Volume 12, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1018-2101
  • E-ISSN: 2406-4238


The current article examines the limitations of perceptual judgment for the transcription of pause occurrence and duration. This investigation extends Kowal and O’Connell’s (2000) previous research, which examined pause occurrence and duration notated by perceptual judgment with measurements from acoustic instruments for three corpora. Kowal and O’Connell found that, across corpora, there were a notable number of errors in perceptual detection of pauses, including both failure to notate pauses measurable with instrumentation (misses) and notation of pauses that were not measurable (false positives). In this study we focus on pause transcription in a uniquely English-language database, examining four excerpts from the . Pauses which had been notated perceptually in were compared with pause measurements from a Siemens Oscillomink L. As in the previous research, it was found that a notable number of pauses detectable with the acoustic instruments were not notated in , which relied on only perceptual judgment. Errors in pause detection, both false positives and misses, accounted for 86 cases over 257 perceptually notated pauses, an error rate of one in three. We also examined two assumptions of : (1) The assumption that perceptually notated pauses would adhere to interval scaling was not substantiated by instrumental measurement. (2) The assumption (Crystal and Quirk 1964: 49) that “impressionistic relative length varies with the tempo norm of a given speaker” was also not substantiated insofar as all correlations of tempo (operationalized as articulation rate) with ambient pause duration were nonsignificant.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Auer, P.E. , E. Couper-Kuhlen , and F. Mueller
    (1999) Language in time: The rhythm and tempo of spoken interaction. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Clark, H.H. , and J.E. Fox Tree
    (n.d.) Using uh and um in spontaneous speaking.
  3. Couper-Kuhlen, E
    (1990) Discovering rhythm in conversational English: Perceptual and acoustic approaches to the analysis of isochrony (Arbeitspapier Nr. 13). Konstanz: Universität Konstanz, Fachgruppe Sprachwissenschaft.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. (1993) English speech rhythm: Form and function in everyday verbal interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.25
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/pbns.25 [Google Scholar]
  5. Crystal, D
    (1969) Prosodic systems and intonation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. (1997) The Cambridge encyclopedia of language (2nded.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Crystal, D. , and D. Davy
    (1975) Advanced conversational English. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Crystal, D. , and R. Quirk
    (1964) Systems of prosodic and paralinguistic features in English. The Hague: Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Ehlich, K
    (1993) HIAT: A transcription system for discourse data. In J.A. Edwards & M.D. Lampert (eds.), Talking data: Transcription and coding in discourse research. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 123-148.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Ehlich, K. , and J. Rehbein
    (1976) Halbinterpretative Arbeitstranskriptionen (HIAT). Linguistische Berichte45: 21-41.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. (1979) Erweiterte halbinterpretative Arbeitstranskriptionen (HIAT 2): Intonation. Linguistische Berichte 59: 51-75.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. (1981) Zur Notierung nonverbaler Kommunikation für diskursanalytische Zwecke. In P. Winkler (ed.), Methoden der Analyse von Face-to-Face-Situationen. Stuttgart: Metzler, pp. 302-329.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Gumperz, J.J. , and N. Berenz
    (1993) Transcribing conversational exchanges. In J. Edwards & M. D. Lampert (eds.), Talking data: Transcription and coding in discourse research. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 91-121.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Have, P. ten
    (1999) Doing conversation analysis: A practical guide. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Jefferson, G
    (1989) Preliminary notes on a possible metric which provides for a 'standard maximum' silence of approximately one second in conversation. In D. Roger & P. Bull (eds.), Conversation: An interdisciplinary perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, pp. 166-196.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Kowal, S. , and D.C. O'Connell
    (1995) Notation und Transkription in der Gesprächsforschung. KODIKAS/CODE; Ars Semeiotica: An International Journal of Semiotics 18: 113-138.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. (2000) Psycholinguistische Aspekte der Transkription: Zur Notation von Pausen in Gesprächstranskripten. Linguistische Berichte 183: 353-378.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Psathas, G. , and T. Anderson
    (1990) The 'practices' of transcription in conversation analysis. Semiotica78: 75-99.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Selting, M. , P. Auer , B. Barden , J. Bergmann , E. Couper-Kuhlen , S. Günthner , C. Meier , U. Quasthoff , P. Schlobinski , and S. Uhmann
    (1998) Gesprächsanalytisches Transkriptionssystem (GAT). Linguistische Berichte 173: 91-122.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Svartvik, J
    (ed.) (1990) The London-Lund Corpus of spoken English: Description and research. Lund: Lund University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. (1992) Directions in corpus linguistics: Proceedings of Nobel Symposium 82, Stockholm, 4 - 8 August, 1991. Berlin: de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110867275
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110867275 [Google Scholar]
  22. Svartvik, J. , and R. Quirk
    (eds.) (1980) A corpus of English conversation. Lund: Lund University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error