Refine
Year of publication
- 2021 (125) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (125) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (125)
Keywords
- Deutsch (47)
- Interaktion (30)
- Konversationsanalyse (27)
- Kommunikation (19)
- Sprachgebrauch (16)
- COVID-19 (14)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (13)
- Wortschatz (12)
- Grammatik (10)
- Neologismus (10)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (92)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (27)
- Postprint (13)
- Hybrides Open Access (2)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (77)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (37)
Publisher
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (45)
- Taylor & Francis (13)
- Verlag für Gesprächsforschung (7)
- Erich Schmidt (4)
- Winter (4)
- Elsevier (3)
- de Gruyter (3)
- Frontiers Media SA (2)
- MDPI (2)
- Springer Nature (2)
This paper explores how attitudes affect the seemingly objective process of counting speakers of varieties using the example of Low German, Germany’s sole regional language. The initial focus is on the basic taxonomy of classifying a variety as a language or a dialect. Three representative surveys then provide data for the analysis: the Germany Survey 2008, the Northern Germany Survey 2016, and the Germany Survey 2017. The results of these surveys indicate that there is no consensus concerning the evaluation of Low German’s status and that attitudes towards Low German are related to, for example, proficiency in the language. These attitudes are shown to matter when counting speakers of Low German and investigating the status it has been accorded.
Bislang gibt es keine akkuraten, repräsentativen Statistiken dazu, welche Sprachen in Deutschland gesprochen werden. Zwar wird in verschiedenen Erhebungen nach Muttersprachen oder nach zuhause gesprochenen Sprachen gefragt; aufgrund einiger Mängel im Erhebungsdesign bilden die Ergebnisse der vorliegenden Erhebungen jedoch die sprachliche Realität der in Deutschland lebenden Bevölkerung nicht angemessen ab. Im Beitrag wird anhand von drei Erhebungen gezeigt, dass bereits die Instrumente zur Erhebung von Sprache von Spracheinstellungen geprägt sind und dass dadurch die Gültigkeit der Ergebnisse stark eingeschränkt wird. Diese Mängel gelten für Sprachstatistiken im Hinblick auf die gesamte Bevölkerung Deutschlands – Kinder und Jugendliche eingeschlossen.
Das vorliegende Themenheft bündelt theoretische, methodologische und empirische Debatten an der Schnittstelle von Zeichen, Zeichensystem, Zeichenmodalität/-materialität und Medium und möchte sie weiterführen. Die Beiträge befassen sich mit Fragen der begrifflichen und empirischen Grenzziehung zwischen Zeichen und Medien und liefern so Impulse für die Erforschung des Wechselspiels der Gegenstandsbereiche Zeichenhaftigkeit, Medialität und Materialität als Manifestation multimodaler Kommunikation. Ziel des Heftes ist es, die theoretischen und empirischen Diskussionen um Multimodalität und Medialität stärker aufeinander zu beziehen.
Playing videogames is a popular social activity; people play videogames in different places, on different media, in different situations, alone or with partners, online or offline. Unsurprisingly, they thereby share space (physically or virtually) with other playing or non-playing people. The special issue investigates through different contexts and settings how non-players become participants of the gaming interaction and how players and non-players co-construct presence. The introduction provides a problem-related context for the individual contributions and then briefly presents them.
This paper investigates situations in French videogame interactions where non-players who share the same physical space as players, participate in the gaming activities as spectators. Through a detailed multimodal and sequential analysis, we show that being a spectator is a local achievement of all co-present participants - players and non-players.
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.