Repetition and paraphrase in contexts of concordant and discordant orientations
Language processing theory posits that a person chooses words based on how he/she conceptualizes the referent.
Where there are two or more interlocutors, depending on the way they conceptualize the referent, their word choices may be the
same or different. In an unpublished paper, Sinclair claims that when interlocutors are in concordance, they are likely to repeat
the word choices of their partners; when they are in discordance, they are likely to use paraphrases. This article investigates
this claim by examining whether there is a relationship between two types of reiteration of concepts (repetition and paraphrase)
and interlocutors’ orientations (concordant and discordant). 100 hotel reviews and responses posted on
TripAdvisor were collected to form two corpora representing the two contexts. The data was analyzed
quantitatively to obtain comparative frequencies of repetition and paraphrase in each context, and connotations of paraphrases
were identified to see whether there is any association between the types of connotations and interlocutors’ orientations. The
results stand in contrast to Sinclair’s claim. More specifically, paraphrase outnumbers repetition in both contexts, and
repetition is more preferred in discordant contexts. Affective connotations are more common in the reviews where the hotels are
rated “terrible” and the reviewers and the respondents show opposing views on the concepts.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Lexical choice and reiteration of concepts
- 3.Corpora
- 4.Data analysis
- 4.1Identifying concepts
- 4.2Identifying reiterated concepts
- 4.3Identifying affective connotations of paraphrase
- 4.4Interrater reliability
- 5.Results
- 6.Discussion
- 7.Conclusion
-
References
References (46)
References
Attardo, Salvatore and Steven Brown. 2011. Understanding Language Structure, Interaction, and Variation: An Introduction to Applied Linguistics and Sociolinguistics for Nonspecialists. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brennan, Susan E., & Herbert H. Clark. 1996. “Conceptual
Pacts and Lexical Choice in Conversation.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,
Memory, and
Cognition 22(6): 1482–1493.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brown, Penelope. 1999. “Repetition.” Journal
of Linguistic
Anthropology 9(1–2): 223–226. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Burton-Roberts, Noel. 1997. “On
Preservation under
Negation.” Lingua 101(1–2): 65–88. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Carnie, Andrew. 2000. “On
the Definition of X0 and
XP.” Syntax
3
(2): 59–106. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Clark, Eve V. 1997. “Conceptual Perspective and
Lexical Choice in
Acquisition.” Cognition 64(1): 1–37. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cohen, Jacob. 1988. Statistical
Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cotterill, Janet. 2003. Language
and Power in Court: A Linguistic Analysis of the OJ Simpson Trial. New York: Springer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cotterill, Janet. 2004. “Collocation,
Connotation, and Courtroom Semantics: Lawyers’ Control of Witness Testimony through Lexical
Negotiation.” Applied
Linguistics 25(4): 513–537. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Croft, William and D. Alan Cruse. 2004. Cognitive
Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cruse, D. Alan. 1986. Lexical
Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Danet, Brenda. 1980. “‘Baby’
or ‘Fetus’?: Language and the Construction of Reality in a Manslaughter
Trial.” Semiotica 32(3–4): 187–220. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Duff, Patricia. 2000. “Repetition
in Foreign Language Classroom.” Second and Foreign Language Learning through
Classroom Interaction:109–138.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Haegeman, Liliane. 2006. Thinking
Syntactically: A Guide to Argumentation and
Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, M. A. K. and Ruqaiya Hasan. 1976. Cohesion
in
English. London: Longman.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Harley, Trevor A. 2008. The Psychology of
Language. New York: Psychology Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hinkel, Eli. (1997). “Indirectness
in L1 and L2 Academic Writing.” Journal of
Pragmatics 27(3): 361–386. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hoey, Michael. 1991. Patterns
of Lexis in Text. Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Huang, Chiung-chih. (2010). “Other-repetition
in Mandarin Child Language: A Discourse-Pragmatic Perspective.” Journal of
Pragmatics 42(3): 825–839. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Károly, Krisztina. 2002. Lexical
Repetition in Text. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kim, Haeyeon. 2002. “The
Form and Function of Next-turn Repetition in English Conversation.” Language
Research 38(1): 51–81.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Landis, Richard J. and Gary G. Koch. 1977. “The
Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical
Data.” Biometrics 33(1): 159–174. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Levelt, Willem J. M., Ardi Roelofs and Antje S. Meyer. 1999. “A
Theory of Lexical Access in Speech Production.” Behavioral and Brain
Sciences 22(1): 1–38. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lichtkoppler, Julia. 2007. ‘Male.
