Proske-Deppermann2020

From emcawiki
Revision as of 07:20, 24 February 2020 by ElliottHoey (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=INCOLLECTION |Author(s)=Nadine Proske; Arnulf Deppermann |Title=Right-dislocated complement clauses in German talk-in-interaction: (Re-)specifying proposit...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
Proske-Deppermann2020
BibType INCOLLECTION
Key Proske-Deppermann2020
Author(s) Nadine Proske, Arnulf Deppermann
Title Right-dislocated complement clauses in German talk-in-interaction: (Re-)specifying propositional referents of the demonstrative pronoun das
Editor(s) Yael Maschler, Simona Pekarek Doehler, Jan Lindström, Leelo Keevallik
Tag(s) EMCA, German, Right dislocation, Demonstrative, Grammar, Interactional linguistics
Publisher
Year 2020
Language English
City
Month
Journal
Volume
Number
Pages 275-302
URL Link
DOI https://doi.org/10.1075/slsi.32.10pro
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title Emergent Syntax for Conversation: Clausal patterns and the organization of action
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

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.

Notes