Article published In:
Meaning in Interaction: Studies in memory of Jack BilmesEdited by Arnulf Deppermann and Elwys De Stefani
[Interactional Linguistics 3:1/2] 2023
► pp. 13–39
Edited by Arnulf Deppermann and Elwys De Stefani
[Interactional Linguistics 3:1/2] 2023
► pp. 13–39
Meta-semantic practices in social interaction
Definitions and specifications provided in response to Was heißt X (‘what does X mean’)
In social interaction, different kinds of word-meaning can become problematic for participants. This study analyzes two meta-semantic practices, definitions and specifications, which are used in response to clarification requests in German implemented by the format Was heißt X (‘What does X mean?’). In the data studied, definitions are used to convey generalizable lexical meanings of mostly technical terms. These terms are either unknown to requesters, or, in pedagogical contexts, requesters ask in order to check the addressee’s knowledge. Specifications, in contrast, clarify aspects of local speaker meanings of ordinary expressions (e.g., reference, participants in an event, standards applied to scalar expressions). Both definitions and specifications are recipient-designed with respect to the (presumed) knowledge of the addressee and tailored to the topical and practical relevancies of the current interaction. Both practices attest to the flexibility and situatedness of speakers’ semantic understandings and to the systematicity of using meta-semantic practices differentially for different kinds of semantic problems. Data are come from mundane and institutional interaction in German from the public corpus FOLK.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Semantic work in interaction: Clarifications
- 3.Uses of and responses to Was heißt X (‘What does X mean’) in German talk-in-interaction
- 4.Definitions
- 5.Specification
- 6.Conclusions
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
-
References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.
For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].
References (85)
Antaki, C. (2012). Affiliative and disaffiliative candidate understandings. Discourse Studies, 14 (5), 531–547. 
Aristotle (1938 [4th century b.c.]). Categories: on interpretation: prior analytics. (H. P. Cooke, Ed. & H. Tredennick, Transl.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Auer, P. (1996). On the prosody and syntax of turn-continuations. In E. Couper-Kuhlen & M. Selting (Eds.), Prosody in conversation (pp. 57–100). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Augustine (1992 [400]). Confessions, a text and commentary by James J. O’Donnell. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bar-Hillel, Y. (1954). Indexical expressions. Mind,
63
1, 359–379.
Barwise, J., & Perry, J. (1983). Situations and attitudes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Belhiah, H. (2013). Using the hand to choreograph instruction: on the functional role of gesture in definition talk. The Modern Language Journal,
97
(2), 417–434.
Bilmes, J. (2019). Regrading as a conversational practice. Journal of Pragmatics,
150
1, 80–91.
(2020). The discussion of abortion in US political debates: a study in occasioned semantics. Discourse Studies,
22
(3), 291–318.
Clark, H. H., & Schaefer, E. F. (1992). Contributing to discourse. In H. H. Clark (Ed.), Arenas of language use (pp. 144–197). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Couper-Kuhlen, E., & Selting, M. (2018). Interactional linguistics: studying language in social interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
De Stefani, E. (2023). Displaying a negative stance by questioning meaning: The Italian format Che cosa vuol dire X? (‘what does X mean?’). Interactional Linguistics 3 (1/2), 40–66.
De Stefani, E., & Sambre, P. (2016). L’exhibition et la négociation du savoir dans les pratiques définitoires: l’interaction autour du syndrome de fatigue chronique dans un groupe d’entraide. Langages,
204
1, 27–42.
Deppermann, A. (2000). Semantic shifts in argumentative processes: a step beyond the ‘fallacy of equivocation’. Argumentation,
14
(
1
), 17–30.
(2005). Conversational interpretation of lexical items and conversational contrasting. In: A. Hakulinen & M. Selting (Eds.), Syntax and lexis in conversation (pp. 289–317). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
(2014). “Don’t get me wrong”: Recipient design by reactive and anticipatory uses of negation to constrain an action’s interpretation. In S. Günthner, W. Imo, & J. Bücker (Eds.), Grammar and dialogism (pp. 15–51). Berlin: de Gruyter.
(2016). La définition comme action multimodale pour des enjeux pratiques: Définir pour instruire à l’auto-école. Langages,
204
(4), 83–101.
(2024). “What do you understand by X”: semantics in Interactional Linguistics. In M. Selting & D. Barth-Weingarten (Eds.), New perspectives in interactional linguistic research. (pp. 103–130). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Deppermann, A., & De Stefani, E. (2019). Defining in talk-in-interaction: recipient-design through negative definitional components. Journal of Pragmatics,
140
1, 140–155.
