Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (5)
- Part of a Book (5)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (11)
Keywords
- Intonation <Linguistik> (11) (remove)
Publicationstate
Reviewstate
In diesem Beitrag stellen wir die Ergebnisse einer Studie über die Intonation von Frageaktivitäten in deutschen Alltagsgesprächen vor. Unsere Untersuchung erforscht, inwieweit die Intonation zur Kontextualisierung von konversationellen Fragen beiträgt. In der Analyse stützen wir uns auf das autosegmental-metrische Modell von Peters und das taxonomische Modell der interaktionalen Prosodieforschung von Selting. Diese Modelle beschreiben jeweils phonologische oder pragmatische Aspekte der Frageintonation, zwei Dimensionen, die für sich genommen, keine vollständige Beschreibung liefern können. Auf der Grundlage authentischer Gesprächsdaten aus dem Korpus FOLK argumentieren wir für die Kompatibilität des autosegmental-metrischen Modells von Peters und des taxonomischen Modells der Frageintonation von Selting. Die Merkmale aus beiden Modellen lassen sich zu Bündeln kombinieren, die es erlauben, die Intonation von Fragen zu erfassen.
In conversation, turn-taking is usually fluid, with next speakers taking their turn right after the end of the previous turn. Most, but not all, previous studies show that next speakers start to plan their turn early, if possible already during the incoming turn. The present study makes use of the list-completion paradigm (Barthel et al., 2016), analyzing speech onset latencies and eye-movements of participants in a task-oriented dialogue with a confederate. The measures are used to disentangle the contributions to the timing of turn-taking of early planning of content on the one hand and initiation of articulation as a reaction to the upcoming turn-end on the other hand. Participants named objects visible on their computer screen in response to utterances that did, or did not, contain lexical and prosodic cues to the end of the incoming turn. In the presence of an early lexical cue, participants showed earlier gaze shifts toward the target objects and responded faster than in its absence, whereas the presence of a late intonational cue only led to faster response times and did not affect the timing of participants' eye movements. The results show that with a combination of eye-movement and turn-transition time measures it is possible to tease apart the effects of early planning and response initiation on turn timing. They are consistent with models of turn-taking that assume that next speakers (a) start planning their response as soon as the incoming turn's message can be understood and (b) monitor the incoming turn for cues to turn-completion so as to initiate their response when turn-transition becomes relevant.
When humans have a conversation with one-another, they generally take turns speaking one after the other without overlapping each others talk or leaving silence between turns for long stretches of time. Previous research has shown that conversation is a structured practice following rules that help interlocutors to manage the flow of conversation interactively. While at the beginning of a conversation it remains open who will speak when about what and for how long, interlocutors regulate the flow of conversation as it unfolds. One basic set of rules that interlocutors operate with governs the allocation of speaking turns, with the central rule stating that whoever starts speaking first at a point in time when speaker change becomes relevant has the rights and obligations to produce the next turn. The organization of turn allocation, therefore, is one reason for conversational turn taking to be so remarkably fast, with the beginnings of turns most often being quite accurately aligned with the ends of the previous turns. Observations of this outstanding speed of turn taking gave rise to a number of questions concerning language processing in conversational situations. The studies presented in this thesis investigate some of these questions from the perspective of the current listener preparing to be the next speaker who will respond to the current turn.
The study presented in Chapter 2 investigates when next speakers begin to plan their own turn with respect to two points in time, (i) the moment when the incoming turn’s message becomes clear enough to make response planning possible and (ii) the moment when the incoming turn terminates. Results of previous studies were inconclusive about the timing of language planning in conversation, with evidence in favour of both late and early response planning. Furthermore, previous studies presented both evidence as well as counter evidence indicating that response planning depends or does not depend on an accurate prediction of the timing of the incoming turn’s end. The study presented here makes use of a novel experimental paradigm which includes a dialogic task that participants need to fulfil in response to critical utterances by a confederate. These critical utterances were structured, on the one hand, so that their message became clear either only at the end of the turn or before the end of the turn, and, on the other hand, so that it was either predictable or not predictable when exactly the turn would end. Participant’s eye-movements as well as their response latencies indicated that they always planned their next turn as early as possible, irrespective of the predictability of the incoming turn’s end. The presented results provide evidence in favour of models of turn taking that predict speech planning to happen in overlap with the incoming turn.
