Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (2962) (remove)
Language
Keywords
- Deutsch (1453)
- Rezension (198)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (189)
- Konversationsanalyse (178)
- Sprachgebrauch (130)
- Wörterbuch (130)
- Interaktion (125)
- Gesprochene Sprache (98)
- Rechtschreibung (95)
- Kommunikation (93)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (1167)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (428)
- Postprint (166)
- Ahead of Print (7)
- Preprint (3)
- Hybrides Open Access (2)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (1)
- Erstveröffentlichung (1)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (916)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (733)
- Peer-review (34)
- Verlags-Lektorat (14)
- Peer-Revied (12)
- Review-Status-unbekannt (3)
- Peer-reviewed (2)
- (Verlag)-Lektorat (1)
- Peer review (1)
- Qualifikationsarbeit (Dissertation, Habilitationsschrift) (1)
Publisher
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (456)
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (182)
- de Gruyter (159)
- Erich Schmidt (78)
- De Gruyter (63)
- Schmidt (63)
- Verlag für Gesprächsforschung (52)
- Akademie-Verlag (36)
- Elsevier (33)
- Erich Schmidt Verlag (33)
This study aims to establish what lexical factors make it more likely for dictionary users to consult specific articles in a dictionary using the English Wiktionary log files, which include records of user visits over the course of 6 years. Recent findings suggest that lexical frequency is a significant factor predicting look-up behavior, with the more frequent words being more likely to be consulted. Three further lexical factors are brought into focus: (1) age of acquisition; (2) lexical prevalence; and (3) degree of polysemy operationalized as the number of dictionary senses. Age of acquisition and lexical prevalence data were obtained from recent published studies and linked to the list of visited Wiktionary lemmas, whereas polysemy status was derived from Wiktionary entries themselves. Regression modeling confirms the significance of corpus frequency in explaining user interest in looking up words in the dictionary. However, the remaining three factors also make a contribution whose nature is discussed and interpreted. Knowing what makes dictionary users look up words is both theoretically interesting and practically useful to lexicographers, telling them which lexical items should be prioritized in lexicographic work.
In social interaction, different kinds of word-meaning can become problematic for participants. This study analyzes two meta-semantic practices, definitions and specifications, which are used in response to clarification requests in German implemented by the format Was heißt X (‘What does X mean?’). In the data studied, definitions are used to convey generalizable lexical meanings of mostly technical terms. These terms are either unknown to requesters, or, in pedagogical contexts, requesters ask in order to check the addressee’s knowledge. Specifications, in contrast, clarify aspects of local speaker meanings of ordinary expressions (e.g., reference, participants in an event, standards applied to scalar expressions). Both definitions and specifications are recipient-designed with respect to the (presumed) knowledge of the addressee and tailored to the topical and practical relevancies of the current interaction. Both practices attest to the flexibility and situatedness of speakers’ semantic understandings and to the systematicity of using meta-semantic practices differentially for different kinds of semantic problems. Data are come from mundane and institutional interaction in German from the public corpus FOLK.
studierfähig – studierbar. Die semantischen Rollen von Aktiv und Passiv bei deverbativen Adjektiven
(2024)
Mehrsprachigkeit gehört zu den Themen, zu denen wohl viele Menschen eine Meinung haben. Der Wert traditioneller schulischer Fremdsprachen wird dabei häufig hervorgehoben, während Wert und Erhalt von Herkunftssprachen Zugewanderter hinterfragt werden. Einstellungen gegenüber Sprachen sind demnach abhängig vom Prestige der jeweiligen Sprachen und ihrer Sprecher:innen. Dies geschieht vor dem Hintergrund, dass Deutschland überwiegend als ein einsprachiges Land mit einer einsprachigen Gesellschaft angesehen wird. Ähnliches gilt im Übrigen auch für Österreich. So schreibt beispielsweise der Sprachwissenschaftler Heiko Marten, „dass in der Wahrnehmung großer Teile der österreichischen Gesellschaft Monolingualismus nach wie vor die Norm ist“ (Marten 2016, S. 165). Diese Annahme gilt auch für den schulischen Kontext, wie die Erziehungswissenschaftlerin Ingrid Gogolin mit dem Begriff des „monolingualen Habitus“ herausgearbeitet hat (vgl. Gogolin 2008). Gründe für einen monolingualen Habitus könnten darin liegen, dass „von Teilen der Allgemeinheit oft übersehen [wird], dass in Deutschland auch zahlreiche weitere Sprachen gesprochen werden“ (Marten 2016, S. 148). Doch was passiert nun, wenn eine Sprache einen Statuswechsel von Landessprache zu Herkunftssprache durchläuft? Was lässt sich beobachten, wenn beispielsweise das Deutsche zu einer Minderheitensprache wird?
