Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (469)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (74)
- Review (71)
- Doctoral Thesis (46)
- Part of a Book (26)
- Postprint (26)
- Preprint (20)
- Master's Thesis (17)
- Other (14)
- Course Material (1)
Keywords
- Conversation Analysis (6)
- Englischunterricht (6)
- Interactional Linguistics (5)
- Fremdsprachenunterricht (4)
- Germany (4)
- Konversationsanalyse (4)
- world literature (4)
- Great Britain (3)
- Ludwig Leichhardt (3)
- Tupaia (3)
Institute
- Institut für Anglistik und Amerikanistik (766) (remove)
Conventional wisdom since the earliest studies of Irish English has attributed much of what is distinctive about this variety to the influence of the Irish language. From the early philologists (Joyce 1910, van Hamel 1912) through the classic works of Henry (1957, 1958) and Bliss (1979) down to present-day linguistic orientations (e.g. Corrigan 2000 a, Filppula 1999, Fiess 2000, Hickey 2000, Todd 1999, and others), the question of Irish-language influence may be disputed on points of detail, but remains a central focus for most studies in the field. It is not our intention to argue with this consensus, nor to examine specific points of grammar in detail, but, rather, to suggest an approach to this question which (a) takes for its empirical base a sample of the standard language, rather than dialectal material or the sample sentences so beloved of many papers on the subject, and (b) understands Celticity not just in terms of the formal transfer of grammatical features, but as an indexical feature of language use, i.e. one in which English in Ireland is used in such a way as to point to the Irish language as a linguistic and cultural reference point. In this sense, our understanding of Celticity is not entirely grammatical, but relies as well on Pierce’s notion of indexicality (see Greenlee 1973), by which semiotic signs ‘point to’ other signs. Our focus in assessing Celticity, then, derives in the first instance from an examination of the International Corpus of English (ICE). We have recently completed the publication of the Irish component of ICE (ICE-Ireland), a machinereadable corpus of over 1 million words of speech and writing gathered from a range of contexts determined by the protocols of the global International Corpus of English project. The international nature of this corpus project makes for ready comparisons with other varieties of English, and in this paper we will focus on comparisons with the British corpus, ICE-GB. For references on ICE generally, see Greenbaum 1996; for ICE-GB, see especially Nelson, Wallis and Aarts 2002; and for ICE-Ireland, see papers such as Kirk, Kallen, Lowry & Rooney (2003), Kirk & Kallen (2005), and Kallen & Kirk (2007). Our first approach will be to look for signs of overt Celticity in those grammatical features of Irish English which have been put forward as evidence of Celtic transfer (or of the reinforcement between Celtic and non-Celtic historical sources); our second approach will be to look at non-grammatical ways in which texts in ICEIreland become indexical of Celticity by less structural means such as loanwords, code-switching, and covert reference using ‘standard’ English in ways that are specific to Irish usage. We argue that, at least within the standard language as we have observed it, Celticity is at once less obvious than a reading of the dialectal literature might suggest and, at the same time, more pervasive than a purely grammatical approach would imply.
The development of speaking competence is widely regarded as a central aspect of second language (L2) learning. It may be questioned, however, if the currently predominant ways of conceptualising the term fully satisfy the complexity of the construct: Although there is growing recognition that language primarily constitutes a tool for communication and participation in social life, as yet it is rare for conceptualisations of speaking competence to incorporate the ability to inter-act and co-construct meaning with co-participants. Accordingly, skills allowing for the successful accomplishment of interactional tasks (such as orderly speaker change, and resolving hearing and understanding trouble) also remain largely unrepresented in language teaching and assessment. As fostering the ability to successfully use the L2 within social interaction should arguably be a main objective of language teaching, it appears pertinent to broaden the construct of speaking competence by incorporating interactional competence (IC). Despite there being a growing research interest in the conceptualisation and development of (L2) IC, much of the materials and instruments required for its teaching and assessment, and thus for fostering a broader understanding of speaking competence in the L2 classroom, still await development. This book introduces an approach to the identification of candidate criterial features for the assessment of EFL learners’ L2 repair skills. Based on a corpus of video-recorded interaction between EFL learners, and following conversation-analytic and interactional-linguistic methodology as well as drawing on basic premises of research in the framework of Conversation Analysis for Second Language Acquisition, differences between (groups of) learners in terms of their L2 repair conduct are investigated through qualitative and inductive analyses. Candidate criterial features are derived from the analysis results. This book does not only contribute to the operationalisation of L2 IC (and of L2 repair skills in particular), but also lays groundwork for the construction of assessment scales and rubrics geared towards the evaluation of EFL learners’ L2 interactional skills.
This article offers an in-depth analysis of one particular type of meta-talk. It looks at how speakers use the meta-pragmatic claim to have previously communicated ('said' or 'meant') the same as, or the equivalent of, what their interlocutor just said. Through detailed sequential analyses, it is shown that this claim is frequently used as a practice for disarming disaffiliative responses and thus to manage (and often resolve) incipient disagreement. Besides unpacking the precise mechanisms underlying this practice, the paper also takes stock of the various (and partly variable) lexico-morpho-syntactic, prosodic and bodily-visual elements of conduct that recurrently enter into its composition. Since the practice essentially rests on the speaker’s insinuation of having been misunderstood by their co-participant, its relationship to the organization of repair will also be discussed. It is argued that the practice operates precisely at the intersection of stance-management (agreement/disagreement) and repair, and that it exhibits features which reflect this intersectional character. Data are in English.
This article offers an in-depth analysis of one particular type of meta-talk. It looks at how speakers use the meta-pragmatic claim to have previously communicated ('said' or 'meant') the same as, or the equivalent of, what their interlocutor just said. Through detailed sequential analyses, it is shown that this claim is frequently used as a practice for disarming disaffiliative responses and thus to manage (and often resolve) incipient disagreement. Besides unpacking the precise mechanisms underlying this practice, the paper also takes stock of the various (and partly variable) lexico-morpho-syntactic, prosodic and bodily-visual elements of conduct that recurrently enter into its composition. Since the practice essentially rests on the speaker’s insinuation of having been misunderstood by their co-participant, its relationship to the organization of repair will also be discussed. It is argued that the practice operates precisely at the intersection of stance-management (agreement/disagreement) and repair, and that it exhibits features which reflect this intersectional character. Data are in English.
A close comparative analysis of the attrition of inflections in historical English and Welsh reveals that Welsh had already lost its entire NP inflection when it surfaces in writing in the 7c AD, while English was still fully inflected both in the NP and VP. The comparison of the modern English and Welsh morphological categories shows that English overtook Welsh in its rate of analyticising drift. This shows first in writing during the Middle English period. Thus in English, the attrition bothfully affected the NP and the VP, while in modern Welsh the attrition of the verbal inflection in the VP is much less advanced than in English. Both languages, however, share the shift in the VP from the synthetism of verbal tense, mood (and voice) marking towards analytic aspect marking, which continues to gain in importance in both languages today. The question is raised, whether this joint development may have been due to the influence of the 'Late British' speaking shifters to Old English, to prolongued areal contactin the island of Britain ("Sprachbund") and/or to a more general drift from syntheticity to analycity in (Western) IE languages in Europe, which affects some languages more than others. The Appendix prints the earliest Old English and Old Welsh texts (dated by absolute chronology) and marks their loss of inflections, in order to highlight the advanced analycity in the Old Welsh NP as opposed to the Old English NP.