Alle Publikationen
- <<
- <
- 1
2018
-
(2018): Interactional linguistics. Studying language in social interaction. Cambridge; New York, NY; Melbourne; Singapore: Cambridge University Press
Abstract: Machine generated contents note: Introduction: 1. What is interactional linguistics?; Part I. How Is Interaction Conducted with Lightening Sources?: 2. Turn construction and turn taking; 3. Repair; 4. Action formation and ascription; 5. Topic and sequence; Part II. How are Linguistic Resources Deployed in Interaction?; 6. Sentences, clauses, and phrases; 7. Clause combinations; 8. One-word constructions: particles; Conclusion: 9. Implications for language theory "Reviewing recent findings on linguistic practices used in turn construction and turn taking, repair, action formation and ascription, sequence and topic organization, the book examines the way linguistic units of varying size - sentences, clauses, phrases, clause combinations, particles - are mobilized for the implementation of specific actions in talk-in-interaction. A final chapter discusses the implications of an interactional perspective for our understanding of language as well as its variation, diversity, and universality. Supplementary online chapters explore additional topics such as the linguistic organization of preference, stance, footing, and storytelling, as well as the use of prosody and phonetics, and further practices with language"-- "The first textbook dedicated to interactional linguistics, focusing on linguistic analyses of conversational phenomena, this introduction provides an overview of the theory and methodology of interactional linguistics. Reviewing recent findings on linguistic practices used in turn construction and turn taking, repair, action formation, ascription, and sequence and topic organization, the book examines the way that linguistic units of varying size - sentences, clauses, phrases, clause combinations, and particles - are mobilized for the implementation of specific actions in talk-in-interaction. A final chapter discusses the implications of an interactional perspective for our understanding of language as well as its variation, diversity, and universality. Supplementary online chapters explore additional topics such as the linguistic organization of preference, stance, footing, and storytelling, as well as the use of prosody and phonetics, and further practices with language. Featuring summary boxes and transcripts from recordings of everyday conversation, this is an essential resource for advanced undergraduate and postgraduate courses on language in social interaction"--
2012
-
Rasmussen, Gitte (2012): Evaluating cognitive competences in interaction. Amsterdam: Benjamins (Pragmatics & beyond)
Abstract: Evaluation is a part of everyday life. Competences, knowledge and skills are assessed in ordinary as well as in institutional settings like hospitals, clinics and schools. This volume investigates how evaluations are being carried out interactionally. More specifically, it explores how people evaluate each others' cognitive competences as they deal with each others' understandings, knowings, feelings, doings, hearings and learnings face-to-face. The contributions focus on different evaluation activities in a variety of Institutional settings in Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Holland and the United States of America. All the contributions approach the theme by use of Ethnomethodology (EM) and/or Conversation Analysis (CA). Thus, the analytic interests concern how participants organize activities of evaluating cognitive competences by means of recognizable interactional methods. This approach differs from other approaches and research interests within cognitive science as it con centrate s on how people in interaction orient towards cognitive competence irrespective of scientific theories. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) zitiert von 3
2010
-
Barron, Anne; Schneider, Klaus P. (Hg.) (2010): The pragmatics of Irish English. Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter (Trends in linguistics. Studies and monographs). Online verfügbar unter http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=558056
Abstract: Irish English, while having been the focus of investigations on a variety of linguistic levels, reveals a dearth of research on the pragmatic level. In the present volume, this imbalance is addressed by providing much-needed empirical data on language use in Ireland in the private, official and public spheres and also by examining the use of Irish English as a reflection of socio-cultural norms of interaction. The contributions cover a wide range of pragmatic phenomena and draw on a number of frameworks of analysis. Despite the wide scope of topics and methodologies, a relatively coherent picture of conventions of language use in Ireland emerges. Indirectness and heterogeneity on the formal level are, for instance, shown to be features of Irish English. This volume is the first book-length treatment of the pragmatics of a national variety of English, or any other language. Indeed, it could be considered a first step towards a new discipline, variational pragmatics, at the interface of pragmatics and dialectology. This book is of primary interest to researchers and students in pragmatics, variational linguistics, Irish English, English as Foreign Language (EFL), cross-cultural communication and discourse analysis. Furthermore, the pragmatic descriptions provided will be of practical use in the increasingly important English as Second Language (ESL) context in Ireland. Finally, it is also of relevance to professionals dealing with Ireland and, indeed, to anyone interested in a deeper understanding of Irish culture.