This contribution explores the relationship between the English CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference for Languages) vocabulary levels and user interest in English Wiktionary entries. User interest was operationalized through the number of views of these entries in Wikimedia server logs covering a period of four years (2019–2022). Our findings reveal a significant relationship between CEFR levels and user interest: entries classified at lower CEFR levels tend to attract more views, which suggests a greater user interest in more basic vocabulary. A multiple regression model controlling for other known or potential factors affecting interest: corpus frequency, polysemy, word prevalence, and age of acquisition confirmed that lower CEFR levels attract significantly more views even after taking into account the other predictors. These findings highlight the importance of CEFR levels in predicting which words users are likely to look up, with implications for lexicography and the development of language learning materials.
Rejecting the validity of inferred attributions of incompetence in German talk-in-interaction
(2024)
This paper deals with pragmatic inference from the perspective of Conversation Analysis. In particular, we examine a specific variety of inferences - the attribution of incompetence which Self constructs on the basis of Other's prior action, hearable as positioning Self as incompetent (e.g., instructions, offers of assistance, advice); this attribution of incompetence concerns Self's execution of some practical task. This inference is indexed in Self's response, which highlights Self's expertise, or competence concerning the task at hand. We focus on two recurrent types of such responses in our data: (i) accounting for competence through formulations of prior experience with carrying out a practical action and (ii) explicit claims of competence for accomplishing this action. We analyze the interactional environments in which these responses occur, the ways in which the two practices index Self's understanding of being positioned as incompetent and the interactional work they do. Finally, we discuss how through rejecting and inferred attribution of incompetence, Self implicitly seeks to restore their face and defend their autonomy as an agent, yet, without entering an explicit identity-negotiation. Findings rest on the analysis of 20 cases found in video-recordings of naturally occurring talk-in-interaction in German from the corpus FOLK.
Drawing upon the transformative power of questions, the paper investigates questioning sequences from authentic coaching data to examine the systematic use of a particular succession of formulation and question and its impact on inviting self-reflection processes in the client and eliciting change. The object of investigation in this paper are therefore questioning sequences in which a coach asks a question immediately after a rephrasing or relocating action, prompting the client to respond in an explicit or implicit way. The coach hereby shifts the focus to a hypothetical scenario, prompting the client to change her perspective on the matter and reflect on her own statements, ideas and attitudes from an outside perspective. The paper aims to contribute to closing the research gap of the change potential of reflection-stimulating action techniques used by coaches, by investigating one of many ways of how questions can be powerful tools to invite a change of perspective for the client. The study focuses on one coaching process consisting of three sessions between a female coach and a female client, utilizing a single case study approach. The data collection was part of the interdisciplinary project “Questioning Sequences in Coaching”, comprising 14 authentic coaching processes. The analysis follows Peräkylä’s Transformative Sequences model, examining the first position including the formulation and the subsequent question, the client’s response, and the coach’s reaction to the response. On a practical level, the main purpose of this paper is not to contribute to the many ways practical literature recommends coaches how to do their work and how to ask questions, but rather to show in what ways the elicitation of self-reflection processes in clients has been achieved by other coaches in authentic coaching sessions.
Fragen, meist mit systemisch-lösungsorientiertem Hintergrund, gelten im Coaching als Königsweg für den Erfolg. Entsprechend ist eine große Anzahl an Publikationen entstanden, die diese zentrale Intervention in den Blick nehmen. In dieser Praxisliteratur werden Fragen dabei oftmals rezeptartig nach Typus, Funktion und möglichen Anwendungskontexten wie etwa Phasen geordnet sowie anhand dekontextualisierter Beispiele beschrieben. Fragen, die in Praxis- und Lehrbuchsammlungen aufgenommen wurden, sind aus der Theorie hergeleitet und in der Praxis erprobt. Allerdings finden sich in dieser Literatur auch empirisch nicht haltbare Aussagen wie etwa die negative Bewertung geschlossener Fragen. Außerdem stellt ihre dekontextualisierte Darstellungsform insbesondere für unerfahrene Coaches eine Herausforderung bei der Umsetzung ins konkrete Coaching-Handeln dar: Fragen sind immer eingebettet in einen Kontext und müssen auf die Anwesenden, die jeweilige kommunikative Interaktion mit ihnen sowie die lokale sequenzielle Struktur des Gesprächs übersetzt werden. Die wissenschaftliche Überprüfung, wie diese Fragensammlungen im Coaching (erfolgreich) ein- und umgesetzt werden, ist dabei insgesamt noch ganz am Anfang. Der vorliegende Beitrag berichtet von einem aktuellen interdisziplinären Forschungsprojekt, das Fragen in den empirischen Blick nimmt und dabei einen Übergang von Eminenz zur Evidenz ermöglicht. Der Beitrag liefert auch Ideen und Anregungen für Coaches, diese Übersetzungsarbeit zu leisten.
