Refine
Year of publication
- 2016 (59) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (59) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (59)
Keywords
- Deutsch (26)
- Gesprochene Sprache (8)
- Konversationsanalyse (6)
- Diskursanalyse (4)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (4)
- Linguistik (4)
- Rezension (4)
- Sprachvariante (4)
- Deutschland <DDR> (3)
- Diskursmarker (3)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (59) (remove)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (32)
- Peer-Review (24)
- Peer-review (3)
Publisher
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (17)
- de Gruyter (7)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (4)
- Frontiers Media (2)
- Geschichtswerkstatt Jena (2)
- Gesellschaft für Sprachtechnologie und Computerlinguistik (2)
- Verlag für Gesprächsforschung (2)
- Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften (1)
- Buro van die Wat (1)
- Buske (1)
In conversation, interlocutors rarely leave long gaps between turns, suggesting that next speakers begin to plan their turns while listening to the previous speaker. The present experiment used analyses of speech onset latencies and eye-movements in a task-oriented dialogue paradigm to investigate when speakers start planning their responses. German speakers heard a confederate describe sets of objects in utterances that either ended in a noun [e.g., Ich habe eine Tür und ein Fahrrad (“I have a door and a bicycle”)] or a verb form [e.g., Ich habe eine Tür und ein Fahrrad besorgt (“I have gotten a door and a bicycle”)], while the presence or absence of the final verb either was or was not predictable from the preceding sentence structure. In response, participants had to name any unnamed objects they could see in their own displays with utterances such as Ich habe ein Ei (“I have an egg”). The results show that speakers begin to plan their turns as soon as sufficient information is available to do so, irrespective of further incoming words.
Having found their way onto the computer screens, comics soon branched into webcomics. These kept a lot of the characteristics of print comic books, but gradually adapted new unexplored modes of representation. Three relatively new ‘enhancements’ to the medium of comics are presented in this article: webcomics enhanced through the use of the infinite canvas, as proposed by Scott McCloud, those enhanced with videos and/or sound, and lastly those enhanced with interactive and ludic elements. All of the mentioned push the medium of comics into new waters, and by doing so they add new layers of meaning and modify their structure based on the make-up of the implemented features. Infinite canvas manages to lift some limitations of print comics without changing the overall feel too drastically, while animated and voiced webcomics, as well as interactive or game comics, have a much higher inclination to transgress into domains of other media and transform themselves in order to accommodate and integrate these novel foreign features.
Der Beitrag stellt ein interdisziplinär durchgeführtes Lehr-Lern-Projekt als Best-Practice-Beispiel vor. Ziel des vom Lehrinnovationspool der Universität Passau geförderten Projekts war es, Studierende der Sprachwissenschaft und Geographie sowie Schülerinnen und Schüler der FOS/BOS an digitales, selbstständiges und forschendes Lernen im thematischen Kontext der „Sprachdynamik im deutsch-österreichischen Grenzraum“ heranzuführen. Der Aufsatz zeigt, wie Studierenden verschiedene Rollen als Lernende, Forschende und auch als Lehrende einnehmen, indem sie die Schülerinnen und Schüler als Lernpaten bei der Planung, Durchführung und Auswertung von gemeinsamen Forschungsvorhaben unterstützen. Exemplarisch wird ein Projekt für Schülerinnen und Schüler näher vorgestellt. Weiterhin reflektiert der Beitrag das Lehrhandeln der Dozierenden.
This paper attempts a critique of the notion of 'dialogue' in dialogue theory as espoused by Linell, Markova, and others building on Bakhtin’s writings. According to them, human communication, culture, language, and even cognition are dialogical in nature. This implies that these domains work by principles of other-orientation and interaction. In our paper, we reject accepting other-orientation as an a priori condition of every semiotic action. Instead, we claim that in order to be an empirically useful concept for the social sciences, it must be shown if and how observable action is other-oriented. This leads us to the following questions: how can we methodically account for other-orientation of semiotic action? Does other-orientation always imply interaction? Is every human expression oriented towards others? How does the other, as s/he is represented in semiotic action, relate to the properties which the other can be seen to exhibit as indexed by their observable behavior? We study these questions by asking how the orientation towards others becomes evident in different forms of communication. For this concern, we introduce ‘recipient design’, ‘positioning’ and ‘intersubjectivity’ as concepts which allow us to inquire how semiotic action both takes the other into account and, reflexively, shapes him/her as an addressee having certain properties. We then specifically focus on actions and situations in which other-orientation is particularly problematic, such as interactions with children, animals, machines, or communication with unknown recipients via mass media. These borderline cases are scrutinized in order to delineate both limits and constitutive properties of other-orientation. We show that there are varieties of meaningful actions which do not exhibit an orientation towards the other, which do not rest on (the possibility of) interaction with the other or which even disregard what their producer can be taken to know about the other. Available knowledge about the other may be ignored in order to reach interactional goals, e. g. in strategical interactions or for concerns of socialization. If semiotic action is otherorientated, its design depends on how the other is available to and matters for their producer. Other-orientation may build on shared biographical experiences with the other, knowledge about the other as an individual and close attention to their situated conduct. However, other-orientation may also rest on (stereo-)typification with respect to institutional roles or group membership. In any case, others as they are represented in semiotic action can never be just others-as-such, but only othersas-perceived-by-the-actor. We conclude that the strong emphasis which dialogue theories put on otherorientation obscures that other-orientation is neither universal in semiotic action, that it must be distinguished from an interactive relationship, and that the ways in which the other figures in semiotic actions is not homogeneous in any of its most general properties. Instead, there is a huge variation in the ways in which the other can be taken into account. Therefore close scrutiny of how the other precisely figures in a certain kind of semiotic action is needed in order to lend the concept of ‘other-orientation’ empirical substance and a definite sense.