Multimodal metaphors as cognitive pivots for the construction of cultural otherness in talk
-
Ulrike Schröder
Ulrike Schröder is a professor of German Studies and Linguistics at the University of Minas Gerais, Brazil. She studied Communication, German Studies, and Psychology at the University of Essen, Germany, where she obtained her doctor’s degree in 2003 and her Venia Legendi (Habilitation) in 2012. She is the author of three books and has published over 60 book chapters and articles in refereed journals. Her research interests include intercultural pragmatics, cultural linguistics, and interactional linguistics.
Abstract
When people experience and talk about cultural alterity, they normally refer to polar scales, such as “individual/collective orientation patterns” or “direct/indirect ways of speaking” etc. The project of the research group (Inter-)Cultural Communication in Interaction entitled Intercultural communication in extended contacts: linguistic and (self-) reflexive processes (2012–2016) aimed to reveal how exchange students retrospectively co-construct and frame their experiences abroad on a verbal, vocal, and visual-corporal plane in elicited talk on encountered divergent cultural differences. The empirical data of the study originates from the corpus recorded by our group whose activities were initiated at the Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG) in Brazil in 2012 (http://www.letras.ufmg.br/nucleos/nucoi/). The specific proposal was to reveal the connection between communicative and cognitive processes coming into play in the co-construction of cultural dimensions in interaction, especially by the multimodal use of key metaphors and their underlying image schemas. For the theoretical background, conversation analysis and interactional linguistics with its focus on prosodic cues, as well as recent work on the multimodality of cognitive metaphor with its crucial contribution to gesture studies, serve as a starting point for a more detailed microanalytic approach as a first step of analysis. In a second step, we see how the results point to studies in the field of intercultural pragmatics, as well as to underlying polar cognitive cultural schemas, as discussed in cultural linguistics. Schemas found in the sequences might be associated with cultural styles reflected in embodied communication practices: These are strength/looseness, the conceptualization of people/cultures as open or closed, which refers to the container schema, as well as rectilinear/deviating motions designed in relation to the source-path-goal schema.
About the author
Ulrike Schröder is a professor of German Studies and Linguistics at the University of Minas Gerais, Brazil. She studied Communication, German Studies, and Psychology at the University of Essen, Germany, where she obtained her doctor’s degree in 2003 and her Venia Legendi (Habilitation) in 2012. She is the author of three books and has published over 60 book chapters and articles in refereed journals. Her research interests include intercultural pragmatics, cultural linguistics, and interactional linguistics.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank CNPq – the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development, Brazil, for the Fellowship Program “Productivity in Research” (Bolsa de Produtividade – PQ, 2015–2018), as well as FAPEMIG – The Minas Gerais State Research Foundation for the Research Fellowship, Brazil, for the “Research Program Minas Gerais” (Programa Pesquisador Mineiro – PPM, 2015–2017). I also gratefully acknowledge the one-year financial support within the program Capes-Humboldt Research Fellowship for experienced researchers at the University of Münster, supported by CAPES and the Alexander von Humboldt-Foundation (2013–2014). Additionally, I would like to thank Prof. Dr Susanne Günthner for being my host and for having invited me to do my research at the Institute of German Studies. I am also deeply grateful for the support received by the International Office (Martina Hofer), the coordination of the exchange program ERASMUS (Susanne Filler) and the Brazilian Centre (Ricardo Schuch and Luciano Januário de Sales). I appreciate their help in establishing the necessary contacts to the exchange students. Finally, many thanks to those students who voluntarily participated in my project, and to Indra Sülzer and Thomas Böcker for the technical support, especially to Thomas Böcker for the transcription of the German footage. Finally, I would like to thank the two reviewers for their careful reading and critiques which helped to improve the paper.