Having established that next speakers begin to plan their turn in overlap, the study presented in Chapter 3 goes more into detail investigating to which depth language planning progresses while the incoming turn is still unfolding. To this end, a number of psycholinguistic paradigms were combined. In the study’s main experiment, participants had to fulfil a switch-task in which they switched from picture naming in response to an auditorily presented question to making a lexical decision. By manipulating the relatedness of the word for lexical decision with the picture that was prepared to be named before the task-switch it was possible to draw inferences on which processing stages were entered during the speech production process in overlap with the incoming turn. Participants’ behavioural responses in the lexical decision task revealed that they entered the stage of phonological encoding while the incoming turn was still unfolding, showing that planning in overlap is not limited to conceptual preparation but includes all sub-processes of formulation.
Given that speech production regularly enters the stages of formulation in overlap with the incoming turn, as shown in Chapters 2 and 3, the question arises whether planning the next turn in overlap is cognitively more demanding than during the gap between turns. This question is approached in the study presented in Chapter 4 by measuring pupillometric responses of participants in a dialogic task. An increase in pupil diameter during a cognitive task is indicative of increased processing load, and pupillometric responses to planning in overlap with the incoming turn were found to be greater than responses to planning in the gap between turns. These results show that planning in overlap is more demanding than planning during the gap, even though it is highly practiced by speakers.
After Chapters 2 to 4 investigated the timing and mechanisms of speech planning in conversation, Chapter 5 turns towards the timing of articulation of a planned turn, asking the question what sources of information next speakers use to time the articulation of a planned utterance to start closely after the incoming turn comes to an end. In this Chapter’s study, participants taking turns with a confederate responded to utterances containing or not containing different cues to the location of the incoming turn’s end. Participants made use of lexical and turn-final intonational cues, but not of turn-initial intonational cues, responding faster when the relevant cues were present than when they were not present. These results show that the timing of turn initiation in next speakers depends on the recognition of the incoming turn’s point of completion and not merely on the progress in planning the next turn.
All evidence presented in Chapters 2 to 5 is summed up and bundled together in a cognitive model of turn taking, which is being presented in Chapter 6. This model assumes, centrally, that the planning of a turn and the timing of its articulation are separate cognitive processes that run in parallel in any next speaker during conversation. Planning generally starts as early as possible, often in overlap with the incoming turn, while the timing of articulation depends on the next speaker’s level of certainty that speaker change has become relevant at a particular moment, with a number of cues to the end of the incoming turn leading to an increase of certainty. Next turns are assumed to often be planned down to fully formulated utterance plans including their phonological form as early as possible on the basis of anticipations of the incoming turn’s message, which are created with the help of the general and situational knowledge about the world, the current speaker and her intentions, as well as the input that has been received so far. The level of certainty that speaker change becomes relevant rises or decreases as lexico-syntactic, prosodic, and pragmatic projections about the development of the current turn are fulfilled or not fulfilled. As the incoming turn progresses towards its end as was projected by the current listener, he becomes certain that speaker change becomes relevant and will initiate articulation of the prepared next turn. Viewing these two processes, planning a next turn and timing of its articulation, as separate makes it possible to explain the observable fast timing of turn taking while still modelling the allocation of turns as interactionally managed by interlocutors — a considerable advantage of the presented model compared to more traditional perspectives on turn taking and conversation.
