430 Deutsch
Refine
Document Type
- Article (8)
- Part of a Book (4)
Keywords
- Konversationsanalyse (12) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Postprint (12) (remove)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (7)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (4)
Publisher
- Benjamins (4)
- Wiley-Blackwell (2)
- Elsevier (1)
- Routledge (1)
- Routledge (Taylor & Francis Group) (1)
- Taylor & Francis (1)
- V&R Unipress (1)
- Wilhelm Fink (1)
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.
Auch Linguist*innen, die gesprochene Sprache untersuchen, kommen schon seit längerem nicht mehr ohne digitale Infrastrukturen aus. Seit Beginn der Gesprochene-Sprache-Forschung werden Gespräche aufgezeichnet und anschließend transkribiert, da die flüchtigen, innerhalb von Bruchteilen von Sekunden stattfindenden Feinheiten des Gesprochenen paradoxerweise nur durch Verschriftung im Detail untersucht werden können. Diese Detailuntersuchungen beschränkten sich im vergangenen Jahrhundert meist auf wenige Einzelbelege für ein untersuchtes Phänomen. Das heißt, die Forschenden hatten den unmittelbaren Überblick über ihre Datenkollektionen und benötigten keine elaborierten digitalen Methoden zu deren Aufbereitung, Annotation und Analyse. Dies hat sich in den letzten beiden Jahrzehnten stark geändert: Es wurden vermehrt gezielt große Datenmengen gesammelt, in Datenbanken organisiert und der Forschungsgemeinschaft zur Nutzung zur Verfügung gestellt. An erster Stelle muss hier das Forschungs- und Lehrkorpus gesprochenes Deutsch (FOLK) genannt werden (vgl. Schmidt 2014). Dieses wird seit 2008 am Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) aufgebaut und ist heute das größte Referenzkorpus für das gesprochene Deutsch.
Korpora gesprochener Sprache
(2022)
Korpora gesprochener Sprache bestehen aus Audio- oder Videoaufnahmen sprachlicher Produktionen, die über eine Transkription einer linguistischen Analyse zugänglich gemacht werden. Sie kommen zur Untersuchung unterschiedlichster sprachwissenschaftlicher Fragestellungen unter anderem in der Gesprächsforschung, der Dialektologie und der Phonetik zum Einsatz. Dieser Beitrag diskutiert die wichtigsten Eigenschaften von Korpora gesprochener Sprache und stellt einige Vertreter der verschiedenen Kategorien vor.
This paper studies practices of indexing discrepant assumptions accomplished by turn-constructional units with ich dachte ('I thought') in German talk-in-interaction. Building on the analysis of 141 instances from the corpus FOLK, we identify three sequential environments in which ich dachte is used to index that an assumption which a speaker (has) held contrasts with some other, contextually salient assumption. We show that practices which have been studied for English I thought are also routinely used in German: ich dachte is a means to manage epistemic incongruencies and to contrast an incorrect with a correct assumption in narratives. In addition, ich dachte is also used to account for the speaker's own prior actions which may have looked problematic because they built on misunderstandings which the speaker only discovered later. Moreover, ich dachte-practices may also be used to create comic effects by reporting an earlier, absurd assumption. The practices are discussed with regard to their role in regaining common ground, in managing relationships, in maintaining the identity of a rational actor, and in terms of their exploitation for other conversational interests. Special attention is paid to how co-occurring linguistic features, and sequential and pragmatic factors, account for local interpretations of ich dachte.
How Do Speakers Define the Meaning of Expressions? The Case of German x heißt y (“x means y”)
(2020)
To secure mutual understanding in interaction, speakers sometimes explain or negotiate expressions. Adopting a conversation analytic and interaction linguistic approach, I examine how participants explain which kinds of expressions in different sequential environments, using the format x heißt y (“x means y”). When speakers use it to clarify technical terms or foreign words that are unfamiliar to co-participants, they often provide a situationally anchored definition that however is rather context-free and therefore transferable to future situations. When they explain common (but indexical, ambiguous, polysemous, or problematic) expressions instead, speakers always design their explanation strongly connected to the local context, building on situational circumstances. I argue that x heißt y definitions in interaction do not meet the requirements of scientific or philosophical definitions but that this is irrelevant for the situational exigencies speakers face.
Response particles manage intersubjectivity. This conversation analytic study describes German eben (“exactly”). With eben, speaker A locally agrees with the immediately prior turn of B (the “confirmable”) and establishes a second indexical link: A relates B’s confirmable to a position A herself had already displayed (the “anchor”). Through claiming temporal priority, eben speakers treat a just-formulated position as self-evident and mark independence. Further evidence for the three-part structure “anchor-confirmable-eben” that eben sets in motion retrospectively comes from instances where eben speakers supply a missing/opaque anchor via a postpositioned display of independent access. Data are in German with English translation.
Instruction practices in German driving lessons: Differential uses of declaratives and imperatives
(2018)
Building on а corpus of 70 hours of German driving lessons, this paper studies the use of declaratives vs. imperatives for instruction. It shows how these linguistic resources are adapted to different praxeological, temporal and participant-related environments. Declaratives are used for first instructions, task-setting and post- trial discussions. They exhibit complex syntax and do not call for immediate compliance. Their high degree of explicitness conveys how the action is to be carried out. Imperative instructions overwhelmingly correct ongoing actions of students or respond to their failure to produce expected actions. They exhibit minimal argument structure. They are reminders which presuppose that the student monitors the scene and can perform the action unproblematically. They index that requests have to be complied with immediately or even urgently.
Linguistic variation and linguistic virtuosity of young “Ghetto”-migrants in Mannheim, Germany
(2011)
In this paper, we provide an insight into the life world and social experiences of young Turkish migrants who are categorised by German society as “social problem cases”. Based on natural conversational data, we describe the communicative repertoire of one migrant adolescent and that of his friends. Our aims are (a) to isolate those linguistic features that convey the impression of “foreignness”, and stand out among other German speakers’ features, and (b) to analyse the variability in our informants’ discursive practices - i.e. code- or style-switching, as it is commonly referred to in the literature - in order to show how variation serves as a communicative resource. Our findings show that these adolescents’ remarkable linguistic proficiency and communicative competence contrast markedly to their low educational and professional status.
This paper analyses paramedic emergency interaction as multimodal multiactivity. Based on a corpus of video-recordings of emergency drills performed by professional paramedics during advanced training, the focus is on paramedics’ participation in multiple joint projects which become simultaneously relevant. Simultaneity and fast succession of multiactivity does not only characterise work on the team level, but also the work profile of the individual paramedic. Participants have to coordinate their own participation in more than one joint project intrapersonally. In the data studied, three patterns of allocating multimodal resources stood out as routine ways of coordinating participation in two simultaneous projects intrapersonally:
1. Talk and hearing vs. manual action monitored by gaze,
2. Talk and hearing vs. gazing (and pointing),
3. Manual action vs. gaze (and talk and hearing).