References
Bakhtin, Mikhail M. 1981 [1930]. The dialogic imagination: Four essays, Ed. Michael Holquist. Trans. Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist. Austin, London: University of Texas Press.Search in Google Scholar
Baldauf, Christa. 1997. Metapher und Kognition. Grundlagen einer neuen Theorie der Alltagsmetapher. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar
Barcelona, Antonio. 2003. On the plausibility of claiming a metonymic motivation for conceptual metaphor. In Antonio Barcelona Antonio (ed.), Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: A cognitive perspective, 31–58. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110894677.31Search in Google Scholar
Bennett, Milton J. 1998. Intercultural communication: A current perspective. In Milton J. Bennett (ed.), Basic concepts of intercultural communication. Selected readings, 1–34. Boston & London: Intercultural Press.10.1002/9781118783665.ieicc0178Search in Google Scholar
Birdwhistell, Ray L. 1970. Kinesics and context. Essays on body motion communication. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.10.9783/9780812201284Search in Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope & Stephen Levinson. 1987 [1978]. Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511813085Search in Google Scholar
Brown, Roger & Albert Gilman. 1969. The pronouns of power and solidarity. In Thomas A. Sebeok (ed.), Style in language, 253–276. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Cameron, Lynne. 2007. Confrontation or complementarity? Metaphor in language use and cognitive metaphor theory. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 5. 107–135.10.1075/arcl.5.06camSearch in Google Scholar
Cameron, Lynne. 2008. Metaphor and talk. In Raymond W. Gibbs Jr (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought, 197–211. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511816802.013Search in Google Scholar
Cameron, Lynne & Alice Deignan. 2003. Combining large and small corpora to investigate tuning devices around metaphor in spoken discourse. Metaphor and Symbol 18(3). 149–160.10.1207/S15327868MS1803_02Search in Google Scholar
Cameron, Lynne & Alice Deignan. 2006. The emergence of metaphor in discourse. Applied Linguistics 27. 671–690.10.1093/applin/aml032Search in Google Scholar
Carvalho, Marília G. & Lino Trevisan. 2003. Relações interculturais entre trabalhadores brasileiros e alemães na VW-Audi de S. José dos Pinhais. Revista Educação & Tecnologia 7. 68–86.Search in Google Scholar
Castelano, Karine L. & Wânia T. Ladeira. 2010. Funções discursivo-interacionais das expressões “assim”, “tipo” e “tipo assim” em narrativas orais. Letra Magna. Revista de Divulgação Científica em Língua Portuguesa, Linguística e Literatura 06(12). 1–17.Search in Google Scholar
Cienki, Alan. 1998. Metaphoric gestures and some of their relations to verbal metaphoric expressions. In Jeand-Pierre Koenig (ed.), Discourse and cognition: Bridging the gap, 189–204. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Search in Google Scholar
Cienki, Alan. 2008. Why study metaphor and gesture?. In Alan Cienki & Cornelia Müller (eds.), Metaphor and Gesture, 5–25. Amsterdam & Philadelhpia: John Benjamins.10.1075/gs.3.04cieSearch in Google Scholar
Cienki, Alan & Cornelia Müller. 2008. Metaphor, gesture, and thought. In Raymond W. Gibbs Jr (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought, 483–501. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511816802.029Search in Google Scholar
Croft, William. 1993. The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies. Cognitive Linguistics 4(4). 335–370.10.1515/cogl.1993.4.4.335Search in Google Scholar
Cunha, Antonio Geraldo da. 2010. Dicionário Etimológico da língua portuguesa. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Lexikon.Search in Google Scholar
Gerard J., Steen, Aletta A. Dorst, J. Berenike Herrman, Anna A. Kaal, Tina Krennmayr & Trijntje Pasma (eds.). 2010. A method for linguistic metaphor identification. From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/celcr.14Search in Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1971. Relations in public: Microstudies of the public order. New York: Basic Books.Search in Google Scholar
Goossens, Louis. 1990. Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action. Cognitive Linguistics 1. 323–340.10.1515/cogl.1990.1.3.323Search in Google Scholar
Grady, Joseph E. 1997. Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors and primary scenes. Berkeley: Department of Linguistics, University of California at Berkeley Doctoral dissertation .Search in Google Scholar
