Pragmalinguistik / Kommunikationsforschung
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (295)
- Article (186)
- Book (30)
- Conference Proceeding (23)
- Part of Periodical (21)
- Working Paper (13)
- Other (8)
- Doctoral Thesis (6)
- Review (5)
- Report (3)
Language
- German (437)
- English (129)
- French (16)
- Ukrainian (4)
- Multiple languages (2)
- Portuguese (1)
- Russian (1)
Keywords
- Deutsch (207)
- Konversationsanalyse (185)
- Interaktion (155)
- Kommunikation (100)
- Pragmatik (70)
- Interaktionsanalyse (69)
- Multimodalität (55)
- Gesprochene Sprache (38)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (30)
- conversation analysis (30)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (303)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (133)
- Postprint (54)
- Ahead of Print (3)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (1)
- Verlags-Lektorat (1)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (265)
- Peer-Review (161)
- Verlags-Lektorat (9)
- Qualifikationsarbeit (Dissertation, Habilitationsschrift) (6)
- (Verlags-)lektorat (2)
- Review-Status-unbekannt (2)
- Veröffentlichungsversion (2)
- (Verlags-)Lektoriat (1)
- Peer-review (1)
- Preprint (1)
Publisher
- de Gruyter (69)
- Narr (36)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (35)
- Benjamins (25)
- Schwann (25)
- Verlag für Gesprächsforschung (24)
- Narr Francke Attempto (16)
- De Gruyter (13)
- Westdeutscher Verlag (13)
- Niemeyer (12)
Anhand einer Auswahl historischer Reden je dreier prominenter Deutscher und Polen wird eine signalphonetisch gestützte sprachvergleichende Analyse der glottalen Markierung vokalinitialer Wörter durchgeführt.
Generell erweist sich die glottale Markierung als variabel entlang eines Kontinuums zwischen einem echten glottalen Verschlusslaut (harter Stimmeinsatz) des Initialvokals über zeitlich nicht exakt koordinierte Glottalisierungen (Knarrstimme) und leichte Reflexe im Grundfrequenzverlauf bis hin zum völligen Fehlen einer Markierung.
Insgesamt zeigen sich im Polnischen gegenüber dem Deutschen seltener glottale Markierungen sowie eine sprachübergreifende schwache Abhängigkeit der Markierungshäufigkeit vom Sprechtempo (weniger bei Sprechtempoerhöhung).
Die Auftretenshäufigkeit glottaler Markierung wird sprachabhängig zudem durch unterschiedliche Faktoren beeinflusst: Für das Deutsche zeigen sich signifikante Einflüsse sowohl des Worttyps (Inhaltswörter mit häufigerer Markierung gegenüber Funktionswörtern) als auch der Betonung (betonte Silben mit häufigerer Markierung gegenüber unbetonten), während im Polnischen hier kein Einfluss sichtbar ist. Dafür zeigt das Polnische gegenüber dem Deutschen einen signifikanten Einfluss der Position innerhalb der Phrase (häufigere glottale Markierung in phraseninitialen im Gegensatz zu phrasenmedialen Wörtern). Diese sprachspezifischen Unterschiede können mit den prosodischen Charakteristika beider Sprachen Zusammenhängen. Im Unterschied zum Deutschen mit einem freien Wortakzent fällt dieser im Polnischen auf die Penultima, ist somit vorhersagbar und bedarf demzufolge keiner zusätzlichen glottalen Markierung im Sprachsignal.
Beide Sprachen hingegen zeigen übereinstimmend einen klar ausgeprägten Effekt der Vokalhöhe auf das Auftreten der glottalen Markierung (tiefe Vokale > mittlere Vokale > hohe Vokale).
In informal interaction, speakers rarely thank a person who has complied with a request. Examining data from British English, German, Italian, Polish, and Telugu, we ask when speakers do thank after compliance. The results show that thanking treats the other’s assistance as going beyond what could be taken for granted in the circumstances. Coupled with the rareness of thanking after requests, this suggests that cooperation is to a great extent governed by expectations of helpfulness, which can be long-standing, or built over the course of a particular interaction. The higher frequency of thanking in some languages (such as English or Italian) suggests that cultures differ in the importance they place on recognizing the other’s agency in doing as requested.
