The coding of discourse relations in English and German argumentative discourse
This chapter examines contrastively the overt and non-overt coding of discourse
relations in British English and German editorials. Particular attention is given
to the linguistic coding of discourse relations between adjacently and non-adjacently
positioned discourse units, and to the question of granularity. In the
data, the discourse relation of Contrast is coded overtly in adjacent and nonadjacent
positioning in the two languages, while Continuation, Elaboration,
Explanation and Comment are coded differently. In the British data, there is a
clear preference for coding discourse relations between adjacently positioned
subordinating discourse relations overtly on the level of clause, and in the
German data, discourse relations holding between non-adjacently positioned
sentences are preferably marked overtly.
References (51)
Anscombe, Jean-Claude, and Oswald Ducrot
1983 L’Argumentation dans la Langue. Bruxelles: Mardaga.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Asher, Nicholas, and Alex Lascarides
2003 Logics of Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Asher, Nicholas, and Laure Vieu
2005 “Subordinating and Coordinating Discourse Relations.” Lingua 115: 591–610.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Benz, Anton, and Peter Kühnlein
Biber, Douglas
1988 Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bloor, Thomas, and Meriel Bloor
1995 The Functional Analysis of English: A Hallidayan Approach. London: Arnold.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brinton, Laurel
1996 Pragmatic Markers in English: Grammaticalization and Discourse Functions. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bublitz, Wolfram, Uta Lenk, and Eija Ventola
Clyne, Michael
1987 “Cultural Differences in the Organization of Academic Texts.” Journal of Pragmatics 11: 211–247.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Degand, Liesbeth, Nathalie Lefèvre, and Yves Bestgen
Esser, Jürgen
2006 Presentation in Language. Rethinking Speech and Writing. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fetzer, Anita
2005 “Negative Theme Zones in Political Interviews: A Contrastive Analysis of German and English Turn-initial Positions.” In
Pressetextsorten im Vergleich. Contrasting Text Types in the Press, ed. by
Andrew Chesterman, and
Hartmut Lenk, 283–301. Hildesheim: Olms.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fetzer, Anita
2008 “Theme Zones in English Media Discourse. Forms and Functions.” Journal of Pragmatics 40 (9): 1543–1568.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gernsbacher, Morton-Ann, and Talmy Givón
Givón, Talmy
1993 English Grammar: A Function-based Introduction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Grosz, Barbara, Ararvind Joshi, and Scott Weinstein
1995 “Centering: A Framework for Modelling the Local Coherence of Discourse.” Computational Linguistics 21: 203–225.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Grosz, Barbara, and Candace Sidner
1986 “Attention, Intentions and the Structure of Discourse.” Computational Linguistics 12: 175–204.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gumperz, John
1992 “Contextualization and Understanding.” In
Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon, ed. by
Alessandro Duranti, and
Charles Goodwin, 229–252. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, Michael, and Ruqaiya Hasan
1976 Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, Michael A. K
1994 Introduction to English Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hannay, Mike
1994 “The Theme Zone.” In
Nauwe Betrekkingen, ed. by
Ronney Boogart, and
Jan Noordegraaf, 107–117. Amsterdam: Neerlandistiek and Münster: Nodus Publikationen.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
House, Juliane
1996 “Contrastive Discourse Analysis and Misunderstanding: The Case of German and English.” In
Contrastive Sociolinguistics, ed. by
Marlies Hellinger, and
Ulrich Ammon, 345–361. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kamp, Hans, and Uwe Reyle
1993 From Discourse to Logic. Introduction to Modeltheoretic Semantics of Natural Language, Formal Logic and Discourse Representation Theory. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
König, Ekkehard
1997 “Zur Bedeutung von Modalpartikeln im Deutschen: Ein Neuansatz im Rahmen der Relevanztheorie.” Germanistische Linguistik 136: 57–75.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Krifka, Manfred, and Caroline Féry
Lenker, Ursual
2010 Argument and Rhetoric – Adverbial Connectors in the History of English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Levinson, Stephen
1979 “Activity Types and Language.” Linguistics 17: 365–399.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Levinson, Stephen
1983 Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Liedtke, Frank
1997 “Gesagt? getan: Über illokutionäre Indikatoren.” Linguistische Berichte 8: 189–213.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mann, William C., and Sandra A. Thompson
1987 “Rhetorical Structure Theory: Description and Construction of Text Structures.” In
Natural Language Generation, ed. by
Gerard Kempen, 85–95. Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mann, William C., and Sandra A. Thompson
1988 “Rhetorical Structure Theory: Toward a Functional Theory of Text Organization.” Text 8: 243–281.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Martin, Jim R., and David Rose
2008 Genre Relations. Mapping Culture. London: Equinox.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pomerantz, Anita
1984 “Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes.” In
Structures of Social Action, ed. by
John Atkinson, and
John M. Heritage, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik
1985 A Grammar of Contemporary English. London: Longman.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Reinhart, Tanya
1982 “Pragmatics and Linguistics: An Analysis of Sentence Topics.” Philosophica 27: 53–94.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Reis, Marga
1997 “Zum syntaktischen Status unselbständiger Verbzweit-Sätze.” In
Sprache im Fokus. Festschrift für Heinz Vater zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. by
Christa Dürscheid,
Karl-Heinz Ramers, and
Monika Schwarz, 121–144. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sacks, Harvey
1995 Lectures on Conversation, ed. by
Gail Jefferson. Oxford: Blackwell.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schegloff, Emanuel
1995 “Discourse as an Interactional Achievement III: The Omnirelevance of Action.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 28 (3): 185–211.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Soria, Claudia, and Giacomo Ferrari
1998 “
Lexical Marking of Discourse Relations – Some Experimental Findings.”
Proceedings of COLING-ACL Workshop on Discourse Relations and Discourse Markers
, 36–42. Montréal.
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson
1986 Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Speyer, Augustin
2010 “Die Markierung von Diskursrelationen im Frühneuhochdeutschen.” Sprachwissenschaft 35: 409–442.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Dijk, Teun A
1980 Textwissenschaft. München: dtv.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Widdowson, Henry
2004 Text, Context, and Pretext. Critical Issues in Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wöllstein, Angelika
2010 Topologisches Satzmodell. Heidelberg: Winter.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (3)
Cited by 3 other publications
Zaliznjak, Anna A. & Irina Mikaelian
2018.
Русское а: опыт интегрального описания.
Russian Linguistics 42:3
► pp. 321 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
Hofmockel, Carolin, Anita Fetzer, Robert M. Maier, Patrick Saint-Dizier & Manfred Stede
2017.
Discourse relations: Genre-specific degrees of overtness in argumentative and narrative discourse.
Argument & Computation 8:2
► pp. 131 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 july 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.