Grady, Joseph E. 2005. Primary metaphors as inputs to conceptual integration. Journal of Pragmatics 37. 1595–1614.10.1016/j.pragma.2004.03.012Search in Google Scholar
Günthner, Susanne. 1999a. Thematisierung moralischer Normen in der interkulturellen Kommunikation. In Jörg Bergmann & Thomas Luckmann (eds.), Kommunikative Konstruktion von Moral. Band 1: Struktur und Dynamik der Formen moralischer Kommunikation, 225–251. Wiesbaden: Opladen.Search in Google Scholar
Günthner, Susanne. 1999b. Polyphony and the ‘layering of voices’ in reported dialogues: An analysis of the use of prosodic devices in everyday reported speech. Journal of Pragmatics 31. 685–708.10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00093-9Search in Google Scholar
Günthner, Susanne. 2002. Stimmenvielfalt im Diskurs. Formen der Stilisierung und Ästhetisierung in der Redewiedergabe. Gesprächsforschung. Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion 3. 59–80.Search in Google Scholar
Günthner, Susanne. 2008. Negotiating Rapport in German-Chinese Conversation. In Helen Spencer-Oatey (ed.), Culturally speaking. Culture, communication and politeness theory, 207–226. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar
Günthner, Susanne. 2011. The construction of emotional involvement in everyday german narratives – interactive uses of ‘dense constructions’. Pragmatics 21(4). 573–592.10.1075/prag.21.4.04gunSearch in Google Scholar
Hall, Edward T. 1966. The hidden dimension. Garden City: Anchor Books.Search in Google Scholar
Henne, Helmut & Helmut Rehbock. 2001. Einführung in die Gesprächsanalyse. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110906189Search in Google Scholar
Houaiss, Antônio, Mauro de Salles Villar & Francisco Manuel de Mello Franco. 2009. Dicionário Houaiss da língua portuguesa. Rio de Janeiro: Objetiva.Search in Google Scholar
House, Juliane. 2003. Misunderstanding in intercultural university encounters. In Juliane House & Gabriele Kasper (eds.), Misunderstanding in social life. Discourse approaches to problematic talk, 22–56. London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar
House, Juliane. 2010. Impoliteness in Germany: Intercultural encounters in everyday and institutional talk. Intercultural Pragmatics 7(4). 561–595.10.1515/iprg.2010.026Search in Google Scholar
House, Juliane & Gabriele Kasper. 1981. Politeness markers in English and German. In Florian Coulmas (ed.), Conversational Routine, 157–186. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110809145.157Search in Google Scholar
Inoue, Kazuko. 1974. Innovating uses of Japanese honorifics and polite forms. Papers in Japanese Linguistics 4. 19–41.10.1515/jjl-1974-1-202Search in Google Scholar
Johnson, Mark. 1987. The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226177847.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Johnson, Mark. 2005. The philosophical significance of image schemas. In Beate Hampe & Joseph E. Grady (eds.), From perception to meaning. Image schemas in cognitive linguistics, 15–33. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110197532.1.15Search in Google Scholar
Kasper, Gabriele. 2008. Data collection in pragmatics research. In Helen Spencer-Oatey (ed.), Culturally speaking. Culture, communication and politeness theory, 279–303. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar
Kecskes, Istvan. 2012. Encyclopaedic knowledge and cultural models. In Hans-Jörg Schmid (ed.), Cognitive pragmatics, 175–197. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110214215.175Search in Google Scholar
Kecskes, Istvan. 2014. Intercultural pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199892655.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Kecskes, Istvan. 2015. Language, culture, and context. In Farzad Sharifian (ed.), The routledge handbook of language and culture, 113–128. Abingdon, NY: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Kendon, Adam. 1972. Some relationships between body motion and speech. An analysis of an example. In Aaron Siegman & Benjamin Pope (eds.), Studies in dyadic communication, 177–216. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press.10.1016/B978-0-08-015867-9.50013-7Search in Google Scholar
Kendon, Adam. 2013. Exploring the utterance roles of visible bodily action: A personal account. In Cornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silvia Ladewig, David McNeill & Sedinha Teßendorf (eds.), Body – language – communication. an international handbook on multimodality in human interaction. Volume 1, 7–28. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110261318.7Search in Google Scholar
Kluge, Friedrich & Elmar Seebold. 2002. Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache. Berlin, NY: de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
