Sprache im 20. Jahrhundert. Gegenwartssprache
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (14) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (14) (remove)
Keywords
- Deutsch (6)
- Deutschland <Bundesrepublik> (2)
- Deutschland <DDR> (2)
- Diskursanalyse (2)
- Kommunikationsforschung (2)
- Konversationsanalyse (2)
- Wortschatz (2)
- Ableitung <Linguistik> (1)
- Anthropologie (1)
- Beeinflussung (1)
Publicationstate
- Postprint (14) (remove)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (14) (remove)
Publisher
- Benjamins (4)
- Carocci (2)
- Aufbau Taschenbuch Verlag (1)
- Dr. Kovač (1)
- Iudicium (1)
- Lang (1)
- Olms (1)
- Peter Lang (1)
- Springer VS (1)
- Stauffenburg (1)
Content analysis provides a useful and multifaceted, methodological framework for Twitter analysis. CAQDAS tools support the structuring of textual data by enabling categorising and coding. Depending on the research objective, it may be appropriate to choose a mixed-methods approach that combines quantitative and qualitative elements of analysis and plays out their respective advantages to the greatest possible extent while minimising their shortcomings. In this chapter, we will discuss CAQDAS speech act analysis of tweets as an example of software-assisted content analysis. We start with some elementary thoughts on the challenges of the collection and evaluation of Twitter data before we give a brief description of the potentials and limitations of using the software QDA Miner (as one typical example for possible analysis programmes). Our focus will lie on analytical features that can be particularly helpful in speech act analysis of tweets.
One major issue in the accomplishment of contrasts in conversation is lexical choice of items which carry the semantic Ioad of the two states of affair which are represented as being opposed to one another. These items or expressions are co-selected to be understood as being contrastively related to each other. In this paper, it is argued that the activity of contrasting itself provides them with a specific local opposite meaning which they would not obtain in other contexts. Practices of contrastingare thus seen as an example of conversational activities which creatively and systematically affect situated meanings. Basedon data from various genres, such as meetings, mediation sessions and conversations, the paper discusses two practices of contrasting, their sequential construction and their interpretative effects. It is concluded that the interpretative effects of conversational contrasting rest on the sequential deployment oflinguistic resources and on the cognitive procedures of frame-based interpretation and constructing a maximally contrastive interpretation for the co-selected expressions.
Das Bild von der 'Sprache der DDR' in der alten Bundesrepublik oder: Haben sie so gesprochen?
(2004)
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.
Im Kontext des Essens und seiner Zubereitung, der Speisen und ihres Verzehrs, akzentuiert das Wort Gericht, dass es sich bei der gesellschaftlich üblichen Form von Nahrungsaufnahme um eine spezifisch ausgeformte soziale Praxis handelt. In diesem Handlungs- und Interpretationskontext wird mit dem Wort Gericht hervorgehoben, dass eine auf bestimmte Weise zubereitete („zugerichtete“) Speise als relevanter Teil einer Mahlzeit zu gelten hat. Wie bei solchen Alltagspraktiken nicht unüblich, ist die Verwendung dieses Worts nicht scharf von anderen Benennungen in diesem Kontext zu trennen, von denen die Praktiken des Essens nicht so sehr über die „Zurichtung“, sondern z.B. über die Abfolge (z.B. Hauptspeise, Gang usw.) geleistet werden. Allerdings ist mit dem Angerichtetsein, das im Wort Gericht steckt, doch auch immer seine Angemessenheit angedeutet, etwas, was es mit dem gleichlautenden juristischen Wort verbindet – und zu mancherlei textueller Verbindung führt.