Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (1456) (remove)
Language
Keywords
- Deutsch (1456) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (472)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (188)
- Postprint (64)
- Ahead of Print (3)
- Erstveröffentlichung (1)
- Preprint (1)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (365)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (314)
- Peer-review (15)
- Verlags-Lektorat (9)
- Peer-Revied (5)
- Review-Status-unbekannt (2)
- Qualifikationsarbeit (Dissertation, Habilitationsschrift) (1)
Publisher
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (329)
- de Gruyter (101)
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (56)
- Erich Schmidt (49)
- Schmidt (47)
- Akademie-Verlag (18)
- Verlag für Gesprächsforschung (17)
- Steiner (16)
- iudicium (14)
- Erich Schmidt Verlag (12)
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.
Mehrsprachigkeit gehört zu den Themen, zu denen wohl viele Menschen eine Meinung haben. Der Wert traditioneller schulischer Fremdsprachen wird dabei häufig hervorgehoben, während Wert und Erhalt von Herkunftssprachen Zugewanderter hinterfragt werden. Einstellungen gegenüber Sprachen sind demnach abhängig vom Prestige der jeweiligen Sprachen und ihrer Sprecher:innen. Dies geschieht vor dem Hintergrund, dass Deutschland überwiegend als ein einsprachiges Land mit einer einsprachigen Gesellschaft angesehen wird. Ähnliches gilt im Übrigen auch für Österreich. So schreibt beispielsweise der Sprachwissenschaftler Heiko Marten, „dass in der Wahrnehmung großer Teile der österreichischen Gesellschaft Monolingualismus nach wie vor die Norm ist“ (Marten 2016, S. 165). Diese Annahme gilt auch für den schulischen Kontext, wie die Erziehungswissenschaftlerin Ingrid Gogolin mit dem Begriff des „monolingualen Habitus“ herausgearbeitet hat (vgl. Gogolin 2008). Gründe für einen monolingualen Habitus könnten darin liegen, dass „von Teilen der Allgemeinheit oft übersehen [wird], dass in Deutschland auch zahlreiche weitere Sprachen gesprochen werden“ (Marten 2016, S. 148). Doch was passiert nun, wenn eine Sprache einen Statuswechsel von Landessprache zu Herkunftssprache durchläuft? Was lässt sich beobachten, wenn beispielsweise das Deutsche zu einer Minderheitensprache wird?
Rejecting the validity of inferred attributions of incompetence in German talk-in-interaction
(2024)
This paper deals with pragmatic inference from the perspective of Conversation Analysis. In particular, we examine a specific variety of inferences - the attribution of incompetence which Self constructs on the basis of Other's prior action, hearable as positioning Self as incompetent (e.g., instructions, offers of assistance, advice); this attribution of incompetence concerns Self's execution of some practical task. This inference is indexed in Self's response, which highlights Self's expertise, or competence concerning the task at hand. We focus on two recurrent types of such responses in our data: (i) accounting for competence through formulations of prior experience with carrying out a practical action and (ii) explicit claims of competence for accomplishing this action. We analyze the interactional environments in which these responses occur, the ways in which the two practices index Self's understanding of being positioned as incompetent and the interactional work they do. Finally, we discuss how through rejecting and inferred attribution of incompetence, Self implicitly seeks to restore their face and defend their autonomy as an agent, yet, without entering an explicit identity-negotiation. Findings rest on the analysis of 20 cases found in video-recordings of naturally occurring talk-in-interaction in German from the corpus FOLK.
Gestures can be brief and compact in their execution, but also elaborate and extended. One way to utilise this kinetic flexibility is to extend one’s gesture in time by holding it in its stroke position. This study explores the interactional function of gestural holds by investigating pointing gestures that are sustained beyond a sequence-initiating turn and into the responsive space following it. The study draws on video data from naturally occurring conversations in German and focuses on held pointing gestures after instructions and questions. It is shown that in both action environments, participants delay gestural closure to indicate that they still consider the addressee’s response to be insufficient.
Rules of behavior are fundamental to human sociality. Whether on the road, at the dinner table, or during a game, people monitor one another’s behavior for conformity to rules and may take action to rectify violations. In this study, we examine two ways in which rules are enforced during games: instructions and reminders. Building on prior research, we identify instructions as actions produced to rectify violations based on another’s lack of knowledge of the relevant rule; knowledge that the instruction is designed to impart. In contrast to this, the actions we refer to as reminders are designed to enforce rules presupposing the transgressor’s competence and treating the violation as the result of forgetfulness or oversight. We show that instructing and reminding actions differ in turn design, sequential development, the epistemic stances taken by transgressors and enforcers, and in how the action affects the progressivity of the interaction. Data are in German and Italian from the Parallel European Corpus of Informal Interaction (PECII).