König, Katharina. 2010. Sprachliche Kategorisierungsverfahren und subjektive Theorien über Sprache in narrativen Interviews. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Linguistik 53. 31–57.10.1515/zfal.2010.008Search in Google Scholar
Kövecses, Zoltán. 2002. Metaphor: A practical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Kövecses, Zoltán. 2003. Metaphor and emotion. Language, culture, and body in human feeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Kövecses, Zoltán. 2005. Metaphor in Culture. Universality and variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511614408Search in Google Scholar
Kövecses, Zoltán & Günther Radden. 1998. Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics 9. 37–77.10.1515/cogl.1998.9.1.37Search in Google Scholar
Lage, Caroline de. 2013. Comunicação Interpessoal e Intercultural entre Brasileiros e Alemães: Análise dos Momentos de Conflito. Belo Horizonte: Dissertação de Mestrado, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Estudos Linguísticos na Faculdade de Letras da Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais.Search in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 1999. Philosophy in the flesh. The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.Search in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 2003 [1980]. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226470993.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar. Volume I: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Littlemore, Jeannette. 2003. The effect of cultural background on metaphor interpretation. Metaphor and Symbol 18(4). 273–288.10.1207/S15327868MS1804_4Search in Google Scholar
Littlemore, Jeannette. 2008. The relationship between associative thinking, analogical reasoning, image formation and metaphoric extension strategies. In Mara Sophia Zanotto, Lynne Cameron & Marilda C. Cavalcanti (eds.), Confronting metaphor in use. An applied linguistic approach, 199–222. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.173.14litSearch in Google Scholar
Littlemore, Jeannette & Graham Low. 2006. Metaphoric competence and communicative language ability. Applied Linguistics 27(2). 268–294.10.1093/applin/aml004Search in Google Scholar
Loenhoff, Jens. 2008. Zu einem reflexiven Konzept interkultureller Kompetenz. In Achim Eschbach, Mark A. Halawa & Jens Loenhoff (eds.), Audiatur et alter pars. Kommunikationswissenschaft zwischen Historiographie, Theorie und empirischer Forschung. Festschrift für H. Walter Schmitz, 98–117. Aachen: Shaker Verlag.Search in Google Scholar
Markowsky, Richard & Alexander Thomas. 1995. Studienhalber in Deutschland. Interkulturelles Orientierungstraining für amerikanische Studenten, Schüler und Praktikanten. Heidelberg: Asanger.Search in Google Scholar
Marschark, Marc. 2005. Metaphors in sign language and sign language users: A window into relations of language and thought. In Herbert L. Colston & Albert N. Katz (eds.), Figurative language comprehension: Social and cultural influences, 209–234. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Search in Google Scholar
McNeill, David. 1992. Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar
McNeill, David. 2013. Gesture as a window onto mind and brain, and the relationship to linguistic relativity and ontogenesis. In Cornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silvia Ladewig, David McNeill & Sedinha Teßendorf (eds.), Body – language – communication. An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction. Volume 1, 28–54. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110261318.28Search in Google Scholar
Meireles, Selma Martins. 2001. A negação sintática em diálogos do alemão e do português do Brasil. Pandaemonium Germanicum 5. 139–168.10.11606/1982-8837.pg.2001.64331Search in Google Scholar
Mittelberg, Irene & Linda R. Waugh. 2009. Metonymy first, metaphor second: A cognitive-semiotic approach to multimodal figures of though. In co-speech gesture, Charles J. Forceville & Eduardo Urios-Aparisi (eds.), Multimodal Metaphor, 329–355. Berlin, NY: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Müller, Cornelia. 1998. Redebegleitende gesten: Kulturgeschichte – theorie – sprachvergleich. Berlin: Arno Spitz.Search in Google Scholar
Müller, Cornelia. 2004. Forms and uses of the palm up open hand: A case of a gesture family?. In Cornelia Müller & Roland Posner (eds.), Semantics and pragmatics of everyday gestures, 234–256. Berlin: Weidler.Search in Google Scholar
Müller, Cornelia. 2008. What gestures reveal about the nature of metaphor. In Alan Cienki & Cornelia Müller (eds.), Metaphor and gesture, 219–245. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/gs.3.12mulSearch in Google Scholar