Deppermann, A., & Schmidt, A. (2021). How Shared Meanings and Uses Emerge Over an Interactional History: Wabi Sabi in a Series of Theater Rehearsals. Research on Language and Social Interaction
54
(2), 203–224.
Dingemanse, M., Blythe, J., & Dirksmeyer, T. (2014). Formats for other-initiation of repair across languages: an exercise in pragmatic typology. Studies in Language,
38
1, 5–43.
Doury, M., & Micheli, R. (2016). Enjeux argumentatifs de la définition : l’exemple des débats sur l’ouverture du mariage aux couples de même sexe. Langages,
204
1, 121–138.
Egbert, M., Golato, A., & Robinson, J. (2009). Repairing reference. In J. Sidnell (Ed.), Conversation Analysis: comparative perspectives (pp. 104–132). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Eichinger, L. (2000). Deutsche Wortbildung. Tübingen: Narr.
Fasel Lauzon, V. (2014). Comprendre et apprendre dans l’interaction: les séquences d’explication en classe de français langue seconde. Bern: Lang.
Fillmore, C. J. (1985). Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di Semantica
6
(2), 222–254.
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodology. New York: Prentice-Hall.
Golato, A., & Betz, E. (2008). German ‘ach’ and ‘achso’ in repair uptake: Resources to sustain or remove epistemic asymmetry. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft,
27
1, 7–37.
Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Grice, H. P. (1957). Meaning. Philosophical Review
66
(3), 377–388.
(1989). Studies in the ways of words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gubina, A., & Betz, E. (2021). What do newsmark-type responses invite? The response space after German echt
. Research on Language and Social Interaction,
54
(4), 374–396.
Günthner, S. (2014). The dynamics of dass-constructions in everyday German interactions – a dialogical perspective. In S. Günthner, W. Imo, & J. Bücker Jörg (Eds.), Grammar and dialogism. Berlin: de Gruyter, 179–206.
(2015). Grammatische Konstruktionen im Kontext sequenzieller Praktiken – ‘was heißt x’-Konstruktionen im gesprochenen Deutsch. In J. Bücker, S. Günthner, & W. Imo (Eds.), Konstruktionsgrammatik V: Konstruktionen im Spannungsfeld von sequenziellen Mustern, kommunikativen Gattungen und Textsorten (pp. 187–218). Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
Helmer, H. (2020). How do speakers define the meaning of expressions? The case of German x heißt y (“x means y”). Discourse Processes,
57
(3), 278–299.
(2023). Ad-hoc-compounds in spoken German: (When) do we need compositionality? Interactional Linguistics 3 (1/2), 67–92.
Horn, L. R. (2001). A natural history of negation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kaukomaa, T., Peräkylä, A., & Ruusuvuori, J. (2014). Foreshadowing a problem: turn-opening frowns in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics,
71
1, 132–147.
Keevallik, L. (2010). Bodily quoting in dance correction. Research on Language and Social Interaction,
43
(4), 410–426.
(2013). The interdependence of bodily demonstrations and clausal syntax. Research on Language and Social Interaction,
46
(1), 1–21.
(2014). Turn organization and bodily-vocal demonstrations. Journal of Pragmatics,
65
1, 103–120.
(2015). Coordinating the temporalities of talk and dance. In A. Deppermann & S. Günthner (Eds.), Temporality in interaction (pp. 309–336). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Kendon, A. (2004). Gesture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Klein, W. (1978). Wo ist hier? Präliminarien zu einer Untersuchung der lokalen Deixis. Linguistische Berichte,
58
1, 18–40.
Laakso, M., & Sorjonen, M. L. (2010). Cut-off or particle: devices for initiating self-repair in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics,
42
(
4
), 1151–1172.
Linell, P., & Lindström, J. (2016). Partial intersubjectivity and sufficient understandings for current practical purposes: on a specialized practice in Swedish conversation. Nordic Journal of Linguistics,
39
(2), 113–133.
Löbner, S. (2003). Understanding semantics. London: Routledge.
Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics (Vol. 11). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Martin, R. (1990). La définition « naturelle ». In J. Chaurand & F. Mazière (Eds.), La définition (pp. 86–95). Paris: Larousse.
Mondada, L. (2018). Multiple temporalities of language and body in interaction: challenges for transcribing multimodality. Research on Language and Social Interaction,
51
(1), 85–106.
Moore, G. E. (1903). Principia ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ninio, A., & Bruner, J. S. (1978). The achievement and antecedents of labelling. Journal of Child Language,
5
(1), 1–15.
Norén, K., & Linell, P. (2007). Meaning potentials and the interaction between lexis and grammar. Pragmatics,
17
(3), 387–416.
