Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (22)
- Article (9)
- Book (7)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (38) (remove)
Keywords
- Konversationsanalyse (12)
- Interaktion (11)
- Deutsch (9)
- German (6)
- Pragmatik (6)
- Grammatik (5)
- Syntax (5)
- Kontrastive Linguistik (4)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (4)
- O.K. (4)
Publicationstate
- Postprint (17)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (14)
- Veröffentlichungsversion (7)
- Ahead of Print (3)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (15)
- Peer-Review (11)
- Verlags-Lektorat (1)
Publisher
- Benjamins (38) (remove)
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.
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.
Recent years have seen a growing interest in grammatical variation, a core explanandum of grammatical theory. The present volume explores questions that are fundamental to this line of research: First, the question of whether variation can always and completely be explained by intra- or extra-linguistic predictors, or whether there is a certain amount of unpredictable – or ‘free’ – grammatical variation. Second, the question of what implications the (in-)existence of free variation would hold for our theoretical models and the empirical study of grammar. The volume provides the first dedicated book-length treatment of this long-standing topic. Following an introductory chapter by the editors, it contains ten case studies on potentially free variation in morphology and syntax drawn from Germanic, Romance, Uralic and Mayan.
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.
The article addresses Solution-Oriented Questions (SOQs) as an interactional practice for relationship management in psychodiagnostic interviews. Therapeutic alliance results from the concordance of alignment, as willingness to cooperate regarding common goals, and of affiliation, as relationship based upon trust. SOQs particularly allow for both: They are situated at the end of a troublesome topic area, which is linked to low agency on the patient’s side, and they reveal understanding of and interest in the patient. Following the paradigm of Conversation Analysis and German Gesprächsanalyse this paper analyzes the design and functions of SOQs as a means for securing and enhancing the relationship in the process of therapy. Our data comprise 15 videotaped first interviews following the manual of the Operationalized Psychodynamic Diagnostics. The analyses refer to all SOQs found but will be illustrated by means of a single conversation.
This edited volume offers up-to-date research on the interactive building and managing of relationships in organized helping. Its contributions address this core of helping in psychotherapy, coaching, doctor-patient interaction, and digital helping interaction and document and analyze essential communicative practices of relationship management. A summarizing contribution identifies common dimensions of relationship management across the different helping contexts and thereby provides a framework for understanding and researching how interactive practices and helping relationships are interconnected. The volume brings together researchers and practitioners and merges academic approaches to studying relationships with practical knowledge about verbal helping in these settings. The book is intended for scholars in the field of organized helping as well as for students and researchers of communication and discourse / conversation analysis in professional and organized contexts. It is also addressed to practitioners interested in learning more about the micro- and meso-management of their working relationships.
This paper investigates the long-term diachronic development of the perfect and preterite tenses in German and provides a novel analysis by supplementing Reichenbach’s (1947) classical theory of tense by the notion of underspecification. Based on a newly compiled parallel corpus spanning the entire documented history of German, we show that the development in question is cyclic: It starts out with only one tense form (preterite) compatible with both current relevance and narrative past readings in (early) Old High German and, via three intermediate stages, arrives at only one tense form again (perfect) compatible with the same readings in modern Upper German dialects. We propose that in order to capture all attested stages we must allow tenses to be unspecified for R (reference time), with R merely being inferred pragmatically. We then propose that the transitions between the different stages can be explained by the interplay between semantics and pragmatics.
Schegloff (1996) has argued that grammars are “positionally-sensitive”, implying that the situated use and understanding of linguistic formats depends on their sequential position. Analyzing the German format Kannst du X? (corresponding to English Can you X?) based on 82 instances from a large corpus of talk-in-interaction (FOLK), this paper shows how different action-ascriptions to turns using the same format depend on various orders of context. We show that not only sequential position, but also epistemic status, interactional histories, multimodal conduct, and linguistic devices co-occurring in the same turn are decisive for the action implemented by the format. The range of actions performed with Kannst du X? and their close interpretive interrelationship suggest that they should not be viewed as a fixed inventory of context-dependent interpretations of the format. Rather, the format provides for a root-interpretation that can be adapted to local contextual contingencies, yielding situated action-ascriptions that depend on constraints created by contexts of use.