The term “pivot” usually refers to two overlapping syntactic units such that the completion of the first unit simultaneously launches the second. In addition, pivots are generally said to be characterized by the smooth prosodic integration of their syntactic parts. This prosodic integration is typically achieved by prosodic-phonetic matching of the pivot components. As research on such turns in a range of languages has illustrated, speakers routinely deploy pivots so as to be able to continue past a point of possible turn completion, in the service of implementing some additional or revised action. This article seeks to build on, and complement, earlier research by exploring two issues in more detail as follows: (1) what exactly do pivotal turn extensions accomplish on the action dimension, and (2) what role does prosodic-phonetic packaging play in this? We will show that pivot constructions not only exhibit various degrees of prosodic-phonetic (non-)integration, i.e., differently strong cesuras, but that they can be ordered on a continuum, and that this cline maps onto the relationship of the actions accomplished by the components of the pivot construction. While tighter prosodic-phonetic integration, i.e., weak(er) cesuring, co-occurs with post-pivot actions whose relationship to that of the pre-pivot tends to be rather retrospective in character, looser prosodic-phonetic integration, i.e., strong(er) cesuring, is associated with a more prospective orientation of the post-pivot’s action. These observations also raise more general questions with regard to the analysis of action.
In diesem Aufsatz geht es um die informationsstrukturellen Kategorien Fokus und kontrastives Topik, die durch charakteristische Intonationsmuster signalisiert werden. Diese werden in Anlehnung an die aktuelle formale semantische/pragmatische Forschung charakterisiert und anhand deutscher Beispiele veranschaulicht. Es wird für eine Theorie plädiert, in der Fokus und kontrastives Topik auf den Diskurskontext Bezug nehmen, in der ihre Funktion also wesentlich die Stiftung von Textkohärenz ist. Gleichzeitig wird gezeigt, wie diese Grundbedeutung trotzdem zur Vermittlung von neuer Information benutzt werden kann. Abschließend kommt kurz zur Sprache, wie sich Fokus und kontrastives Topik in geschriebenen Texten bemerkbar machen.
Da eine Darstellung der prosodischen bzw. intonatorischen Variation innerhalb des Standarddeutschen zur Zeit (noch?) nicht möglich ist, möchte ich folgendes bescheidenere Ziel verfolgen: Ich möchte anhand des Berlinischen beispielhaft die Bereiche und Dimensionen aufzeigen, in denen Unterschiede einerseits zwischen Standard und Stadtsprache und andererseits auch innerhalb des Standard zwischen Sprechern aus unterschiedlichen Regionen vorhanden bzw. erwartbar sind. Dabei werde ich mich vor allem um die Variation der Intonation kümmern.
Zu diesem Zweck werde ich zeigen, in welchen Bereichen der intonatorischen Gestaltung von gesprochener Sprache in Gesprächen sich Besonderheiten berlinischer Sprecher finden, soweit wie möglich auch im Vergleich zum sog. Standarddeutschen. Darüber hinaus werde ich untersuchen, welche Unterschiede zwischen standardnahen und standardfernen Sprechern des Berlinischen bestehen.
Für diese Arbeit werde ich zurückgreifen auf Daten und Arbeiten aus dem DFG-Projekt ‚Untersuchungen zur Struktur und Funktion regionalspezifischer Intonationsverläufe im Deutschen‘, in dem die Beschreibung und der Vergleich von ausgewählten Stadtsprachen geleistet wird.
Recht haben im Sprachunterricht. Wie besteht man bei Meinungsgegensätzen auf seinem Standpunkt?
(2012)
„Den eigenen Standpunkt begründen und verteidigen" gehört zu den Kann-Beschreibungen im Europäischen Referenzrahmen für Sprachen. Um seinen Standpunkt verteidigen zu können, muss man unter anderem in der Lage sein, darauf hinzuweisen, dass man selber Recht hat, wie auch, einem Kommunikationspartner zu widersprechen. Der folgende Aufsatz untersucht intonatorische Sprachmittel, die ein Sprecher des Deutschen hierzu einsetzen kann: Betonung des finiten Verbs, einer Partikel wie wohl oder doch oder eines Negationsausdrucks wie nicht oder kein. In der Linguistik spricht man von Verumfokus und Negationsfokus. Der Aufsatz erklärt, was unter Fokus zu verstehen ist, und gibt Beispiele dafür, wie er in gesprochener und geschriebener Sprache funktioniert. Er zeigt auf, welchen Stellenwert Intonation im Sprachunterricht haben kann und sollte, und schließt mit einigen praktischen Übungsvorschlägen.