Meaning in interaction
(2024)
This editorial to the Special Issue on “Meaning in Interaction” introduces to the approach of Interactional Semantics, which has been developed over the last years within the framework of Interactional Linguistics. It discusses how “meaning” is understood and approached in this framework and lays out that Interactional Semantics is interested in how participants clarify and negotiate the meanings of the expressions that they are using in social interaction. Commonalities and differences of this approach with other approaches to meaning are flagged, and the intellectual origins and precursors of Interactional Semantics are introduced. The contributions to the Special Issue are located in the larger field of research.
We investigate the optional omission of the infinitival marker in a Swedish future tense construction. During the last two decades the frequency of omission has been rapidly increasing, and this process has received considerable attention in the literature. We test whether the knowledge which has been accumulated can yield accurate predictions of language variation and change. We extracted all occurrences of the construction from a very large collection of corpora. The dataset was automatically annotated with language-internal predictors which have previously been shown or hypothesized to affect the variation. We trained several models in order to make two kinds of predictions: whether the marker will be omitted in a specific utterance and how large the proportion of omissions will be for a given time period. For most of the approaches we tried, we were not able to achieve a better-than-baseline performance. The only exception was predicting the proportion of omissions using autoregressive integrated moving average models for one-step-ahead forecast, and in this case time was the only predictor that mattered. Our data suggest that most of the language-internal predictors do have some effect on the variation, but the effect is not strong enough to yield reliable predictions.
Rules of behavior are fundamental to human sociality. Whether on the road, at the dinner table, or during a game, people monitor one another’s behavior for conformity to rules and may take action to rectify violations. In this study, we examine two ways in which rules are enforced during games: instructions and reminders. Building on prior research, we identify instructions as actions produced to rectify violations based on another’s lack of knowledge of the relevant rule; knowledge that the instruction is designed to impart. In contrast to this, the actions we refer to as reminders are designed to enforce rules presupposing the transgressor’s competence and treating the violation as the result of forgetfulness or oversight. We show that instructing and reminding actions differ in turn design, sequential development, the epistemic stances taken by transgressors and enforcers, and in how the action affects the progressivity of the interaction. Data are in German and Italian from the Parallel European Corpus of Informal Interaction (PECII).
In workplace settings, skilled participants cooperate on the basis of shared routines in smooth and often implicit ways. Our study shows how interactional histories provide the basis for routine coordination. We draw on theater rehearsals as a perspicuous setting for tracking interactional histories. In theater rehearsals, the process of building performing routines is in focus. Our study builds on collections of consecutive performances of the same instructional task coming from a corpus of video-recordings of 30 h of theater rehearsals of professional actors in German. Over time, instructions and their implementations are routinely coordinated by virtue of accumulated shared interactional experience: Instructions become shorter, the timing of responses becomes increasingly compacted and long negotiations are reduced to a two-part sequence of instruction and implementation. Overall, a routine of how to perform the scene emerges. Over interactional histories, patterns of projection of next actions emanating from instructions become reliable and can be used by respondents as sources for anticipating and performing relevant next actions. The study contributes to our understanding of how shared knowledge and routines accumulate over shared interactional experiences in publicly performed and reciprocally perceived ways and how this impinges on the efficiency of joint action.
The first International Summer Institute for Interactional Linguistics (henceforth ISIIL) took place from July 18 to 23 at the Leibniz-Institute for the German Language (IDS) in Mannheim, Germany. The local organizers, Arnulf Deppermann and Alexandra Gubina, collaborated with five other facilitators in preparing this Summer Institute: Emma Betz (University of Waterloo), Elwys De Stefani (University of Heidelberg & KU Leuven), Barbara A. Fox (University of Colorado), Chase Raymond (University of Colorado) and Jörg Zinken (Leibniz-Institute for the German Language, Mannheim). The goal of ISIIL was to bring together both early-career researchers and established scholars from the fields of Conversation Analysis (CA) and Interactional Linguistics (IL) in order to foster the development of new skills for doing research using IL. The participants and organizers had diverse backgrounds, both in terms of their research interests (e.g., classroom interaction, second language acquisition, cross-linguistic comparison, particles, grammar-in-interaction) and institutional affiliations, with many participants from institutions from around Europe (i.e., Belgium, Denmark, England, France, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland) as well as overseas (Canada, U.S.A., South Africa). Because of the compact nature of the Institute, the advanced topics covered, as well as the original research projects the participants would engage in, participation was limited to 24 participants, selected on the basis of their prior training and experience in CA/IL.