Müller, Cornelia, Jana Bressem & Silva H. Ladewig. 2013. Towards a grammar of gestures: A form-based view. In Cornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silvia Ladewig, David McNeill & Sedinha Teßendorf (eds.), Body – language – communication. An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction. Volume 1, 707–733. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110261318.707Search in Google Scholar
Müller, Cornelia & Alan Cienki. 2009. Words, gestures, and beyond: Forms of multimodal metaphor in the use of spoken language. In Charles Forceville & Edurado Urios-Aparisi (eds.), Multimodal Metaphor, 297–328. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Müller, Cornelia, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silvia Ladewig, David McNeill & Sedinha Teßendorf (eds.). 2013. Body – language – communication. An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction. Volume 1. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Search in Google Scholar
Müller, Cornelia, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silvia Ladewig, David McNeill & Sedinha Teßendorf (eds.). 2014. Body – language – communication. An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction. Volume 2. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Search in Google Scholar
Müller, Cornelia, Silvia Ladewig & Jana Bressem. 2013. Gestures and speech from a linguistic perspective: A new field and its history. In Cornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silvia Ladewig, David McNeill & Sedinha Teßendorf (eds.), Body – language – communication. An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction. Volume 1, 55–81. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110261318.55Search in Google Scholar
Murphy, Gregory L. 1996. On metaphoric representation. Cognition 60. 173–204.10.1016/0010-0277(96)00711-1Search in Google Scholar
Pragglejaz Group. 2007. MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol 22. 1–39.10.1080/10926480709336752Search in Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1995. Lectures on conversation. Volume 2. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.10.1002/9781444328301Search in Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg. 2012. Generalizing the apparently ungeneralizable. Basic ingredients of a cognitive-pragmatic approach to the construal of meaning-in-context. In Hans-Jörg Schmid (ed.), Cognitive pragmatics, 3–22. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110214215.3Search in Google Scholar
Schmidt, Thomas & Kai Wörner. 2009. EXMARaLDA – Creating, analysing and sharing spoken language corpora for pragmatic research. Pragmatics 19. 565–582.10.1075/prag.19.4.06schSearch in Google Scholar
Schröder, Ulrike. 2003. Brasilianische und deutsche Wirklichkeiten. Eine vergleichende Fallstudie zu kommunikativ erzeugten Sinnwelten. Wiesbaden: Deutscher Universitätsverlag.10.1007/978-3-322-81302-2Search in Google Scholar
Schröder, Ulrike. 2010. Speech styles and functions of speech from a cross-cultural perspective. Journal of Pragmatics 42(2). 466–476.10.1016/j.pragma.2009.06.014Search in Google Scholar
Schröder, Ulrike. 2011. Pragmática intercultural no ensino de alemão no Brasil. In Ruth Bohunovsky (ed.), Ensinar Alemão no Brasil. Contextos e Conteúdos, 147–170. Curitiba: Editora UFPR.Search in Google Scholar
Schröder, Ulrike. 2014a. The interplay of politeness, conflict styles, rapport management and metacommunication in Brazilian-German interaction. Intercultural Pragmatics 11. 57–82.10.1515/ip-2014-0003Search in Google Scholar
Schröder, Ulrike. 2014b. Interkulturelle Kommunikation zwischen Deutschen und Brasilianern im Lichte von Strategien der (Un-)höflichkeit, divergierenden Konfliktstilen und Formen des Beziehungsmanagements. In Csaba Földes (ed.), Interkulturalität unter dem Blickwinkel von Semantik und Pragmatik, 207–224. Tübingen: Narr, Francke Attempto.Search in Google Scholar
Schröder, Ulrike. 2015. Society and culture as container: (Re-)Drawing borders and their metaphorical foundation from a communicative and extracommunicative point of view. International Journal of Language and Culture 2. 38–61.10.1075/ijolc.2.1.02schSearch in Google Scholar
Schröder, Ulrike & Carolina de Viterbo Lage. 2014. Estratégias de polidez em momentos de dissensão: Análise de uma interação entre estudantes brasileiros e alemães. Revista de Estudos da Linguagem 22(1). 153–179.10.17851/2237-2083.22.1.153-179Search in Google Scholar
Schütz, Alfred. 1971. Gesammelte Aufsätze I. Das Problem der sozialen Wirklichkeit. Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Search in Google Scholar
