Refine
Year of publication
- 2019 (15) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (7)
- Part of a Book (3)
- Review (2)
- Other (1)
- Part of Periodical (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Language
- German (8)
- English (5)
- Multiple languages (1)
- Ukrainian (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (15)
Keywords
- Interaktion (15) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (7)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (6)
- Postprint (2)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (9)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (4)
Publisher
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (2)
- Verlag für Gesprächsforschung (2)
- de Gruyter (2)
- Elsevier (1)
- Frank & Timme (1)
- Gesellschaft für deutsche Sprache e.V. (1)
- Klaipėdos Universitetas (1)
- University of Oulu (1)
- University of Szeged, Department of Finno-Ugric Studies / Universität Hamburg, Zentrum für Sprachkorpora (1)
- Université de Lille (1)
Linguistic relativists have traditionally asked 'how language influences thought', but conversation analysts and anthropological linguists have moved the focus from thought to social action. We argue that 'social action' should in this context not become simply a new dependent variable, because the formulation 'does language influence action' suggests that social action would already be meaningfully constituted prior to its local (verbal and multi-modal) accomplishment. We draw on work by the gestalt psychologist Karl Duncker to show that close attention to action-in-a-situation helps us ground empirical work on cross-cultural diversity in an appreciation of the invariances that make culture-specific elements of practice meaningful.
This article examines a recurrent format that speakers use for defining ordinary expressions or technical terms. Drawing on data from four different languages - Flemish, French, German, and Italian - it focuses on definitions in which a definiendum is first followed by a negative definitional component (‘definiendum is not X’), and then by a positive definitional component (‘definiendum is Y’). The analysis shows that by employing this format, speakers display sensitivity towards a potential meaning of the definiendum that recipients could have taken to be valid. By negating this meaning, speakers discard this possible, yet unintended understanding. The format serves three distinct interactional purposes: (a) it is used for argumentation, e.g. in discussions and political debates, (b) it works as a resource for imparting knowledge, e.g. in expert talk and instructions, and (c) it is employed, in ordinary conversation, for securing the addressee's correct understanding of a possibly problematic expression. The findings contribute to our understanding of how epistemic claims and displays relate to the turn-constructional and sequential organization of talk. They also show that the much quoted ‘problem of meaning’ is, first and foremost, a participant's problem.
Der Beitrag stellt die wissenschaftlichen und methodologischen Herausforderungen für die Erstellung einer innovativen, korpusbasierten lexikografischen Ressource zur Lexik des gesprochenen Deutsch in der Interaktion vor und zeigt neue Wege für lexikografische Arbeiten auf. Neben allgemeinen Projektinformationen zu den Ausgangspunkten, der Datengrundlage, den Methoden, Zielen und dem konkreten Gegenstandsbereich werden ausgewählte Ergebnisse von zwei projektbezogenen empirischen Studien zu Erwartungshaltungen an eine lexikografische Ressource des gesprochenen Deutsch präsentiert. Für korpusbasierte quantitative Informationen werden die Möglichkeiten eines Tools, welches im Rahmen des Projekts entwickelt wurde, aufgezeigt. Außerdem wird ein Einblick in die konzeptionellen und methodologischen Überlegungen zur Mikrostruktur der geplanten Ressource gegeben.
Der Beitrag behandelt das Zusammenspiel von Text und Interaktion im Internet. Abschnitt 2 erläutert am Beispiel der Wikipedia, wie sich die textorientierte Arbeit an den Artikeln und das interaktionsorientierte Diskutieren funktional ergänzen. Abschnitt 3 untersucht Links als digitale Kohärenzbildungshilfen und zeigt an einem Fallbeispiel, wie diese in den schriftlichen Diskussionen dafür genutzt werden, relevante Informationen im „virtuellen“ Aufmerksamkeitsbereich präsent und für phorische und deiktische Bezugnahmen zugänglich zu machen. Abschnitt 4 diskutiert Ergebnisse aus zwei Vergleichsstudien zum Gebrauch der Konnektoren 'weil' sowie 'sprich' und 'd.h.' in Wikipedia-Artikeln und Diskussionen, die auf der Basis von Wikipedia-Korpora in der DeReKo-Sammlung des IDS durchgefuhrt wurden.
