Sprache im 20. Jahrhundert. Gegenwartssprache
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (31) (remove)
Language
- English (31) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (31)
Keywords
- Deutsch (15)
- Englisch (8)
- Massenmedien (5)
- Gesprochene Sprache (3)
- Konversationsanalyse (3)
- Mediensprache (3)
- Russisch (3)
- Semantik (3)
- Bedeutung (2)
- Deutschland (2)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (9)
- Postprint (7)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (1)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (13)
- Peer-Review (1)
- Verlags-Lektorat (1)
Publisher
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (7)
- Benjamins (6)
- Lang (3)
- Niemeyer (2)
- Ashgate (1)
- De Gruyter Oldenbourg (1)
- Deutsches Bergbau Museum (1)
- European Language Resources Association (ELRA) (1)
- Europäische Akademie (1)
- German Historical Institute (1)
Playing with the voice of the other : stylized kanaksprak in conversations among German adolescents
(2007)
This is a revised and translated version of my article "Die doppelte Wende - Zur Verbindung von Sprache, Sprachwissenschaft und zeitgebundener politischer Bewertung am Beispiel deutsch-deutscher Sprachdifferenzierung" which appeared in Politische Semantik - Bedeutungsanalytische und sprachkritische Beiträge zur politischen Sprachverwendung, ed. Josef Klein (Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1989), pp. 297-326. I am indepted to Colin Good, Norwich, England, for having translated the text into English.
Europe is a continent of many languages. We all know that, but normally when we think about this fact, we focus on national languages, the type of language that shapes our political and our linguistic geography. But as natural as it may seem today, the idea of a language closely being interrelated with one's identity does not have a very long tradition. In fact it is only since the late 18th century that we think there is some type of intimate connection between the language spoken and the identity of a person as belonging to a nation. And even if the stabilization of European nation states was closely connected with this type of reasoning, European language communities differ considerably in their way of dealing with natural variation within their national language. For some of them, it is only the standardized national language that is relevant in this respect; for others, a certain amount of variation is a central part of their linguistic identity.
Following a welcome in Lithuanian and English to the guests and members on the occa- sion of the 10"’ anniversary of EFNIL, the history of this European language Organization is sketched. A brief survey of the sociolinguistic themes treated at previous Conferences and the state of the inajor projects is given, followed by an introduction (in German) to the general topic of the present Conference. The importance that translation and interpretation have for European language diversity and the individual national languages beside foreign language education of all Europeans is being stressed.
In this paper, I argue that the main questions that arise in the process of making a dictionary of political metaphors - that of identifying live conceptual metaphors in a corpus of text - may be solved on the basis of a pragmatic approach, taking into account the reflections in a text of cognitive processes in the minds of its author and its reader. Certainly, this goal cannot be attained without a further fine-grained semantic analysis o f presumably metaphoric expressions in their linguistic and cultural context.
The research project “German Today” aims to determine the amount of regional variation in (near-)standard German spoken by young and older educated adults and to identify and locate regional features. To this end, we compile an areally extensive corpus of read and spontaneous German speech. Secondary school students and 50-to-60-year-old locals are recorded in 160 cities throughout the German speaking area of Europe. All participants read a number of short texts and a word list, name pictures, translate words and sentences from English, answer questions in a sociobiographic interview, and take part in a map task experiment. The resulting corpus comprises over 1000 hours of speech, which is transcribed orthographically. Automatically derived broad phonetic transcriptions, selective manual narrow phonetic transcriptions, and variationalist annotations are added. Focussing on phonetic variation we aim to show to what extent national or regional standards exist in spoken German. Furthermore, the linguistic variation due to different contextual styles (read vs. spontaneous speech) shall be analysed. Finally, the corpus enables us to investigate whether linguistic change has occurred in spoken (near-)standard German.
In her overview, Margret Selting makes the case for the claim that dealing with authentic conversation necessarily lies at the heart of an interactionallinguistic approach to prosody (see Selting this volume, Section 3.3). However, collecting and transcribing corpora of authentic interaction is a time-consuming enterprise. This fact often severely restricts what the individual researcher is able to do in terms of analysis within the scope of his or her resources. Still, for dealing with many of the desiderata Margret Selting points out in Section 5 of her extensive overview, the use of larger corpora seems to be required. In this commenting paper, I want to argue that future progress in research on prosody in interaction will essentially rest on the availability and use of large public corpora. After reviewing arguments for and against the use of public corpora, I will discuss some upshots regarding corpus design and issues of transcription of public corpora.