Selting, Margret, Peter Auer, Dagmar Barth-Weingarten, et al. 2011. A system for transcribing talk-in-interaction: GAT 2; translated and adapted for English by Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen and Dagmar Barth-Weingarten. Gesprächsforschung – Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion 12. 1–51. http://www.gespraechsforschung-ozs.de/fileadmin/dateien/heft2011/px-gat2-englisch.pdf (accessed 31 December 2016).Search in Google Scholar
Senft, Gunter. 1995. Elicitation. In Jef Verschueren, Jan-Ola Östman & Jan Blommaert (eds.), Handbook of pragmatics: Manual, 577–581. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/hop.m.eli1Search in Google Scholar
Shibatani, Masayoshi. 1994. Honorifics. In Ronald E. Asher & James M. Y. Simpson (eds.), The encyclopedia of language and linguistics, 1600–1608. Oxford & New York: Pergamon Press.Search in Google Scholar
Sidnell, Jack. 2010. Conversation analysis. An introduction. Malden, Oxford, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1093/obo/9780199772810-0062Search in Google Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, Helen. 2008. Face, (im)politeness and rapport. In Helen Spencer-Oatey (ed.), Culturally speaking. Culture, communication and politeness theory, 11–47. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar
Triandis, Harry C. 1995. Individualism and collectivism. Boulder: Westview.Search in Google Scholar
Weber, Roziney Alencar Melo. 2004. A Comunicação intercultural no ambiente de trabalho: A interação entre trabalhoadores brasileiros e estrangeiros em empresas multinacionais no Brasil. Florianópolis: Dissertação apresentada ao Programa de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia de Produção da Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina.Search in Google Scholar
Weinrich, Harald. 1976. Sprache in Texten. Stuttgart: Ernst Klett.Search in Google Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna. 2003. Cross-Cultural Pragmatics. The Semantics of Human Interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110220964Search in Google Scholar
Appendix: Transcription conventions [8]
- [ ]
overlap and simultaneous talk
- [ ]
- =
fast, immediate continuation with a new turn or segment (latching)
- and_uh
cliticizations within units
- hm_hm
bi-syllabic tokens
- (.)
micro pause, up to 0.2 sec.
- (-)
short pause of 0.2–0.5 sec.
- (–)
intermediary pause of 0.5–0.8 sec.
- (2.0)
measured pause of 2.0 sec.
- :, ::, :::
lengthening (0.2–0.5 sec.; 0.5–0.8 sec.; 0.8–1.0 sec.)
- ((laughs))
non-verbal vocal actions and events
- ≪laughing>>
para-verbal and non-verbal action as accompanying speech with indication of scope
- ≪acc>
accelerando
- (may i)
assumed wording
- (i say/let’s say)
possible alternatives
- ºhh hhº
in- and outbreaths
- (xxx)
one unintelligible syllable
- acCENT
focus accent
- accEnt
secondary accent
- ac!CENT!
extra strong accent
- ?
rising to high final pitch movement of intonation unit
- ,
rising to mid final pitch movement of intonation unit
- -
level final pitch movement of intonation unit
- ;
falling to mid final pitch movement of intonation unit
- .
falling to low final pitch movement of intonation unit
- ˆSO
rising-falling accent pitch movement
- ˇSO
falling-rising accent pitch movement
- ´SO
rising accent pitch movement
- `SO
falling accent pitch movement
- ↑
pitch upstep
- ↓
pitch downstep
© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Figurative language in intercultural communication – a case study of German-Southern African international academic discourse
- Multimodal metaphors as cognitive pivots for the construction of cultural otherness in talk
- Conceptualizing politeness in Japanese and Greek
- Forum
- Conversational presuppositions: Presupposition as defeasible inference
- Book Review
- Martin Pütz Justyna A. Robinson Monika Reif: Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Social and Cultural Variation in Cognition and Language Use
- Arnd Witte: Blending Spaces: Mediating and Assessing Intercultural Competence in the L2 Classroom
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Figurative language in intercultural communication – a case study of German-Southern African international academic discourse
- Multimodal metaphors as cognitive pivots for the construction of cultural otherness in talk
- Conceptualizing politeness in Japanese and Greek
- Forum
- Conversational presuppositions: Presupposition as defeasible inference
- Book Review
- Martin Pütz Justyna A. Robinson Monika Reif: Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Social and Cultural Variation in Cognition and Language Use
- Arnd Witte: Blending Spaces: Mediating and Assessing Intercultural Competence in the L2 Classroom