How to propose an action as an objective necessity. The case of Polish trzeba x (‘one needs to x’)
(2011)
The present study demonstrates that language-specific grammatical resources can afford speakers language-specific ways of organizing cooperative practical action. On the basis of video recordings of Polish families in their homes, we describe action affordances of the Polish impersonal modal declarative construction trzeba x (“one needs to x”) in the accomplishment of everyday domestic activities, such as cutting bread, bringing recalcitrant children back to the dinner table, or making phone calls. Trzeba-x turns in first position are regularly chosen by speakers to point to a possible action as an evident necessity for the furthering of some broader ongoing activity. Such turns in first position provide an environment in which recipients can enact shared responsibility by actively involving themselves in the relevant action. Treating the necessity as not restricted to any particular subject, aligning responsive actions are oriented to when the relevant action will be done, not whether it will be done. We show that such sequences are absent from English interactions by analyzing (a) grammatically similar turn formats in English interaction (“we need to x,” “the x needs to y”), and (b) similar interactive environments in English interactions. We discuss the potential of this research to point to a new avenue for researchers interested in the relationship between language diversity and diversity in human action and cognition.
Sometimes in interaction, a speaker articulates an overt interpretation of prior talk. Such moments have been studied as involving the repair of a problem with the other’s talk or as formulating an understanding of the matter at hand. Stepping back from the established notions of formulations and repair, we examine the variety of actions speakers do with the practice of offering an interpretation, and the order within this domain. Results show half a dozen usage types of interpretations in mundane interaction. These form a largely continuous territory of action, with recognizably distinct usage types as well as cases falling between these (proto)typical uses. We locate order in the domain of interpretations using the method of semantic maps and show that, contrary to earlier assumptions in the literature, interpretations that formulate an understanding of the matter at hand are actually quite pervasive in ordinary talk. These findings contribute to research on action formation and advance our understanding of understanding in interaction. Data are video- and audio-recordings of mundane social interaction in the German language from a variety of settings.
The present paper explores how rules are enforced and talked about in everyday life. Drawing on a corpus of board game recordings across European languages, we identify a sequential and praxeological context for rule talk. After a game rule is breached, a participant enforces proper play and then formulates a rule with an impersonal deontic statement (e.g. “It’s not allowed to do this”). Impersonal deontic statements express what may or may not be done without tying the obligation to a particular individual. Our analysis shows that such statements are used as part of multi-unit and multi-modal turns where rule talk is accomplished through both grammatical and embodied means. Impersonal deontic statements serve multiple interactional goals: they account for having changed another’s behavior in the moment and at the same time impart knowledge for the future. We refer to this complex action as an “instruction.” The results of this study advance our understanding of rules and rule-following in everyday life, and of how resources of language and the body are combined to enforce and formulate rules.
We examine moments in social interaction in which a person formulates what another thinks or believes. Such formulations of belief constitute a practice with specifiable contexts and consequences. Belief formulations treat aspects of the other person's prior conduct as accountable on the basis that it provided a new angle on a topic, or otherwise made a surprising contribution within an ongoing course of actions. The practice of belief formulations subjectivizes the content that the other articulated and thereby topicalizes it, mobilizing commitment to that position, an account, or further elaboration. We describe how the practice can be put to work in different activity contexts: sometimes it is designed to undermine the other's position as a subjective 'mere belief', at other times it serves to mobilize further topic talk. Throughout, belief formulations show themselves to be a method by which we get to know ourselves and each other as mental agents.
Linguistic relativists have traditionally asked 'how language influences thought', but conversation analysts and anthropological linguists have moved the focus from thought to social action. We argue that 'social action' should in this context not become simply a new dependent variable, because the formulation 'does language influence action' suggests that social action would already be meaningfully constituted prior to its local (verbal and multi-modal) accomplishment. We draw on work by the gestalt psychologist Karl Duncker to show that close attention to action-in-a-situation helps us ground empirical work on cross-cultural diversity in an appreciation of the invariances that make culture-specific elements of practice meaningful.
This article makes an empirical and a methodological contribution to the comparative study of action. The empirical contribution is a comparative study of three distinct types of action regularly accomplished with the turn format du meinst x (“you mean/think x”) in German: candidate understandings, formulations of the other’s mind, and requests for a judgment. These empirical materials are the basis for a methodological exploration of different levels of researcher abstraction in the comparative study of action. Two levels are examined: the (coarser) level of conditionally relevant responses (what a response speaker must do to align with the action of the prior turn) and the (finer) level of “full alignment” (what a response speaker can do to align with the action of a prior turn). Both levels of abstraction provide empirically viable and analytically interesting descriptive concepts for the comparative study of action. Data are in German.