- Home
- e-Journals
- Pragmatics
- Previous Issues
- Volume 15, Issue, 2005
Pragmatics - Volume 15, Issue 1, 2005
Volume 15, Issue 1, 2005
-
Regulation of behavior and attention in Estonian, Finnish, and Swedish peer interaction
Author(s): Boel De Geer, Tiia Tulviste and Luule Mizerapp.: 1–24 (24)More LessThe aim of this study is to compare the regulatory speech used by Estonian, Finnish, and Swedish kindergarten children. 62 dyads with children of 3-6 years were videotaped during play. All regulatory speech was coded according to play situation (game play or free play), focus of regulation (behavior or attention), addressee (peer or both), sentence form, pragmatic form, and outcome (response). The results confirm earlier studies and show a more symmetrical interaction in the Swedish group (S) than in the Estonian (E) and Finnish (F) groups. E and F were found to be more controlling than S, both in behavior and in attention regulation. Further, E and F were more direct in regulation, using imperatives as orders and preventing utterances, rather than declaratives or questions, which were most frequent in the S data. Although the outcomes of peer regulation were mainly compliance in all groups, S more often negotiated regulation. E and F were more often silent following regulation.
-
Revisiting the methodological debate on interruptions
Author(s): Marie-Noëlle Guillotpp.: 25–47 (23)More LessThis paper considers issues relating to the identification and categorisation of interruptive acts for cross- cultural study, as revealed by the conflicting methodological requirements of a medium-scale project involving contrastive analysis of confrontational native speaker and non-native speaker talk in French and English. The paper opens with a brief introduction to the project, followed by a review of issues from the conflicting ends of corpus annotation and Conversation Analysis, the main locus of information about, and research into, sequential aspects of talk and interruptive phenomena. It then uses two examples from the project data for native English and French respectively to reveal and discuss tensions between diverging requirements in the categorisation of interruptive acts. It shows that, while categorising interruptive phenomena inevitably entails a degree of arbitrariness - minimised in either very large corpora or small scale situated analysis -, medium-size data are peculiarly vulnerable to issues of empirical validity, but that their function and the options they create to derive critical findings from the tensions between approaches make them an important tool for research, notably cross-cultural research.
-
Writer’s argumentative attitude
Author(s): Gabrina Poundspp.: 49–88 (40)More LessThis article deals with those aspects of language that can be seen to carry out a primarily “interactional function” in that they are used to “establish and maintain social relationships” (Brown and Yule 1983: 2 and 3). Such aspects have been variously referred to as performing an “expressive” (Bühler 1934), “emotive” (Jakobson 1960), “social expressive” (Lyons 1977) or “interpersonal” (Halliday 1994) function or, more recently, as performing the function by which “social roles and relationships are constructed” (White 2002: 2). In this article such aspects are referred to in very general terms as ‘attitudinal’ or as carrying ‘attitudinal meaning’ or expressing ‘attitude’. It is widely accepted that the interaction generated through language has a strong pragmatic dimension, that is, it can hardly be appreciated out of context. This article is particularly concerned with highlighting the significance and the all-pervasive nature of such pragmatic dimension in the case of the interaction engendered between writers and readers through the medium of Letters to the Editor published in the English and Italian print media. The following three questions arise: 1) At which linguistic level can specific attitudinal resources be identified and compared? 2) To what extent may the extra linguistic context play a role in the specific case of Letters to the Editor? 3) Are similar attitudinal resources and strategies used in the English and Italian letters? How may any differences be explained? In order to answer these questions the article firstly explores the nature of attitudinal meaning as outlined in previous studies. The second section focuses on the cultural context in which the letters are produced with particular reference to the role of language, argumentation, the press and the genre Letters to the Editor in England and Italy. The third section deals with the argumentative structure of the letters and the specific attitudinal meanings associated with the various components of such structure. The method of analysis is illustrated through examples from the English corpus. The main findings are presented and a comparison is drawn between the two corpora. The findings are further assessed in the light of the contextual framework set out in the preceding section.
-
Metalinguistic activity, humor and social competence in classroom discourse
Author(s): David Povedapp.: 89–107 (19)More LessThis paper examines the role that humor plays during an episode of classroom interaction. Using concepts derived from the ethnography of communication and interactional sociolinguistics, it analyzes activity during a metalinguistic event in a kindergarten classroom and argues that verbal humor, in itself a form of metalinguistic activity, plays a crucial role in the modulation of children’s face demands. The analysis also shows how humor is the result of the shared history of participants. The findings highlight the importance of considering emergent and improvised goals during classroom discourse that go beyond the prescribed curriculum.
-
Collaborative strategies in Chinese telephone conversation closings
Author(s): Hao Sunpp.: 109–128 (20)More LessThis study is focused on Chinese telephone conversation closings in non-institutional settings. The purpose is to provide a descriptive account of characteristics of Chinese telephone conversation closings. This article reports findings of differences between Chinese and English calls regarding initiation of closing, length and structure of leave-taking, and interactional styles such as repetition and overlaps.
Volumes & issues
-
Volume 35 (2025)
-
Volume 34 (2024)
-
Volume 33 (2023)
-
Volume 32 (2022)
-
Volume 31 (2021)
-
Volume 30 (2020)
-
Volume 29 (2019)
-
Volume 28 (2018)
-
Volume 27 (2017)
-
Volume 26 (2016)
-
Volume 25 (2015)
-
Volume 24 (2014)
-
Volume 23 (2013)
-
Volume 22 (2012)
-
Volume 21 (2011)
-
Volume 20 (2010)
-
Volume 19 (2009)
-
Volume 18 (2008)
-
Volume 17 (2007)
-
Volume 16 (2006)
-
Volume 15 (2005)
-
Volume 14 (2004)
-
Volume 13 (2003)
-
Volume 12 (2002)
-
Volume 11 (2001)
-
Volume 10 (2000)
-
Volume 9 (1999)
-
Volume 8 (1998)
-
Volume 7 (1997)
-
Volume 6 (1996)
-
Volume 5 (1995)
-
Volume 4 (1994)
-
Volume 3 (1993)
-
Volume 2 (1992)
-
Volume 1 (1991)
Most Read This Month

-
-
Pragmatic markers
Author(s): Bruce Fraser
-
-
-
Learning to think for speaking
Author(s): Dan I. Slobin
-
-
-
Language ideology
Author(s): Kathryn A. Woolard
-
- More Less