Keywords: Angesicht, Dialekt, Discourse analysis, Electronic books, English language, Face, Familie, Familiendiskurs, Heterogenität, Höflichkeit, Höflichkeitsforschung, Indirektheit, In-Group, Intimität, Ireland, Linguistik, Nahbeziehung, Negative and positive Politeness, Politeness, Pragmatics, Social aspects, Soziale Angemessenheit, Sprachgebrauch, Variation 2009
-
(2009): Geschichte versus Genealogie. Warum die Debatte um sozialwissenschaftliche Reflexivitat die Ethnomethodologie vergass. In: Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research (Online Journal) 10 (3)
Abstract: This paper addresses the almost complete disappearance of ethnomethodological approaches from the reflexivity debate in social-scientific theory and methodology since the 1980s. This disappearance is remarkable because many of the tropes and questions characterizing the debate around reflexivity had already been articulated in ethnomethodology. The main reason for this neglect, it is argued, is the productive effect it had, as it helped later debates find answers to the epistemological challenge of postmodern approaches entering sociological discourse from the direction of anthropology and science and technology studies. Those answers could never have stabilized in the presence of the fundamental ethnomethodological presupposition that reflexivity is an ontological feature of social reality. The paper ends with a number of suggestions concerning a revision of reflexivity in the social sciences, highlighting the performative aspects of social meaning, especially social-scientific meaning. Es wird die Frage nach den Grunden fur das offensichtliche Vergessen ethnomethodologischer Diskussionen in der Debatte um Reflexivitat in der sozialwissenschaftlichen Theorie und Methodologie seit den 1980er Jahren gestellt. Dieses Vergessen ist deswegen erstaunlich, da in der Ethnomethodologie viele der spater aufkommenden Fragen bereits formuliert und diskutiert worden waren. Das Hauptargument lautet, dass dieses Vergessen einen epistemisch produktiven Effekt hatte, weil es spateren Diskursen ermoglichte, Antworten auf die epistemologische Herausforderung durch postmoderne Argumentationsfiguren zu finden, die hauptsachlich aus der Anthropologie Eingang in den sozialwissenschaftlichen Diskurs fanden. Ware die fundamentale ethnomethodologische Argumentationsfigur, dass Reflexivitat ein ontologisches Merkmal sozialer Realitat ist, berucksichtigt worden, hatten sich jene Antworten nicht stabilisieren konnen. Abschliessend werden Vorschlage zu einer Neubestimmung von Reflexivitat in den Sozialwissenschaften gemacht, die die performativen Aspekte sozialen Sinns - auch sozialwissenschaftlichen Sinns - berucksichtigt. zitiert von 2
2003
-
(2003) : Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis. In: Reynolds, Larry T.: Handbook of symbolic interactionism: Lanham, Md.: AltaMira Press, S. 173-202
Abstract: Over the past thirty years, symbolic interactionists have proposed, on one hand, a synthesis between symbolic interactionism and ethnomethodology, or, on the other hand, that these two forms of sociology are philosophically, conceptually, and methodologically incompatible. In reply, ethnomethodologists argue that neither the synthetic version nor the incompatibility hypothesis accurately understands ethnomethodology. Conversation analysis, which is related to ethnomethodology, no doubt gets painted by the same brushstrokes, and conversation analysts would raise similar objections to arguments about either synthesis or incompatibility. We agree that a synthesis between symbolic interactionism (SI) and ethnomethodology (EM) and conversation analysis (CA) is not possible. However, we do view SI and EM/CA as at least partly congruent. A chapter on EM and CA, accordingly, has a place in a book that is mainly about SI, and we aim to describe EM and CA and their approaches to th e study of everyday life and interaction. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved) zitiert von 110
- <<
- <
- 1