Difference between revisions of "Walker2014a"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m
 
Line 2: Line 2:
 
|BibType=ARTICLE
 
|BibType=ARTICLE
 
|Author(s)=Traci Walker;
 
|Author(s)=Traci Walker;
|Title=Form ≠ Function: The Independence of Prosody and Action
+
|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
|Month=jan
+
|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

Download BibTex

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