Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (57)
- Article (42)
- Book (7)
- Habilitation (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (107) (remove)
Keywords
- Konversationsanalyse (56)
- Deutsch (45)
- Interaktion (30)
- conversation analysis (10)
- Gesprochene Sprache (9)
- Gesprächsanalyse (7)
- Jugendlicher (7)
- Patient (6)
- Verstehen (6)
- Arzt (5)
Publicationstate
- Postprint (10)
- Veröffentlichungsversion (6)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (1)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (9)
- Peer-Review (8)
- Veröffentlichungsversion (1)
Publisher
- Verl. für Gesprächsforschung (8)
- de Gruyter (8)
- Benjamins (7)
- De Gruyter (7)
- Narr (7)
- Stauffenburg (7)
- Elsevier (6)
- Verlag für Gesprächsforschung (6)
- Lang (5)
- VS, Verl. für Sozialwissenschaften (3)
"damit sie mich verstehen" : Genese, Verfahren und recipient design einer narrativen Performance
(2009)
Speakers’ dialogical orientation to the particular others they talk to is implemented by practices of recipient-design. One such practice is the use of negation as a means to constrain interpretations of speaker’s actions by the partner. The paper situates this use of negation within the larger context of other recipient-designed uses of negation which negate assumptions the speaker makes about what the addressee holds to be true (second-order assumptions) or what the addressee assumes the speaker holds to be true (third- order assumptions). The focus of the study is on the ways in which speakers use negation to disclaim interpretations of their turns which partners have displayed or may possibly arrive at. Special emphasis is given to the positionally sensitive uses of negation, which may occur before, after or inserted between the nucleus actions whose interpretation is constrained by the negation. Interactional motivations and rhetorical potentials of the practice are pointed out, partly depending on the position of the negation vis-à-vis the nucleus action. The analysis shows that the concept of ‘recipient design’ is in need of distinctions which have not been in focus in prior research.
"Standard language" is a contested concept, ideologically, empirically and theoretically. This is particularly true for a language such as German, where the standardization of the spoken language was based on the written standard and was established with respect to a communicative situation, i.e. public speech on stage (Bühnenaussprache), which most speakers never come across. As a consequence, the norms of the oral standard exhibit many features which are infrequent in the everyday speech even of educated speakers. This paper discusses ways to arrive at a more realistic conception of (spoken) standard German, which will be termed "standard usage". It must be founded on empirical observations of speakers linguistic choices in everyday situations. Arguments in favor of a corpus-based notion of standard have to consider sociolinguistic, political, and didactic concerns. We report on the design of a large study of linguistic variation conducted at the Institute for the German Language (project "Variation in Spoken German", Variation des gesprochenen Deutsch) with the aim of arriving at a representative picture of "standard usage" in contemporary German. It systematically takes into account both diatopic variation covering the multi-national space in which German an official language, and diastratic variation in terms of varying degrees of formality. Results of the study of phonetic and morphosyntactic variation are discussed. At least for German, a corpus-based notion of "standard usage" inevitably includes some degree of pluralism concerning areal variation, and it needs to do justice to register-based variation as well.
Anhand einer konversationsanalytischen Untersuchung wird eine unter männlichen Jugendlichen weit verbreitete Praktik aggressiven Sprechens, das sog. gissen“, dargestellt. Die Untersuchung der sequenziellen Organisation, der Teilnehmerkonstellation und der spezifischen semantischen und gestalterischen Eigenschaften von ,Diss-Scquenzen‘ zeigt, dass,Dissen1 zur spielerischen Herabsetzung des Opponenten vor einem w-groi/p-Publikum abzielt. Dabei zeigt sich eine charakteristische Doppelstruktur von Spaß und Ernst: Entgegen der offiziellen Modali- sierung der Aktivität als unernst, stellt ,Dissen* ein prominentes Verfahren zur Verhandlung von Charakter, Status und moralischen Ansprüchen in jugendlichen peer-groups dar.
The paper deals with the use of ICH WEIß NICHT (‘I don’t know’) in German talk-in-interaction. Pursuing an Interactional Linguistics approach, we identify different interactional uses of ICH WEIß NICHT and discuss their relationship to variation in argument structure (SV (O), (O)VS, V-only). After ICH WEIß NICHT with full complementation, speakers emphasize their lack of knowledge or display reluctance to answer. In contrast, after variants without an object complement, in contrast, speakers display uncertainty about the truth of the following proposition or about its sufficiency as an answer. Thus, while uses with both subject and object tend to close a sequence or display lack of knowledge, responses without an object, in contrast, function as a prepositioned epistemic hedge or a pragmatic marker framing the following TCU. When ICH WEIß NICHT is used in response to a statement, it indexes disagreement (independently from all complementation patterns).
Our paper deals with the use of ICH WEIß NICHT (‘I don’t know’) in German talk-in-interaction. Pursuing an Interactional Linguistics approach, we identify different interactional uses of ICH WEIß NICHT and discuss their relationship to variation in argument structure (SV (O), (O)VS, V-only). After ICH WEIß NICHT with full complementation, speakers emphasize their lack of knowledge or display reluctance to answer. In contrast, after variants without an object complement, in contrast, speakers display uncertainty about the truth of the following proposition or about its sufficiency as an answer. Thus, while uses with both subject and object tend to close a sequence or display lack of knowledge, responses without an object, in contrast, function as a prepositioned epistemic hedge or a pragmatic marker framing the following TCU. When ICH WEIß NICHT is used in response to a statement, it indexes disagreement (independently from all complementation patterns).
The transition between phases of activities is a practical problem which participants in an interaction have to deal with routinely. In meetings, the sequence of phases of activity is often outlined by a written agenda. However, transitions still have to be accomplished by local interactional work of the participants. In a detailed conversation analytic case study based on video-data, it is shown how participants collaboratively accomplish an emergent interactional state of affairs (a break-like activity) which differs widely from the state of affairs which was projected by awritten agenda (the next presentation), although in doing so, the participants still show their continuous orientation to the agenda. The paper argues that the reconstruction of emergent developments in interaction calls for a multimodal analysis of interaction, because the fine-grained multimodal co-ordination of bodily and verbal resources provides for opportunities of sequentially motivated, relevant next actions. These, however, can amount to emergent activity sequences, which may be at odds with the activity types which are projected by an interactional agenda or expected on behalf of some institutional routine.