Chapter published in:
Emergent Syntax for Conversation: Clausal patterns and the organization of actionEdited by Yael Maschler, Simona Pekarek Doehler, Jan Lindström and Leelo Keevallik
[Studies in Language and Social Interaction 32] 2020
► pp. 275–302
Chapter 10Right-dislocated complement clauses in German
talk-in-interaction
(Re-)specifying propositional referents of the demonstrative pronoun das
This contribution deals with
right-dislocated complement clauses with the
subordinating conjunction dass
(‘that’) in German talk-in-interaction. The
bi-clausal construction we analyze is as follows:
The first clause, in which one argument is realized
by the demonstrative pronoun das
(‘this/that’), is syntactically and semantically
complete; the reference of the pronoun is
(re-)specified by adding a
dass-complement clause after a
point of possible completion (e.g., aber das
hab ich nich MITbekommen. (0.32) dass es da so
YOUtubevideos gab. (‘But I wasn’t aware
of that. That there were videos about that on
YouTube.’). The first clause always performs a
backward-oriented action (e.g., an assessment) and
the second clause (re-)specifies the propositional
reference of the demonstrative, allowing for a
(strategic) perspective shift. Based on a collection
of 93 cases from everyday conversations and
institutional interactions, we found that the
construction is used close to the turn-beginning for
referring to and (re-)specifying (parts of) another
speaker’s prior turn; turn-internal uses tie
together parts of a speaker’s multi-unit turn. The
construction thus facilitates an incremental
constitution of meaning and reference.
Keywords: right-dislocation, complementizer, German, demonstrative
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Right dislocation in German
- 2.1General properties of the construction [[NP V das i] [dass NP VP]i]
- 2.2Right dislocation in the literature
- 3.Data
- 4.Uses of the right dislocation construction
- 4.1Co-reference with (parts of) a prior turn
- 4.2Co-reference with prior parts of the same turn
- 4.3Co-constructed uses: Referential self-repair and understanding-check
- 5.Discussion
- 6.Conclusion
-
Notes -
References
Published online: 17 February 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/slsi.32.10pro
https://doi.org/10.1075/slsi.32.10pro
References
Ahrenholz, Bernt
Altmann, Hans
2010 Zum
Segmentierungsproblem in der Gesprochenen
Sprache. InLiSt – Interaction and Linguistic
Structures, 49. http://www.inlist.uni-bayreuth.de/issues/49/InList49.pdf
Barth-Weingarten, Dagmar
Chafe, Wallace L.
Chafe, Wallace
Consten, Manfred, & Schwarz-Friesel, Monika
Consten, Manfred, Knees, Mareile, & Schwarz-Friesel, Monika
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth, & Ono, Tsuyoshi
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth, & Thompson, Sandra A.
Deppermann, Arnulf, & Proske, Nadine
Du Bois, John W. et al.
Ford, Cecilia, & Thompson, Sandra A.
Gallmann, Peter
Geluykens, Ronald
Golato, Andrea, & Fagyal, Zsuzsanna
Günthner, Susanne
Günthner, Susanne, & Hopper, Paul J.
2010 Zeitlichkeit &
sprachliche Strukturen: Pseudoclefts im Englischen
und Deutschen. Gesprächsforschung –
Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen
Interaktion 11, 1–28. http://www.gespraechsforschung-online.de/fileadmin/dateien/heft2010/ga-guenthner.pdf
Horlacher, Anne-Sylvie
Keevallik, Leelo
Ono, Tsuyoshi, & Thompson, Sandra A.
Pekarek Doehler, Simona, De Stefani, Elwys, & Horlacher, Anne-Sylvie
Proske, Nadine
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
Schmidt, Thomas
Selting, Margret et al.
2009 Gesprächsanalytisches
Transkriptionssystem 2 (GAT 2). Gesprächsforschung –
Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen
Interaktion 10, 353–402. http://www.gespraechsforschung-ozs.de/heft2009/px-gat2.pdf
Uhmann, Susanne
Cited by
Cited by 1 other publications
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 01 april 2022. 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.