ISL1: Meaning in Discourse - Discourseanalysis We focuse on the process of forming meaning "conduit metaphor" is not enough Joint construction

of meaning: People form meaning together "discourse": The process by which we use language to create and negotiate meaning "text": the product of the process of discourse Discourse is similar for written and spoken language There exists spoken text Papers A and B: B makes sense for us. A is the information of a linguists who wrote a book at this time - it doesn't fit together, is does not form a meaning B is a text - it has meaning. Why? a.) b.) c.) d.) e.) f.) y g.) h.) i.) Referring expressions outside the text (deictics) - My, my, I, I Referring expressions within the text (phorics) - My father, He, he, he. Ref. expr - Lincoln convertible, That car, it, the convertible lexical relation: Lincoln convertible, car, convertible referring expressions: bought a Loncoln convertible, it. semantic (meaning) relation: bought, saving penny, worth a fortune, sold, pa semantic relation: once, nowadays, Sometimes. Connector: However. Logical links in the text, structures the meaning. repetition: convertible, convertible.

Such a small text has many linkages (cohesive devices) Cohesion: verbalized links between clauses and sentences Yule (2010): the ties and connections that exist within texts "cohesive devices" Shakespeare - Cohesion example a.) Rhyme: lies - eyes b.) Alletoration: Full Fathom Five (thy) Father c.) deictics: thy (father), his, his. d.) Construction, Parallelism: Those are (pearls) that were... e.) Referring expressions: father, bones, eyes (his bones, his eyes) - coral, pe arls (diamonds) Cohesives devices: . Parallelism . referring expressions (deictis; anaphoric) . ... What cohesion can't do:

Text A and B. B is cohesive, but has no meaning for us - it is no text There can be cohesive devices, but it is still not a text. Coherence: "connectedness" within the text regarding pragmatic meaning Coherence is difficult to pin-point. You can't identify it by using tools. Example: I don't understand the financial papers - it is not coherent for me. For other persons, however, it is highly coherent cohesion: surface / textual level coherence: underlying / level of meaning Coherence does not necessary require cohesion!! The more we are familiar with a situation, the less we need cohesion to understa nd a text. SPEAKING is relevation again! (Settings, Participant, Ends, Act sequences, Keys, instrumentalities, norms, gen res) Her: That's the telephone. - request Him: I'm in the bath. - reason to decline the request Her: O.K. - she'll do it "Context" of a "speech situation" (= a social ... We draw context out of "schema", of experiance. schema: -a conventional knowledge structure that exists in memory -a mental construct of reality as culturally ordered and socially sanctioned: What people in a particular community regard as normal and practicable ways of o rganizing the world and communicating with others -people's expectations about people, objects, events, settings and ways to inter act in the world e.g. "classroom", "doctor's appointment", "supermarket" - "Schematic knowledge", "schema of expectations" Script: actions, "a dynamic schema" - e.g. "writing an exam" context (schemata) <-> communication (language) "co-constitutive relationship" Politeness: Def. - Showing awareness of and consideration for another person's "Face" (= pub lic self-image they want to claim for themselves). positive face: positive self-image, group membership negative face: freedom of action and from imposition (individuality)

face-threatening act (FTA) (vs. face-saving act (FSA)) Choosing a politeness strategy: "Borrow money" 1st choice: Should I ask (do the FTA) or not? 2nd choice: off record (indirect way - "life is so difficult, I can't seem to ma nage") or on record (direct way - "Could you please give me money?") 3rd choice: without redressive action ("Give me 2000 ") or with redressive action (Formulation) 4th choice: positive politeness (remember he is part of family) negative politeness (adress to him as individual) Turn-transition places: A: I don't know / whether he went /or not,/ do you? B: No, /.../ I don't know either / whether he went /or not. Individuals have different styles. There can be people who interrupt turn-transition and people who don't do that a t all. conversational Style (Deborah Tannen): "high involvement style" "high considerateness style" - these 2 style must not contradict each other! inherent "polysemy" - wants to control the discussion, could be helpful or not "complementary schismogenesis" - if there a 2 different types of speakers around , this lack of balance can lead to less success in the discussion Levels of discourse organization: exchange structure > turn-taking act structure > sequences of speech acts idea structure > topic sequences, presupposistions participation framework > speaker/hearer roles information state > knowledge management Participation framework (Goffman 1981): speaker roles: principal - author - animator - figure e.g. "The Queen's Speech" Queen is the animator (she reads the speech). She didn't write the speech (speechwriter is the author) The thoughts go back to the prime minister (principal) Listener roles: official - unofficial