Cover not available
Article published In:
Languages in Contrast
Vol. 19:2 (2019) ► pp.205–231

Discourse relations across genres and contexts

A contrastive analysis of English and German discourse

| University of Augsburg (Germany)
| University of Saarbrücken (Germany)
This paper presents an analysis of the linguistic realization of discourse relations across and within English and German discourse, comparing the genres of newspaper editorial and personal narrative. It concentrates on Continuation, Narration and Contrast, and Elaboration, Explanation and Comment. Particular attention is given to (1) their overt realization with textual themes and pragmatic word order, and (2) the (non)adjacent positioning of discourse units realizing the relations. The methodological framework is an integrated one, supplementing Systemic Functional Grammar with Segmented Discourse Representation Theory. In the English and German narratives, there is a strong tendency to realize discourse relations overtly. The overall overt realization is significantly higher for narratives in both languages with editorials being significantly less overt. There are also significant differences in the overt realization of non-adjacently positioned units realizing discourse relations with significant distributions in all cases, although the distribution in the narratives is less significant.
Keywords: discourse relations, textual theme, adjacency, argumentative discourse, narrative discourse, English/German
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The granularity of discourse: Micro meets macro
    • 2.1Micro units
    • 2.2Discourse relations
    • 2.3Macro units
  • 3.Method
    • 3.1Procedure
    • 3.2Data
  • 4.Contrastive analysis
    • 4.1Editorials
    • 4.2Personal narratives
    • 4.3Editorials and personal narratives
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 1 November 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.17006.fet
References (39)
References
Aijmer, K. (ed.). 2009. Contrastive Pragmatics. Special Issue of Languages in Contrast 9(1).Google Scholar
Aijmer, K. and Lewis, D. (eds). 2017. Contrastive Analysis of Discourse-Pragmatic Aspects of Linguistic Genres. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Asher, N. and Lascarides, A. 2003. Logics of Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Behrens, B., Fabricius-Hansen, C. and Solfjeld, K. 2012. Competing Structures. The Discourse Perspective. In Big Events, Small Clauses. The Grammar of Elaboration, C. Fabricius-Hansen and D. Haug (eds), 179–225, Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Chesterman, A. 1998. Contrastive Functional Analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Beaugrande, R. and Dressler, W. 1981. Einführung in die Textlinguistik. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dürscheid, C. 1989. Zur Vorfeldbesetzung in deutschen Verbzweit-Strukturen. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier.Google Scholar
Fabricius-Hansen, C. and Ramm, W. 2008. Editors’ Introduction. In ‘Subordination’ versus ‘Coordination’ in Sentence and Text, C. Fabricius-Hansen and W. Ramm (eds), 1–30. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fabricius-Hansen, C. and Haug, D. (eds). 2012. Big Events, Small Clauses. The Grammar of Elaboration. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fetzer, A. 2008. Theme Zones in English Media Discourse. Forms and Functions. Journal of Pragmatics 40(9): 1543–1568. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009. Challenges in Contrast. Languages in Contrast 9(1): 73–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013. Structuring of Discourse. In Handbooks of Pragmatics. The Pragmatics of Speech Actions. Vol. 21, M. Sbisà and K. Turner (eds), 685–711. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017. The Dynamics of Discourse: Quantity Meets Quality. In Implicitness: From Lexis to Discourse, P. Cap and M. Dynel (eds), 235–257. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018. The Linguistic Realisation of Contrastive Discourse Relations in Context: Contextualisation and discourse common ground. Modélisation et utilisation du contexte / Modeling and Using Context 2(1): 1–19.Google Scholar
Fetzer, A. and Speyer, A. 2012. Discourse Relations in English and German Discourse: Local and Not-So-Local Constraints. Intercultural Pragmatics 9(4): 413–452. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fries, P. H. 1994. On Theme, Rheme and Discourse Goals. In Advances in Written Text Analysis, M. Coulthard (ed), 229–249. Lomndon: routledge.Google Scholar
Gernsbacher, M. and Givón, T. (eds). 1995. Coherence in Spontaneous Text. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, T. 1993. English Grammar: A Function-Based Introduction, 21 Vols. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Grice, H. P. 1975. Logic and Conversation. In Syntax and Semantics. Vol. III1, P. Cole and J. Morgan (eds), 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. Introduction to English Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. and Halliday, M. 1987. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Hengeveld, K. and Mackenzie, L. 2008. Functional Discourse Grammar. A Typologically-Based Theory of Language Structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hützen, N. and Serbina, T. 2018. Lexical Chains and Topic Continuity in the Register of Popular Scientific Writing: German-English Contrasts. Pragmatics and Society 9(1): 8–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koch, P. and Oesterreicher, W. 2007. Schriftlichkeit und kommunikative Distanz. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik 351: 346–375. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krzeszowski, T. 1989. Towards a Typology of Contrastive studies. In Contrastive Pragmatics, W. Oleksy (ed), 55–72. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kunz, K., Degaetano-Ortlieb, S., Lapshinova-Koltunski, E., Menzel, K. and Steiner, E. 2017. English-German contrasts in cohesion and implications for translation. In Empirical Translation Studies, Sutter, G., Lefer, M. and Delaere, I. (eds), 265–311. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, S. 1979. Activity Types and Language. Linguistics 171: 365–399. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2000. Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maier, R. M., Hofmockel, C. and Fetzer, A. 2016. The Negotiation of Discourse Relations in Context: Co-Constructing Degrees of Overtness. Intercultural Pragmatics 13(1): 71–105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Molnár, V. 1991. Das TOPIK im Deutschen und im Ungarischen. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Preacher, K. J. 2001. Calculation for the Chi-Square Test: An Interactive Calculation Tool for Chi-Square Tests of Goodness of Fit and Independence [Computer software]. Available from [URL]
Reis, M. 1997. Zum syntaktischen Status unselbständiger Verbzweit-Sätze. In Sprache im Fokus. Festschrift für Heinz Vater zum 65. Geburtstag, C. Dürscheid, K.-H. Ramers and M. Schwarz (eds), 121–144. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Shaer, B. and Frey, W. 2004. ‘Integrated’ and ‘Non-Integrated’ Left-peripheral Elements in German and English. In Proceedings of the Dislocated Elements Workshop. ZASPiL 35(2), B. Shaer, W. Frey and C. Maienborn (eds), 465–502. Berlin: ZAS.Google Scholar
Speyer, A. 2009. Das Vorfeldranking und das Vorfeld-es. Linguistische Berichte 2191, 323–353.Google Scholar
Speyer, A. and Fetzer, A. 2014. The Coding of Discourse Relations in English and German Argumentative Discourse. In The Pragmatics of Discourse Coherence. Theories and Applications, H. Gruber and G. Redeker (eds), 87–119. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Thibault, P. 2003. Contextualization and Social Meaning-Making Practices. In Language and Interaction. Discussions with John J. Gumperz, S. Eerdmans et al.. (eds), 41–62. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, G. 2014. Introduction to Functional Grammar. Third Edition. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Widdowson, H. 2004. Text, Context, and Pretext. Critical Issues in Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Klumm, Matthias
2024. A corpus-based study of phrasal and clausal temporal adjuncts at the left and right peripheries across genres of written English discourse. Lingua 309 ► pp. 103794 ff. DOI logo
Fetzer, Anita & Matthias Klumm
2023. The linguistic realization of continuative discourse relations in English discourse. Functions of Language 30:1 ► pp. 16 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 october 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.