Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Keywords
- Sprecherwechsel (2) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Ahead of Print (2) (remove)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (2)
This article makes an empirical and a methodological contribution to the comparative study of action. The empirical contribution is a comparative study of three distinct types of action regularly accomplished with the turn format du meinst x (“you mean/think x”) in German: candidate understandings, formulations of the other’s mind, and requests for a judgment. These empirical materials are the basis for a methodological exploration of different levels of researcher abstraction in the comparative study of action. Two levels are examined: the (coarser) level of conditionally relevant responses (what a response speaker must do to align with the action of the prior turn) and the (finer) level of “full alignment” (what a response speaker can do to align with the action of a prior turn). Both levels of abstraction provide empirically viable and analytically interesting descriptive concepts for the comparative study of action. Data are in German.
Telephone-based remote interpreting has come into widespread use in multilingual encounters, all the more so in times of refugee crises and the large influx of asylum-seekers into Europe. Nevertheless, the linguistic practices in this mode of communication have not yet been examined comprehensively. This article therefore investigates selected aspects of turn-taking and clarification sequences during semi-authentic telephone-interpreted counselling sessions for refugees (Arabic–German). A quantitative analysis reveals that limited audibility makes it more difficult for interpreters to claim their turn successfully; in most cases, however, turn-taking occurs smoothly. The trouble sources that trigger queries are mainly content-related and interpreters vary greatly in the ways they deal with such difficulties. Contrary to what one might expect, the study shows that coordination fails only rarely during telephone-based remote interpreting.