Difference between revisions of "Walker2014a"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) m |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
|Author(s)=Traci Walker; | |Author(s)=Traci Walker; | ||
− | |Title=Form ≠ | + | |Title=Form ≠ function: the independence of prosody and action |
− | |Tag(s)=EMCA; IL; Transcription; Prosody; Action; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; IL; Transcription; Prosody; Action; |
|Key=Walker2014a | |Key=Walker2014a | ||
|Year=2014 | |Year=2014 | ||
− | | | + | |Language=English |
|Journal=Research on Language and Social Interaction | |Journal=Research on Language and Social Interaction | ||
|Volume=47 | |Volume=47 | ||
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
|URL=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08351813.2014.871792 | |URL=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08351813.2014.871792 | ||
|DOI=10.1080/08351813.2014.871792 | |DOI=10.1080/08351813.2014.871792 | ||
− | |Abstract=This article argues for the importance of describing form independently of function, especially for prosodic and phonetic forms. Form and function are often conflated by language-in-interaction researchers when they give descriptive labels to the sound of talk (e.g., “upgraded” pitch, “continuing” intonation), and that tempts researchers to see a given form as having a given function or practice—often one that is influenced by the descriptive label. I argue that we should discipline ourselves to keeping to a purely technical description of any form (practice); that will then make it possible unambiguously to show how that form contributes to a particular function (action), without | + | |Abstract=This article argues for the importance of describing form independently of function, especially for prosodic and phonetic forms. Form and function are often conflated by language-in-interaction researchers when they give descriptive labels to the sound of talk (e.g., “upgraded” pitch, “continuing” intonation), and that tempts researchers to see a given form as having a given function or practice—often one that is influenced by the descriptive label. I argue that we should discipline ourselves to keeping to a purely technical description of any form (practice); that will then make it possible unambiguously to show how that form contributes to a particular function (action), without presuming the relationship to be exclusive. Data are in American and British English. |
− | presuming the relationship to be exclusive. Data are in American and British English. | ||
}} | }} |
Latest revision as of 04:57, 6 December 2019
Walker2014a | |
---|---|
BibType | ARTICLE |
Key | Walker2014a |
Author(s) | Traci Walker |
Title | Form ≠ function: the independence of prosody and action |
Editor(s) | |
Tag(s) | EMCA, IL, Transcription, Prosody, Action |
Publisher | |
Year | 2014 |
Language | English |
City | |
Month | |
Journal | Research on Language and Social Interaction |
Volume | 47 |
Number | 1 |
Pages | 1–16 |
URL | Link |
DOI | 10.1080/08351813.2014.871792 |
ISBN | |
Organization | |
Institution | |
School | |
Type | |
Edition | |
Series | |
Howpublished | |
Book title | |
Chapter |
Abstract
This article argues for the importance of describing form independently of function, especially for prosodic and phonetic forms. Form and function are often conflated by language-in-interaction researchers when they give descriptive labels to the sound of talk (e.g., “upgraded” pitch, “continuing” intonation), and that tempts researchers to see a given form as having a given function or practice—often one that is influenced by the descriptive label. I argue that we should discipline ourselves to keeping to a purely technical description of any form (practice); that will then make it possible unambiguously to show how that form contributes to a particular function (action), without presuming the relationship to be exclusive. Data are in American and British English.
Notes