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)
Verbs may be attributed to higher agency than other grammatical categories. In Study 1, we confirmed this hypothesis with archival datasets comprising verbs (N = 950) and adjectives (N = 2115). We then investigated whether verbs (vs. adjectives) increase message effectiveness. In three experiments presenting potential NGOs (Studies 2 and 3) or corporate campaigns (Study 4) in verb or adjective form, we demonstrate the hypothesized relationship. Across studies, (overall N = 721) grammatical agency consistently increased message effectiveness. Semantic agency varied across contexts by either increasing (Study 2), not affecting (Study 3), or decreasing (Study 4) the effectiveness of the message. Overall, experiments provide insights in to the meta-semantic effects of verbs – demonstrating how grammar may influence communication outcomes.
This study deals with interpretation practices that speakers employ in order to (re)formulate what another person has said or implied. Analyzing interpretations in a public televised mediation that resembles a public debate, I show which kinds of interpretation practices that speakers adopt and how they differ depending the participants' roles. Systematically comparing all interpretations of the mediator vs. the opposing participants’, I argue that interpretations can be described as general practices with specific interactional effects, but that they are designed and exploited in different ways (i.e., for clarification and discourse-organization vs. self- and other-positioning and constructing arguments). I point out that speakers use meta-pragmatic accounts that support the interactional effects of their interpretations.
With recourse to a broader understanding of the concept of translation, the transfer of source texts in one variety into another variety of the same language can also be called translation. This paper focuses on the target language – or rather – the target variety “easy-to-read language”, which is meant to make texts comprehensible for people with communication limitations. Considering its origins in the disability rights movement, the aim is to inform affected persons about their rights and democratic processes, i.e. to translate especially legal texts into the so-called easy-to-read language. Although there is a whole range of rules and guidelines for formulating in easy-to-read language, ”none offers a sufficient approach for translation into easy-to-read language“ (Bredel & Maaß, 2016a, p. 109). Standardization of the variety is also still a long way off. On the one hand, the contribution takes stock of legal regulations in easy-to-read language. On the other hand, four versions of the Federal Participation Law in easy-to-read language are analysed with regard to their external features and the constructions used to explain technical terminology. The analysis shows that legal texts in easy-to-read language are (still) quite limited in number and are also difficult to find. Concerning the second part, the constructions used exhibit a great structural variance, both intra- and intertextually. It is therefore questionable whether the addressees can access the texts independently. Also, it is still necessary to make the rules, the formulations of the rules and the implementations clearer so that the translations fulfil their function.
Zum Geleit
(2021)
Neben den wissenschaftlichen Aufsätzen, die nach den Qualitätskriterien
der heute üblichen doppelt anonymen Begutachtung ausgewählt wurden, enthält das Heft drei Berichte – zu einer Tagung zur Mehrsprachigkeit in Tartu, zu einem interdisziplinären DaF-Projekt in Tallinn sowie zu einer Forschungsgruppe zu Sprachkompetenzen und Deutschlernmotivationen von Student/innen in den baltischen und nordischen Ländern. Das Heft wird schließlich durch zwei Rezensionen abgerundet.
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.