Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 27 items

  • Author: Rita Finkbeiner x
Clear All Modify Search

Abstract

The paper starts from the question whether bla(h), bla(h), bla(h) - a linguistic expression that is ubiquitous in everyday conversation - is a case of (non)-prototypical total reduplication. It is argued that this syllable triple fulfills a range of formal criteria of total reduplication. On the meaning side, bla(h) is descriptively merely indexical, but may convey a range of additional expressive meaning aspects. However, it seems that triplication of bla(h) does not lead to a substantial change in eaning. This is taken as an argument against reduplication. On the other hand, the results of a corpus study in COCA indicate that there is a strong conversational preference to triplicate bla(h). It is concluded that bla(h), bla(h), bla(h) is neither an instance of (non)-prototypical reduplication nor of ‘free’ repetition, but a conventionalized repetitive pattern.The paper starts from the question whether bla(h), bla(h), bla(h) - a linguistic expression that is ubiquitous in everyday conversation - is a case of (non)-prototypical total reduplication. It is argued that this syllable triple fulfills a range of formal criteria of total reduplication. On the meaning side, bla(h) is descriptively merely indexical, but may convey a range of additional expressive meaning aspects. However, it seems that triplication of bla(h) does not lead to a substantial change in meaning. This is taken as an argument against reduplication. On the other hand, the results of a corpus study in COCA indicate that there is a strong conversational preference to triplicate bla(h). It is concluded that bla(h), bla(h), bla(h) is neither an instance of (non)-prototypical reduplication nor of ‘free’ repetition, but a conventionalized repetitive pattern.

Abstract

In many languages, there are instantiations of non-adjacent syntactic reduplication, sometimes referred to as “syndetic reduplication” (Stolz 2009). Such patterns have been accounted for in constructionist approaches as constructional schemata with a certain semantic meaning that is directly mapped onto form (Jackendoff 2008; Zwarts 2013). However, constructionist approaches often have little to say about the role of pragmatics in the meaning constitution of utterances containing reduplicative constructions. While more recent approaches to “Construction Discourse” (Ostman 2005, 2015) aim to integrate conventional aspects of discourse into constructional schemata, they fail to account for context-variable aspects of meaning that can be regularly inferred by hearers on the basis of general pragmatic principles. In this paper, I investigate the case of Sentence-peripheral Coordinative Reduplication (SpCR), a category not described earlier, arguing that a comprehensive account of SpCR must take into account not only the conventional syntactic, semantic and discoursal properties, but also the more general pragmatic principles that are at work in the meaning constitution of such patterns. More generally, I argue that our theory of reduplication must incorporate a systematic interface with pragmatics.

Abstract

Der Beitrag nähert sich dem Begriff der Expressivität aus sprechakttheoretischer Sicht, indem er der Frage nachgeht, in welchem Sinn Verabschiedungen expressive Sprechakte sind. Ausgehend von Kaplans Analyse von goodbye zeige ich zunächst einige Probleme auf, die sich aus einer semantischen Sicht ergeben. Ich argumentiere, dass es sinnvoll ist, Verabschiedungen im Rahmen einer Sprechakttheorie als Routinehandlungen zu beschreiben, die primär einen sozialen Zweck in der Kommunikation erfüllen. Vor diesem Hintergrund analysiere ich eine Teilklasse von Verabschiedungen, die sich von der Normalform durch besondere ‚expressive‘ Effekte unterscheiden. Auf Basis einer Beispielklassifikation sowie Überlegungen zu ihrer kommunikativen Verwendung mache ich einen Vorschlag zu ihrer theoretischen Modellierung, der die besonderen expressiven Effekte solcher Verabschiedungen als Eigenschaft von Äußerungen begreift, nicht als Eigenschaft der Ausdrücke an sich.

FREE ACCESS
FREE ACCESS
FREE ACCESS