Olsher, D. (2004). Talk and gesture: The embodied completion of sequential actions in spoken interaction. In R. Gardner & J. Wagner (Eds.), Second language conversations (pp. 221–245). London: Continuum.
Pfeiffer, M. (2015). Selbstreparaturen im Deutschen. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Pomerantz, A. (1988). Offering a candidate answer: an information seeking strategy. Communication Monographs,
55
(4), 360–373.
Pustejovsky, J. (1995). The generative lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Rae, J. (2008). Lexical substitution as a therapeutic resource. In A. Peräkylä, C. Antaki, S. Vehviläinen, & I. Leudar (Eds.), Conversation Analysis and psychotherapy (pp. 62–79). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Raymond, G., & Sidnell, J. (2019). Interaction at the boundaries of a world known in common: initiating repair with “What Do You Mean?”. Research on Language and Social Interaction,
52
(2), 177–192.
Reineke, S., Deppermann, A., & Schmidt, T. (2023). Das Forschungs- und Lehrkorpus für Gesprochenes Deutsch (FOLK): Zum Nutzen eines großen annotierten Korpus gesprochener Sprache für interaktionslinguistische Fragestellungen. In A. Deppermann, C. Fandrych, M. Kupietz, & T. Schmidt (Eds.), Korpora in der germanistischen Sprachwissenschaft: Jahrbuch des Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache 2022 (pp. 71–102). Berlin: de Gruyter.
Robinson, J., Clift, R., Kendrick, K. H., & Raymond, C. W. (Eds.) (2024). The Cambridge handbook of methods in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Robinson, R. (1950). The definition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sambre, P. (2005). Emergence et conceptualisation de la définition en langue naturelle. Leuven: Katholieke Universiteit. [URL]
Rosch, E. (1975). Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,
104
(3), 192–233.
(1978). Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categorization (pp. 27–48). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Sacks, H. (1972). On the analyzability of stories by children. In J. J. Gumperz & D. Hymes (Eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics: the Ethnography of Communication (pp. 325–345). New York: Rinehart & Winston.
(1992). Lectures on conversation. Volume 11. Oxford: Blackwell.
Sacks, H., & Schegloff, E. A. (1979). Two preferences in the organization of reference to persons in conversation and their interaction. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language: studies in Ethnomethodology (pp. 15–21). New York: Irvington.
Schegloff, E. A. (1997). Practices and actions: boundary cases of other-initiated repair. Discourse Processes,
23
(3), 499–545.
(2000). On granularity. Annual Review of Sociology,
26
1, 715–720.
(2005). On complainability. Social Problems,
52
(4), 449–476.
(2016). Increments. In J. D. Robinson (Ed.), Accountability in social interaction (pp. 239–263). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schenkein, J. (1978). Identity negotiations in conversation. In J. Schenkein (Ed.), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction (pp. 57–78). New York: Academic Press.
Schmale, G. (2016). La définition-en-interaction: la définition du sens comme accomplissement interactif. Langages,
204
1, 67–82.
Selting, M. (1987). Verständigungsprobleme: Eine empirische Analyse am Beispiel der Bürger-Verwaltungs-Kommunikation. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Selting, M., Auer, P., Barth-Weingarten, D., Bergmann, J., Bergmann, P., Birkner, K. et al. (2011). A system for transcribing talk-in-interaction: GAT 2. Translated and adapted for English by E. Couper-Kuhlen and D. Barth-Weingarten. Gesprächsforschung / Discourse and Conversation Analysis 121, 1–51.
Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
St. Thomas Aquinas. (1947[1265]). The summa theologica. New York: Benziger.
Stivers, T. (2022). The book of answers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stivers, T., & Hayashi, M. (2010). Transformative answers: one way to resist a question’s constraints. Language in Society,
39
(1), 1–25.
Svennevig, J. (2018). Decomposing turns to enhance understanding by L2 speakers. Research on Language and Social Interaction,
51
(4), 398–416.
Thurmair, M. (1989). Modalpartikeln und ihre Kombinationen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Traverso, V., & Greco, L. (2016). L’activité de définition dans l’interaction: Objets, ressources, formats. Langages,
204
1, 5–26.
Traverso, V., & Ravazzolo, E. (2016). Définitions ostensives co-construites: le cas de la visite guidée. Langages,
204
1, 43–66.
Wittgenstein, L. (1953 [1950]). Philosophical investigations (translated by G. E. M. Anscombe). Oxford: Blackwell.
Cited by (4)
Cited by four other publications
De Stefani, Elwys
2023. Displaying a negative stance by questioning meaning. Interactional Linguistics 3:1-2 ► pp. 40 ff. 
Deppermann, Arnulf & Elwys De Stefani
Koole, Tom
Mondada, Lorenza
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 august 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.