Refine
Year of publication
- 2013 (15) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (10)
- Part of a Book (4)
- Book (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (15)
Keywords
- Deutsch (7)
- Konversationsanalyse (5)
- Sprecherwechsel (4)
- Englisch (3)
- Interaktion (3)
- Multimodal interaction (2)
- Multimodalität (2)
- Projection (2)
- Turn construction (2)
- Turn-beginnings (2)
Publicationstate
- Postprint (15) (remove)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (9)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (1)
- Peer-review (1)
- Verlags-Lektorat (1)
Publisher
- Benjamins (5)
- Elsevier (4)
- Springer (2)
- Akademie Verlag (1)
- Taylor & Francis (1)
Automatic recognition of speech, thought, and writing representation in German narrative texts
(2013)
This article presents the main results of a project, which explored ways to recognize and classify a narrative feature—speech, thought, and writing representation (ST&WR)—automatically, using surface information and methods of computational linguistics. The task was to detect and distinguish four types—direct, free indirect, indirect, and reported ST&WR—in a corpus of manually annotated German narrative texts. Rule-based as well as machine-learning methods were tested and compared. The results were best for recognizing direct ST&WR (best F1 score: 0.87), followed by indirect (0.71), reported (0.58), and finally free indirect ST&WR (0.40). The rule-based approach worked best for ST&WR types with clear patterns, like indirect and marked direct ST&WR, and often gave the most accurate results. Machine learning was most successful for types without clear indicators, like free indirect ST&WR, and proved more stable. When looking at the percentage of ST&WR in a text, the results of machine-learning methods always correlated best with the results of manual annotation. Creating a union or intersection of the results of the two approaches did not lead to striking improvements. A stricter definition of ST&WR, which excluded borderline cases, made the task harder and led to worse results for both approaches.
Based on German speaking data from various activity types, the range of multimodal resources used to construct turn-beginnings is reviewed. It is claimed that participants in talk-in-interaction need to deal with four tasks in order to construct a turn which precisely fits the interactional moment of its production:
1. Achieve joint orientation: The accomplishment of the socio-spatial prerequisites necessary for producing a turn which is to become part of the participants’ common ground.
2. Display uptake: Next speaker needs to display his/her understanding of the interaction so far as the backdrop on which the production of the upcoming turn is based.
3. Deal with projections from prior talk: The speaker has to deal with projections which have been established by (the) previous turn(s) with respect to the upcoming turn.
4. Project properties of turn-in-progress: The speaker needs to orient the recipient to properties of the turn s/he is about to produce.
Turn-design thus can be seen to be informed by tasks related to the multimodal, embodied, and interactive contingencies of online-construction of turns. The four tasks are ordered in terms of prior tasks providing the prerequisite for accomplishing a later task.
This article advocates an understanding of ‘positioning’ as a key to the analysis of identities in interaction within the methodological framework of conversation analysis. Building on research by Bamberg, Georgakopoulou and others, a performative, interaction-based approach to positioning is outlined and compared to membership categorization analysis. An interactional episode involving mock stories to reveal and reproach an inadequate identity-claim of a co-participant is analysed both in terms of practices of membership categorization and positioning. It is concluded that membership categorization is a core element of positioning. Still, positioning goes beyond membership categorization in a) revealing biographical dimensions accomplished by narration and b) by uncovering implicit performative claims of identity, which are not established by categorization or description.
Based on German speaking data from various activity types, the range of multimodal resources used to construct turn-beginnings is reviewed. It is claimed that participants in talk-in-interaction need to deal with four tasks in order to construct a turn which precisely fits the interactional moment of its production:
1. Achieve joint orientation: The accomplishment of the socio-spatial prerequisites necessary for producing a turn which is to become part of the participants’ common ground.
2. Display uptake: Next speaker needs to display his/her understanding of the interaction so far as the backdrop on which the production of the upcoming turn is based.
3. Deal with projections from prior talk: The speaker has to deal with projections which have been established by (the) previous turn(s) with respect to the upcoming turn.
4. Project properties of turn-in-progress: The speaker needs to orient the recipient to properties of the turn s/he is about to produce.
Turn-design thus can be seen to be informed by tasks related to the multimodal, embodied, and interactive contingencies of online-construction of turns. The four tasks are ordered in terms of prior tasks providing the prerequisite for accomplishing a later task.
