Phonetik / Phonologie
Refine
Year of publication
- 2023 (3) (remove)
Document Type
- Part of a Book (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Keywords
- Deutsch (2)
- Phonetik (2)
- Prosodie (2)
- /e:/-Diphthongisierung (1)
- Affix (1)
- Akustisches Signal (1)
- Allomorph (1)
- Annotation (1)
- Arbeitsablauf (1)
- Aufgabendesign (1)
Publicationstate
- Zweitveröffentlichung (2)
- Postprint (1)
- Veröffentlichungsversion (1)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (2)
- Peer-Review (1)
Publisher
- IDS-Verlag (1)
- Wiley & Sons (1)
- de Gruyter (1)
This conversation analytic study compares the use of negation particles in spoken German and Persian, namely nein/nee and na. While these particles have a range of functions in both languages (Ghaderi 2022; Imo 2017), their use in response to news remains understudied. We focus on nein/nee and na in two sequential contexts: (i) after prior disconfirmations (Extract (a)) and (ii) in response to either solicited or unsolicited informings (see Extracts (b) and (c), respectively). In both contexts, nein/nee and na mark unexpectedness and open up an opportunity space for more, but they do so in different ways and with different outcomes. Nein/nee- and na-turns after disconfirming, often minimal responses to first-position confirmable turns mark the prior as unexpected (or even contrasting with the nein/nee/na-speaker’s expectations) and thus as expandable/accountable (cf. Ford 2001; Gubina/Betz 2021). Nein/nee/na-turns after informings (e.g., announcements that display a story teller’s negative emotional stance) differ not only in sequential position but also in prosodic realization. They can be either falling or rising, but all are characterized by marked prosody, i.e., lengthening, very low onset, smiling or breathy voice, or high overall pitch. Through position and turn design features, such nein/nee- and na-turns not only mark a prior turn as counter to (normative) expectations, but may also display the speaker’s affective stance and affiliate with the affective stance of the prior interactant. By comparing the use of nein/nee and na in German and Persian in the two functions illustrated in Extracts (a) and (b/c), we will show (i) how nein/nee- and na-turns shape interactional trajectories after responsive actions and (ii) what role the particles play in managing news and stance-taking as well as epistemic and affective positioning. Apart from revealing similarities in the use of German and Persian negation particles, the results of our crosslinguistic comparison will demonstrate that even if different languages have similar practices for specific actions, the use of these practices is language- and culture-specific. This means that even similar practices in different languages have their own “collateral effects” (Sidnell/Enfield 2012), linguistic and prosodic characteristic features, and, at least sometimes, consequences for social actions accomplished in the specific language (e.g., Dingemanse/Blythe/Dirksmeyer 2014; Evans/Levinson 2009; Floyd/Rossi/Enfield (eds.) 2020; Fox et al. 2009). Our study uses the method of Conversation Analysis (Sidnell/Stivers (eds.) 2013) and draws on more than 80 hours of audio and video recordings of spontaneous interactions (co-present, via video link, and on the telephone) in everyday and institutional contexts.
Morphophonological asymmetries in affixation concern systematic correlations between morphological properties of affixes (e.g. combination with bound versus free stems, position relative to stem (suffixes versus prefixes)) and their phonological properties (e.g. stress behaviour). The arguably most insightful approach to capturing relevant asymmetries invokes a notion of affix coherence, first introduced by Dixon in connection with his work on Yidiɲ, a nearly extinct language spoken in Northern Australia. This notion is based on a categorical division of affixes into ones that integrate into the phonological word of the stem and ones that do not. The integration of affixes is envisioned as being fully determined by phonological and morphological structure in a given language and verifiable by diagnostics relevant to phonological word domains (primarily the syllable and the foot structure). The assumption of two types of prosodic domains characterized by integrated versus non-integrated affixes is manifest in consistent asymmetries that pertain to morphophonological, phonological, and phonetic rules. This consistency constitutes compelling evidence for the structure-based analysis of the impact of various affixes on derived words, as opposed to alternative approaches to capturing these effects by associating affixes with diacritics (morpheme versus word boundary, class 1 versus class 2, stratum 1 versus stratum 2). The present entry aims to demonstrate, mostly on the basis of data from Germanic languages, the breadth of the empirical evidence in support of a fundamental role of affix coherence. Moreover, it aims to draw attention to the various implications of affix coherence for modeling relevant generalizations, in particular the necessary reference to a level of phonological representation characterized by a specific degree of abstractness (‘phonemic’).
Die erfolgreiche Wiederverwendung gesprochener Korpora muss fachspezifischen Evaluationskritierien genügen und erfordert daher eine flexible Korpusarchitektur, die durch multirepräsentationale (Verfügbarkeit eines akustischen Signals und einer Transliteration) und multisituationale Daten (Variabilität von Situationen bzw. Aufgaben) gekennzeichnet ist. Diese Kriterien werden in einer Fallstudie zur /eː/-Diphthongisierung polnischer Deutschlerner/-innen angewendet und diskutiert. Die Fallstudie repliziert die Ergebnisse der /eː/-Diphthongisierung bei Bildbenennungen von Nimz (2016). Vor der Wiederverwendung werden weitere fachspezifische Evaluationskriterien überprüft, wie Multisituationalität, Aufnahmequalitäten, Erweiterbarkeit, vorhandene Metadaten und vorhandene Dokumentation. Nach der Replikationsstudie werden die Herausforderungen für eine Umsetzung der Wiederverwendung bezüglich Datenmanagement, Workflows und Data Literacy in Forschungs- und Lehrkontexten diskutiert.