Male.’ – ‘Male?’ – ‘The Sex Is Male.’ The Role of Repetition in English as a Lingua Franca
Conversations. Vienna English Working
Papers 16(1): 39–65.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Marco, Maria José Luzon. 1999. “Procedural Vocabulary:
Lexical Signalling of Conceptual Relations in Discourse.” Applied
Linguistics 20(1): 1–21. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Martin, James R. and Peter R. R. White. 2005. The
Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in
English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McDonough, Kim and Alison Mackey. 2006. “Responses
to Recasts: Repetitions, Primed Production, and Linguistic Development.” Language
Learning 56(4): 693–720. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mohamed, Ayisha H. and Majzoub R. Omer. 2000. “Texture
and Culture: Cohesion as A Marker of Rhetorical Organisation in Arabic and English Narrative
Texts.” RELC
Journal 31(2): 45–75. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Murphy, Lynne M. 2003. Semantic Relations and the Lexicon:
Antonymy, Synonymy and Other Paradigms. New York: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Norrick, Neal R. 1987. “Functions of Repetition in
Conversation.” Text-Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of
Discourse 7(3): 245–264. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Payne, Scott, and Brenda Ross. 2005. “Synchronous
CMC, Working Memory, and L2 Oral Proficiency Development.” Language Learning &
Technology 9(3): 35–54.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Perrin, Laurent, Denise Deshaies and Claude Paradis. 2003. “Pragmatic
Functions of Local Diaphonic Repetitions in Conversation.” Journal of
Pragmatics 35(12): 1843–1860. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pope, Alan H. 1992. Lexical Repetition in American
Poetry. Studia Anglica
Posnaniensia, 241: 105–116.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Reynolds, Dudley W. 1995. “Repetition in Nonnative Speaker
Writing: More Than Quantity.” Studies in Second Language
Acquisition: 185–209. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rydland, Veslemøy, and Vibeke Grøver Aukrust. 2005. “Lexical
Repetition in Second Language Learners’ Peer Play Interaction.” Language
Learning 55(2): 229–274. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Savignon, Sandra J. and Waltraud Roithmeier. 2004. “Computer-mediated
communication: Texts and strategies.” Calico
Journal: 265–290.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1997. “Practices and actions: Boundary
cases of other-initiated repair.” Discourse
Processes 23(3): 499–545. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sinclair, John. 2004. Trust
the text: Language, Corpus and Discourse. London and New York: Routledge. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tannen, Deborah. 1987. “Repetition
in Conversation: Toward a Poetics of
Talk.” Language 63(3): 574–605. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tannen, Deborah. 2007. Talking
Voices: Repetition, Dialogue, and Imagery in Conversational
Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van Valin, Robert D., Jr. 2001. An
Introduction to Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Walsh, Steve. 2011. Exploring
Classroom Discourse: Language in
Action. London: Routledge. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wang, Shih-Ping. 2005. “Corpus-based
Approaches and Discourse Analysis in Relation to Reduplication and Repetition.” Journal of
Pragmatics 37(4): 505–540. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wong, Jean. 2000. “Repetition
in Conversation: A Look at “First and Second Sayings””. Research on Language and Social
Interaction 33(4): 407–424. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Panseeta, Sayamol & Richard Watson Todd
2023.
The Influence of Contexts and Orientations on Interlocutors’ Choices of Concept Reiterations.
rEFLections 30:3
► pp. 776 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 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.