I can see the pages - Misunderstanding in contextuality/indexicality john: what is 'R' in MWR ? john: you said MWR twice, the first time I thought you meant MWF petertw: thursday john: oh ok

7. Sources of Miscommunication - Asynchrony igal: So what does ECON 2A count for? hp: don't forget the lams hp: QR and social science reqs IggyPop: fall back hp: *labs (in previous comment) Static-Nomad: QR is handled by biochem stuff IggyPop: (fall back refers to ECON...just in case she changes her mind) - Unconscious typing error or elision

8. Resolution - Speaker realizes error or potential for misunderstanding and tries to correct it immediately pflynn: we need two each for spring 06, fall 07 pflynn: er sp07-fa07 pflynn: you know what i mean - One of the group members tries to clarify Anthony: got it. casino is metro stop jean-drapeau pchiusano: casino? Anthony: yeah, for entertainment pchiusano: ah.. (Though error is marked, speaker assumes the possibility that meaning is conveyed) Contextuality

9. - Miscommunication is not noticed until a conflict occurs petertw: ok so the third semester... john: wait a sec john: I thought first year meant first semester, no? john: oops john: o should fall 07 go on the "year1" page ? petertw: it has to john: ok ok john: will do that Observe statistical distribution of these different cases, formulate possible correspondence to structure of group common understanding Resolution

10. Small, Quickly-resolved Miscommunications Could Be Good? Resolution of ambiguity/contextuality establishes language precedent better, leads to stronger common ground john: you said MWR twice, the first time I thought you meant MWF petertw: … petertw: thursday john: oh ok john: i'll call it MWR on the schedule then too … miscommunication has led to the explicit setting of a convention

11. Repetition due to lack of backchanneling leads to stronger grounding hp: can you guys see the pages i made? Static-Nomad: 3 hour evening lectures are good for that. hp: i made a main and reqs pages so far Static-Nomad: yes I can see the pages … igal: Yeah saw it. Ok I am gonna structure the requirements page then hp’s repetition has resulted in greater specificity. Would igal have looked at editing the requirements page given only hp’s first cue? Small, Quickly-resolved Miscommunications Could Be Good?

12. Failure to object implicitly assumes a general agreement pchiusano: bk, are you still transcribing reqs, or should I take over that? bk: They are on the main page. bk: Correct? acs: can we just say they're doing algebra? because... i like algebra better :-P pchiusano: um, no? pchiusano: I don't see any Steve: i dont care … Steve: so diod we decide on algebra or calc acs: algebra … acs: at least, no one objected to algebra :-P (Transcribing requirements takes precedence over acs’s question… quick implicit decision making because of another problem) Small, Quickly-resolved Miscommunications Could Be Good?