Volume 37, Issue 3 -

This study examines the linguistic feature known as discourse connector using a corpus-informed approach. The study applies a taxonomy which classifies and describes 632 discourse connectors in eight broad classes with 17 categories. The frequency of use of each discourse connector listed was analyzed in the three different registers of spoken, non-academic and academic English in the two different cultural contexts of British and American English. The resulting data on discourse connector frequency were compiled in a database and processed with various statistical formulae to highlight multi-register and cross-cultural differences and similarities of use of each discourse connector. An interpretation of the use of this database, which is free to download and use, is included in the study as well as a discussion of the results and the potential for use as a research and pedagogical tool.

This paper addresses the role of prosodic and phonetic features in talk, focussing on how to identify competitive overlaps in conversations. It has previously been claimed that turn competition may be distinguishable from non-competitive overlaps, based on phonetic/prosodic features alone. We test this hypothesis on recordings from a UK-based call center, combining a conversation analytic approach with quantitative methods using a coding scheme. Our long-term aim is to develop large-scale methods operationalizing what we know about conversational sequence and social actions into speech technological applications. Our findings show that, although there is a tendency for competitive overlaps to be more prominent in terms of loudness and pitch features than non-competitive overlaps, this difference is not sufficient to reliably identify turn competitions from the speech signal itself. We discuss the findings in relation to observations made in individual examples, and conclude by highlighting some of the methodological challenges of applying findings from the linguistic and conversation analytic literature to speech technologies.

This article examines an oral story that displays how embodiment is crucial for understanding language in interaction. It demonstrates how stance, which refers to the way speakers or hearers evaluate the topic of conversation, is an embodied activity. Drawing on theories of discourse analysis, this study examines natural data collected in Morocco and argues that storytelling is a social and interactive practice. A shopkeeper recounts an unusual dining event, which started with commensality and ended with a physical dispute. The storyteller tells his story, enacts its events, and displays stance through intricate forms of embodiment, including contrasts and different ways of producing and copying gestures. Analysis shows that telling a story, beyond a matter of verbal narrative, is performed through embodied enactments to allow for achieving co-participation and alignment. The data also reveal a unique way of intensifying storytelling through both verbal and embodied repetition of selected story events.

This paper presents an analysis of letters written by two fathers to their daughters in the highly acclaimed Chinese reality TV show Dad Where Are We Going , exploring how father identities are constructed through meaning choices in language use. Drawing on Systemic Functional Linguistics, three inter-related coding schemes were developed: Speech Function (what is done), Experience (what is said) and Evaluation (how things said are evaluated). After the letters were coded, quantitative analyses were conducted of all meaning choices – realized in lexicogrammatical forms – made by the two fathers in their letters. The results reveal meaning features that function to construct the two fathers’ identities: one as a sensitive and devoted “servant”, willing to do all he can for the physical and emotional well-being of his daughter, meanwhile inclined to self-criticism and hoping to improve his performance; and the other as a perceptive and dedicated “mentor”, aware of both strong and weak points of his daughter and concerned with her personal development, setting out specific qualities and behaviors for her to acquire. The analysis demonstrates how a systematic analysis of one’s meaning choices, supported by linguistic evidence, helps to avoid selective attention to certain discourse features, apart from shedding new light on identity construction.

This paper explores an overlooked yet intriguing phenomenon: the different preferences of first language (L1) and second language (L2) groups in the use of I don’t think and I think + not . Based on naturally occurring data from linguistically and culturally contrastive groups of American English speakers, Chinese and Persian English speakers, this study finds that I don’t think highlights the speaker’s opinion, and I think + not focuses on the content conveyed. There is a correlation between the negative power and the distance between I think and the negative marker: the closer the two, the stronger the negativity. While I don’t think has more negativity force, I think+not has more mitigating weight and can be employed as a politeness strategy. The L1 speakers differ from the L2 speakers but are closer to the Chinese than the Persians; the striking variations occur between the L1 speakers and the Persians. The Persians are found to be the most indirect; the Chinese are more direct than the Persians but less direct than the L1 speakers. The differences between L1 and L2 groups relate to the first-language transfer and cultural influence. This study implies that different varieties of English use need to be addressed in language teaching.