说话者和听者如何消除多功能词的歧义?

IF 0.6 3区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Christoph Rühlemann, S. Gries
{"title":"说话者和听者如何消除多功能词的歧义?","authors":"Christoph Rühlemann, S. Gries","doi":"10.1075/fol.18050.ruh","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n Well is an exemplary multi-functional word performing pragmatic and syntactic functions. That\n multi-functionality poses a potential problem: How do hearers in conversation determine which function is actualized and how do speakers\n project the function actualized? We address both questions examining factors hearers rely on to disambiguate well and the\n resources speakers deploy to designate well’s function. The study is based on 8-, 9-, and 10-word turns containing\n well extracted from the British National Corpus for which audio files from the Audio BNC are available. We include\n duration, measuring well’s durations in Praat. The workflow comprised both qualitative and quantitative methods.\n Qualitatively, all turns were manually inspected and the functions and subfunctions of well were identified. Due to data\n paucity the quantitative analysis was based only on a broad distinction between syntactic and pragmatic functions. The analysis involved two\n logistic regression model selection processes, one adopting a hearer, one a speaker perspective. Based on the factors position in the turn,\n duration and lexical context, our final models indicate that hearers disambiguate the two main functions of well drawing on\n lexical context and position in the turn while speakers project well’s functions by modulating duration. We propose that\n Hoey’s (2005) 6th priming hypothesis, concerned with polysemy, can be extended to also include\n polyfunctionality. Position also suggests a reading in terms of Hoey’s ‘textual colligation’ hypothesis related to a word’s\n position: particularly in its incarnation as a marker of dispreferreds, pragmatic well is heavily primed\n to occur turn-initially.","PeriodicalId":44232,"journal":{"name":"Functions of Language","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How do speakers and hearers disambiguate multi-functional words?\",\"authors\":\"Christoph Rühlemann, S. Gries\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/fol.18050.ruh\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n Well is an exemplary multi-functional word performing pragmatic and syntactic functions. That\\n multi-functionality poses a potential problem: How do hearers in conversation determine which function is actualized and how do speakers\\n project the function actualized? We address both questions examining factors hearers rely on to disambiguate well and the\\n resources speakers deploy to designate well’s function. The study is based on 8-, 9-, and 10-word turns containing\\n well extracted from the British National Corpus for which audio files from the Audio BNC are available. We include\\n duration, measuring well’s durations in Praat. The workflow comprised both qualitative and quantitative methods.\\n Qualitatively, all turns were manually inspected and the functions and subfunctions of well were identified. Due to data\\n paucity the quantitative analysis was based only on a broad distinction between syntactic and pragmatic functions. The analysis involved two\\n logistic regression model selection processes, one adopting a hearer, one a speaker perspective. Based on the factors position in the turn,\\n duration and lexical context, our final models indicate that hearers disambiguate the two main functions of well drawing on\\n lexical context and position in the turn while speakers project well’s functions by modulating duration. We propose that\\n Hoey’s (2005) 6th priming hypothesis, concerned with polysemy, can be extended to also include\\n polyfunctionality. Position also suggests a reading in terms of Hoey’s ‘textual colligation’ hypothesis related to a word’s\\n position: particularly in its incarnation as a marker of dispreferreds, pragmatic well is heavily primed\\n to occur turn-initially.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44232,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Functions of Language\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Functions of Language\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.18050.ruh\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Functions of Language","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.18050.ruh","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

Well是一个典型的多功能词,兼具语用和句法功能。这种多功能性提出了一个潜在的问题:在对话中,听者如何确定实现了哪个功能,说话者如何投射实现的功能?我们解决了这两个问题,考察了听者用来消除歧义的因素和说话者用来指定好功能的资源。该研究基于从英国国家语料库中提取的8、9和10个单词的轮流,其中音频文件来自音频BNC。我们包括持续时间,在Praat测量井的持续时间。工作流包括定性和定量两种方法。在定性上,人工检查了所有匝,并确定了井的功能和子功能。由于数据缺乏,定量分析仅基于对句法和语用功能的广泛区分。分析涉及两个逻辑回归模型选择过程,一个采用听者视角,一个采用说话者视角。基于转折中的位置、持续时间和词汇语境等因素,我们的模型表明听者利用词汇语境和转折中的位置来消歧well的两个主要功能,而说话者则通过调节持续时间来投射well的功能。我们建议Hoey(2005)的第6个启动假设,涉及一词多义,可以扩展到也包括多功能。位置也表明,根据Hoey关于单词位置的“文本整合”假设进行阅读:特别是在它作为不喜欢的标记的化身中,语用良好是严重启动的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How do speakers and hearers disambiguate multi-functional words?
Well is an exemplary multi-functional word performing pragmatic and syntactic functions. That multi-functionality poses a potential problem: How do hearers in conversation determine which function is actualized and how do speakers project the function actualized? We address both questions examining factors hearers rely on to disambiguate well and the resources speakers deploy to designate well’s function. The study is based on 8-, 9-, and 10-word turns containing well extracted from the British National Corpus for which audio files from the Audio BNC are available. We include duration, measuring well’s durations in Praat. The workflow comprised both qualitative and quantitative methods. Qualitatively, all turns were manually inspected and the functions and subfunctions of well were identified. Due to data paucity the quantitative analysis was based only on a broad distinction between syntactic and pragmatic functions. The analysis involved two logistic regression model selection processes, one adopting a hearer, one a speaker perspective. Based on the factors position in the turn, duration and lexical context, our final models indicate that hearers disambiguate the two main functions of well drawing on lexical context and position in the turn while speakers project well’s functions by modulating duration. We propose that Hoey’s (2005) 6th priming hypothesis, concerned with polysemy, can be extended to also include polyfunctionality. Position also suggests a reading in terms of Hoey’s ‘textual colligation’ hypothesis related to a word’s position: particularly in its incarnation as a marker of dispreferreds, pragmatic well is heavily primed to occur turn-initially.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Functions of Language is an international journal of linguistics which explores the functionalist perspective on the organisation and use of natural language. It encourages the interplay of theory and description, and provides space for the detailed analysis, qualitative or quantitative, of linguistic data from a broad range of languages. Its scope is broad, covering such matters as prosodic phenomena in phonology, the clause in its communicative context, and regularities of pragmatics, conversation and discourse, as well as the interaction between the various levels of analysis. The overall purpose is to contribute to our understanding of how the use of languages in speech and writing has impacted, and continues to impact, upon the structure of those languages.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信