Maria Grazia Sindoni, Spoken and Written Discourse in Online Interactions: A Multimodal Approach

(New York and London: Routledge, 2013), pp. 240

Reviewed by ABDULMALIK YUSUF OFEMILE

Ph.D. Candidate in English, University of Nottingham

Maria Grazia Sindoni’s monograph is foregrounded by tracing the conceptual development of

spoken and written discourse online using heterogeneous technologies. Chapter one deals with

the characteristics, roles and integration of speaking and writing online from sociocultural,

linguistic, and digital perspectives, while chapter two handles semiotic resource reinterpretation,

and sociolinguistic surveys of perception, and carries out a multimodal analysis of spontaneous

web-based video interactions. Chapter three focuses on blogs and introduces the concept of

“polymorphic BlogEng”, which is the language and other semiotic resources used in blogging

practices and communities (118). The chapter also presents a six-step methodology for assessing

various strands of blogging, as summarised in the following table:

STEPS DESCRIPTION

1 Using purposely built corpora from different groups of data sets and access to

specific communicative changes in blogs.

2 The selection of different semiotic resources that is adequately representative to

enable quantitative and qualitative analysis.

3 Corpus Analysis using specific software programmes.

4

Corpus Linguistics annotation of multivariate language use and variation using

a problem-oriented approach. This approach compares “positive and negative

keyness” (130) with some reference to corpora.

5 Categorization and discussion of the most frequent lexical bundles considered

as indicators of register variation.

6

Separate but combinable analysis of various distinct semiotic resources like

verbal language, images, videos and others. This ensures that a full account is

taken of the role and impact of multimodal resources in blogging.

Table 1: Methodological steps in strand analysis of blogging (adapted from Sindoni, 129-130)

Chapter four focuses on YouTube interactions, their language modes and variation across

discourse typologies. The methodological steps are similar to those outlined in the table above,

except that when analysing videos, steps two and six are omitted and categorisation in step five is

heuristic and functional. Although the method may at times be tedious, it is useful and adaptable

for diverse multimodal transcription and digital data management contexts.

It has previously been argued by Bezemer, in his 2012 article “Mode: What is

Multimodality”, that multimodal research should be built on three interconnected theories, the

first of which being the use of multiplicity of modes. Sindoni applies Bezemer’s first theory by

drawing on a multiplicity of online modes and language skills including video, audio, text,

hypermedia, speaking and writing, to give a diverse representation that contributes to meaning

building when users make systems to convey meanings in all ways. Bezemer’s second theory

states that resources are socially shaped, reaffirming earlier theories by McKenzie and Wajcman

(1999) and Hartford et al. (2010) on the social shaping of technology. Sindoni applies this theory

by treating resources as socially shaped modes that meet the needs and feelings of individuals and

communities of users. Examples include the reinterpretation of semiotic resources by discussants

and the identified roles of social distance and proxemics (90-113) for the articulation of social,

individual and affective meanings dictated by the needs of each online interaction community.

Bezemer’s last theory is that people build meaning mutually by deliberately selecting and

configuring modes in preparation for interaction between modes. Sindoni applies this theory in

her analysis of mode switching and its significance in online interaction (85-88). The concept is

also evident in the regular mixture of audio, text, video and video logs as modes of interaction

and semiotic resource integration – a practice previously called “process mediality” by Lanfranchi

(2003:97) – and the management of turn taking in the monograph.

Sindoni’s “notion of territoriality” (56), described as where interactants lay claims to and

defend an online space from any unauthorised external claim using available resources, agrees

with Bezemer’s view that communication in many contexts is determined by mutually accepted

norms and rules, and by the motivation and interests of the communicants. Territoriality ensures

effective space perception and management by communicants during multimodal interaction and

this ultimately affects the way communication is organised and carried forward.

The monograph does display one of the hallmarks of multimodal research because

Sindoni covers core multimodal concepts like mode (33, 39, 44), semiotic resources (140) and

inter-semiotic relationship in data analysis. No mention is made however, of modal affordance

which, according to Bezemer and Jewitt, explains the material and the cultural aspects of modes

in relation to what it is possible to express and represent easily with a mode. Meanwhile,

Sindoni’s findings indicate that the degree of relevance between participants’ comments is low,

while individual participant relevance with the device is very high (217). Sindoni’s explanation

using “multimodal relevance maxim” (217) is correct but does not adequately explain the high

relevance with the device. Research published by Ofemile in 2010 indicates that different

affordances exist and the levels at which users perceive them influence the extent to which they

can use devices. Thus, affordances further explain the high degree of relevance exhibited between

Sindoni’s participants and their devices.

In conclusion, Sindoni has made a significant contribution to the application of a

multimodal approach to understanding the nature of spoken and written discourse in online

interactions by developing a new methodology for the collection and analysis of digital, visual and

video data in digital environments within social research.

Works Cited Bezemer, Jeff. “Mode: What is Multimodality.” Mode: Multimodal Methodologies. Institute of Education, University of

London, 2012. Web. 16 Jan. 2014. Bezemer, Jeff and C. Jewitt. “Multimodal Analysis: Key Issues.” Research Methods in Linguistics. Ed. L. Litosseliti.

London: Continuum, 2010. 180-197. Print. Hartford, Susan, Leslie Carr and Cathy Pope. “A Manifesto for Web Science?” Proceedings of the WebSci10: Extending

the Frontiers of Society On-Line. Eds. M. Rowe and F. Ciravegna. North Carolina: Raleigh, 2010. 1-6. Print. Lanfranchi, V. “A Multimodal Approach to Ubiquitous Information Management”. Diss. University of Torino,

2003. Print. McKenzie, D. and J. Wajcman. The Social Shaping of Technology. Buckingham: Open University Press, 1999. Print. Ofemile, A. C. Y. “Assessing Affordances of Cloud Computing Tools for Language Education in Nigerian Colleges

of Education”. Diss. University of Leeds, 2010. Print. Scollon, R. and P. Levine. Multimodal Discourse Analysis as the Confluence of Discourse and Technology. Washington DC:

Georgetown University Press, 2004. Print. Wesch, M. “An Anthropological Introduction to YouTube”. YouTube. n.p., 23 June 2008. Web. 15 Jul. 2010.

ABDULMALIK CAXTON YUSUF OFEMILE is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of

English at the University of Nottingham. He holds a B.Ed. in Language Arts (English) from

A.B.U. Zaria, Nigeria, and an M.A. in T.E.S.O.L. and I.C.T. from the University of Leeds – for

the latter of which he held a Hornby Scholarship. He has worked as a lecturer and researcher in

the English Department of the F.C.T. College of Education, Zuba Abuja, Nigeria since 2002.

Abdulmalik has published numerous articles in academic journals in Nigeria and is currently

working with a team to write textbooks for teaching English language in Nigerian primary and

secondary schools. His research focuses on communication issues in Human Agent Collectives

(HACs), Linguistics, T.E.F.L. and the integration of I.C.T. into education.