430 Deutsch
Refine
Document Type
- Part of a Book (4)
- Article (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (6)
Keywords
- Imperativ (6) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Postprint (3)
- Veröffentlichungsversion (2)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (1)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (2)
- Peer-Review (2)
Publisher
- Benjamins (1)
- Schwann (1)
- Verlag für Gesprächsforschung (1)
- Wiley-Blackwell (1)
- de Gruyter (1)
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.
In the management of cooperation, the fit of a requested action with what the addressee is presently doing is a pervasively relevant consideration. We present evidence that imperative turns are adapted to, and reflexively create, contexts in which the other person is committed to the course of action advanced by the imperative. This evidence comes from systematic variation in the design of imperative turns, relative to the fittedness of the imperatively mandated action to the addressee’s ongoing trajectory of actions, what we call the “dine of commitment”. We present four points on this dine: Responsive imperatives perform an operation on the deontic dimension of what the addressee has announced or already begun to do (in particular its permissibility); local-project imperatives formulate a new action advancing a course of action in which the addressee is already actively engaged; global-project-imperatives target a next task for which the addressee is available on the grounds of their participation in the overall event, and in the absence of any competing work; and competitive imperatives draw on a presently otherwise engaged addressee on the grounds of their social commitment to the relevant course of actions. These four turn shapes are increasingly complex, reflecting the interactional work required to bridge the increasing distance between what the addressee is currently doing, and what the imperative mandates. We present data from German and Polish informal and institutional settings.
Der vorliegende Beitrag beschäftigt sich mit Imperativen, die nicht oder nicht nur für Handlungsaufforderungen, sondern auch für gesprächsorganisatorische Zwecke eingesetzt werden. Einschlägige Vertreter wie guck mal, hör mal, komm oder geh wurden in der Literatur meist als Interjektionen, aber auch als Diskursmarker klassifiziert. Anhand einer explorativen Korpusrecherche wird zunächst ein Überblick über die Häufigkeit und einige distributionelle Eigenschaften gesprächsorganisatorischer Imperative im gesprochenen Deutsch gegeben. Anschließend wird ein bisher nicht empirisch untersuchter Vertreter, warte (mal), anhand einer Kollektion von 190 Belegen im Hinblick auf seine Semantik und Funktion untersucht. In turninitialer und syntaktisch vorangestellter Position wird warte (mal) zur Markierung von Unterbrechungen der Progressivität und von Aktivitätswechseln verwendet, z.B. um Verstehensprobleme zu klären oder Argumente in eine Diskussion einzubringen. Tritt es satzmedial auf, markiert es Selbstreparaturen und Häsi-tationen. Es wird argumentiert, dass die Distribution und Funktionen es nicht rechtfertigen, warte (mal) als Diskursmarker zu bezeichnen.
The authors compare the use of two formats for requesting an object in informal everyday interaction: imperatives, common in our Polish data, and second-person polar questions, common in our English data. Imperatives and polar questions are selected in the same interactional “home environments” across the languages, in which they enact two social actions: drawing on shared responsibility and enlisting assistance, respectively. Speakers across the languages differ in their choice of request format in “mixed” interactional environments that support either. The finding shed light on the orderly ways in which cultural diversity is grounded in invariants of action formation.