"Standard language" is a contested concept, ideologically, empirically and theoretically. This is particularly true for a language such as German, where the standardization of the spoken language was based on the written standard and was established with respect to a communicative situation, i.e. public speech on stage (Bühnenaussprache), which most speakers never come across. As a consequence, the norms of the oral standard exhibit many features which are infrequent in the everyday speech even of educated speakers. This paper discusses ways to arrive at a more realistic conception of (spoken) standard German, which will be termed "standard usage". It must be founded on empirical observations of speakers linguistic choices in everyday situations. Arguments in favor of a corpus-based notion of standard have to consider sociolinguistic, political, and didactic concerns. We report on the design of a large study of linguistic variation conducted at the Institute for the German Language (project "Variation in Spoken German", Variation des gesprochenen Deutsch) with the aim of arriving at a representative picture of "standard usage" in contemporary German. It systematically takes into account both diatopic variation covering the multi-national space in which German an official language, and diastratic variation in terms of varying degrees of formality. Results of the study of phonetic and morphosyntactic variation are discussed. At least for German, a corpus-based notion of "standard usage" inevitably includes some degree of pluralism concerning areal variation, and it needs to do justice to register-based variation as well.
Diese Studie untersucht kontrastiv deutsche und englische Satzstrukturen und entwirft eine Typologie ihrer Textrealisierungen. Im Mittelpunkt steht der Valenzaspekt der Satzstruktur. Es werden aber nicht nur die deutschen und englischen Ausdrucksmittel (einfache Ergänzungen und Ergänzungssätze) vorgestellt und kontrastiert, sondern sie werden in einer Korpusanalyse quantifiziert. Hierzu wird ein deutsch-englisches bzw. englisch-deutsches Übersetzungskorpus definiert und ausgewertet. Die beobachteten Kontraste werden im Zusammenhang typologischer Tendenzen und bevorzugter Vertextungsstrategien bewertet. Ziel der Untersuchung ist die Überprüfung der einflussreichen typologischen These von John A. Hawkins, das Deutsche sei semantisch transparenter als das Englische. Die Einzelanalysen sind für alle, die sich theoretisch oder praktisch für Übersetzung und Spracherwerb interessieren, von Interesse.
Contemporary studies on the characteristics of natural language benefit enormously from the increasing amount of linguistic corpora. Aside from text and speech corpora, corpora of computer-mediated communication (CMC) Position themselves between orality and literacy, and beyond that provide in- sight into the impact of "new", mainly intemet-based media on language beha- viour. In this paper, we present an empirical attempt to work with annotated CMC corpora for the explanation of linguistic phenomena. In concrete terms, we implement machine leaming algorithms to produce decision trees that reveal rules and tendencies about the use of genitive markers in German.
Pseudoclefts in Hungarian
(2013)
Based on novel data from Hungarian, this paper makes the case that in at least some languages specificational pseudocleft sentences must receive a ‘what-you- see-is-what-you-get’ syntactic analysis. More specifically, it is argued that the clefted constituent is the subject of predication (underlyingly base-generated in Spec, Pr), whereas the cleft clause acts as a predicate in the structure. Alongside connectivity effects characteristic of specificational pseudoclefts, we also discuss a range of anti-connectivity effects, which we show to receive a straightforward explanation under the proposed analysis. It follows that attested connectivity effects, in turn, require a semantic, rather than a syntactic account, along the lines of Jacobson (1994) and Sharvit (1999).
Reformulating place
(2013)
This report examines what can be accomplished in conversation by reformulating a reference to a place using the practices of repair. It is based on an analysis of a collection of place references situated in second pair parts of adjacency pairs taken from a wide range of field recordings of talk-in-interaction. Not surprisingly, place references are sometimes reformulated so as to indicate a misspeaking or in pursuit of recipient recognition. At other times, however, we show that place references can be reformulated to more adequately implement the action of a turn in prosecuting the course of action of which it is a part. In these cases repairing a place reference can target a source of trouble associated with implementing the action of a turn at talk, and thus reformulating place can serve as a practical resource for accomplishing a range of interactional tasks. We conclude with a more complex case in which two reformulations are deployed in responding to a so-called ‘double-barrelled’ initiating action.