Refine
Year of publication
- 2012 (272) (remove)
Document Type
- Part of a Book (120)
- Article (82)
- Conference Proceeding (35)
- Book (19)
- Part of Periodical (11)
- Doctoral Thesis (2)
- Other (2)
- Review (1)
Keywords
- Deutsch (118)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (28)
- Konversationsanalyse (19)
- Computerlinguistik (16)
- Englisch (11)
- Sprachgebrauch (11)
- Interaktion (10)
- Kontrastive Grammatik (10)
- Deutschland (9)
- Diskursanalyse (9)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (102)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (23)
- Postprint (15)
Reviewstate
Publisher
- de Gruyter (37)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (31)
- Narr (17)
- European Language Resources Association (8)
- Lang (8)
- De Gruyter (7)
- European Language Resources Association (ELRA) (5)
- Verl. für Gesprächsforschung (5)
- Akademie Verlag (4)
- Springer (4)
Der vorliegende Beitrag soll nun diese Diskussion um Sinn, Unsinn und Definition der Kategorie "Satz" als Grundeinheit der gesprochenen Sprache nicht fortsetzen. Ich will vielmehr kurz darlegen, in welcher Weise ein traditioneller Satzbegriff m.E. für die Analyse gesprochener Sprache relevant ist, und wie er sich zu gesprächsanalytischen Kategorien wie "Turn" und "Turnkonstruktionseinheit" verhält. Dies geschieht aber nur als Voraussetzung, um sodann die traditionelle Fragerichtung umzukehren: Anstatt zu fragen, warum in Gesprächen oft nicht-sentenzielle Strukturen vorkommen, gehe ich vom Befund aus, dass ein großer Teil von Turns aus nicht-sentenziellen Strukturen besteht und frage umgekehrt, wieso in Gesprächen überhaupt Sätze (im Sinne der eingangs gegebenen klassischen Definition) verwendet werden. Den Schlüssel zur Antwort suche ich dabei in der temporalen Struktur der Äußerungsproduktion und der Position, die Sätze in Bezug auf diese einnehmen.
This article focuses on the qualitative and quantitative analysis of patients’ responses to different types of doctors’ prediagnostic statements. Prediagnostic statements document the doctors’ process of understanding in the on going interactive event and simultaneously move it to an intersubjective level within the boundaries of communicability, for example, in the case of problematic symptom patterns. Four types of prediagnostic statements will be distinguished: the preliminary, unspecific diagnosis, the establishing of a (causal) link, information about the findings, and diagnoses of exclusion. On the basis of 29 doctor-patient-conversations, 150 patients’ responses to prediagnostic statements are analyzed in their contextual organization. Although many patients’ responses turn out to be affirmatively minimal, there are differences both in the elaborateness and regarding the reference type, depending on the statements’ degree of certainty, the patients’ self-diagnoses as well as on influences of the interaction type’s asymmetrical properties. Both patients and doctors work together on establishing interactive and epistemic territories and pay attention to the maintenance of their self-images and their interaction relationship.
Die jährlich im Vorfeld der DGfS-Tagung veranstaltete Arbeitstagung Linguistische Pragmatik fand 2012 vor besonderem Hintergrund statt: Es war zugleich die erste Jahrestagung des neu gegründeten, seit 01.01.2012 bestehenden Vereins Arbeitskreis Linguistische Pragmatik. Zu diesem Anlass haben die Organisatoren (Constanze Spieß, Elke Diedrichsen und Jörg Bücker) ein Rahmenthema gewählt, das pragmatisch orientierte Linguistinnen und Linguisten der verschiedensten Forschungsrichtungen zusammenbringt: Sprachkritik und Sprachwandel.
In this paper, we address issues of inconsistencies of dictionary information and how different corpus methods and computer tools can assist in providing systematic cross-referencing. The question is raised how hyperlinking in an electronic reference work can be approached systematically in order to warrant consistent symmetrical links between synonyms or antonyms. Firstly, it is argued that working with a comprehensive corpus does not account for consistent cross-referencing. It is shown that a top-down corpus-driven linguistic analysis also does not guarantee the lexicographic documentation of binary lexico-semantic relations covered by corpus data, as proposed by Paradis/Willners (2006a, b). Secondly, with the help of dictionary examples taken from elexiko (an online dictionary of contemporary German) we demonstrate how a combination of both corpus-driven and corpus-based procedures enables lexicographers to systematically exploit corpus material in more depth than by using only one of these methods. It is also discussed where and why lexicographers are still prone to inconsistencies in the editing processes, irrespective of their underlying corpus methodologies. Finally, we introduce a cross-reference management tool that has been developed for elexiko and we explain its technological prerequisites and implications. This software supports lexicographers in detecting existing and missing references from and to a specific headword. It also offers options to automatically and comfortably correct discrepancies. Overall, we suggest a method that includes linguistic competence, complementary corpus approaches and additional software in order to ensure that links or references between synonymic and antonymic pairings are given in both directions.