Der vorliegende Beitrag setzt sich mit dem computergestützten Transkriptionsverfahren arabisch-deutscher Gesprächsdaten für interaktionsbezogene Untersuchungen auseinander. Zunächst werden wesentliche methodische Herausforderungen der gesprächsanalytischen Arbeit adressiert: Hinsichtlich der derzeitigen Korpustechnologie ermöglicht die Verwendung von arabischen Schriftzeichen in einem mehrsprachigen, bidirektionalen Transkript keine analysegerechte Rekonstruktion von Reziprozität, Linearität und Simultaneität sprachlichen Handelns. Zudem ist die Verschriftung von arabischen Gesprächsdaten aufgrund der unzureichenden (gesprächsanalytischen) Beschäftigung mit den standardfernen Varietäten und gesprochensprachlichen Phänomenen erschwert. Daher widmet sich der zweite Teil des Beitrags den bisher erarbeiteten und erprobten Lösungsansätzen ̶ einem stringenten, gesprächsanalytisch fundierten Transkriptionssystem für gesprochenes Arabisch.
The paper deals with the process of computer-aided transcription regarding Arabic-German data material for interaction-based studies. First of all, it sheds light upon some major methodological challenges posed by the conversation-analytic approaches: due to current corpus technology, the reciprocity, linearity, and simultaneity of linguistic activities cannot be reconstructed in an analytically proper way when using the Arabic characters in multilingual and bidirectional transcripts. The difficulty of transcribing Arabic encounters is also compounded by the fact that Spoken Arabic as well as its varieties and phenomena have not been standardised enough (for conversation-analytic purposes). Therefore, the second part of this paper is dedicated to preliminary, self-developed solutions, namely a systematic method for transcribing Spoken Arabic.
You might not know what a “smombie” is, but you have certainly already met one today. In public streets and places, the so-called “smartphone zombies” regularly cross our ways. They walk slowly, in peculiar ways, their eyes and fingers focused on their smartphone displays. While some cities have already introduced specific walking lanes or ground-level traffic signs for smartphone users “on the go”, it is not only road safety that is at stake. Frequently hunching over our phones causes cervical pain, we are addicted to likes on social media, and the fear of missing out prevents us from switching off our phones. If asked if mobile device use is possibly harmful to our bodies and minds, most people would spontaneously agree. Our social skills seem to constantly diminish since smartphones have become an everyday tool: we stick to them like glue while waiting for the bus, while walking, while eating, even while being with others. Will we turn into social zombies in the end?
Special Issue: Mobile Medienpraktiken im Spannungsfeld von Öffentlichkeit, Privatheit und Anonymität
(2019)
In German oral discourse, previous research has shown that okay can be used both as a response token (e.g., for agreeing with the previous turn or for claiming a certain degree of understanding) and as a discourse marker (e.g., for closing conversational topics or sequences and/or indicating transitions). This contribution focuses on the use of okay as a response token and how it is connected with the speakers’ interactional state of knowledge (their understanding, their assumptions etc.). The analysis is based on video recorded everyday conversations in German and a sequential, micro-analytic approach (multimodal conversation analysis). The main function of conversational okay in the selected data set is related to indicating the acceptance of prior information. By okay, speakers however claim acceptance of a piece of information that they can’t verify or check. The analysis contrasts different sequences containing okay only with sequences in which change-of-state tokens such as ah and achso co-occur with okay. This illustrates that okay itself does not index prior information as new, and that it is not used for agreeing with or for confirming prior information. Instead it enables the speaker to adopt a kind of neutral, “non-agreeing” position towards a given piece of information.
The article deals with communicative failures of journalists in “YouTube” celebrity video interviews in the Ukrainian and German linguacultures from the point of view of social interaction and the theory of speech genres at all structural levels of the communicative genre construction, establishing common and distinctive features in both linguacultures. The analysis made it possible to conclude that behind a language (speech) failure there is a violation caused by a journalist, a respondent, or an external noise.