Difference between revisions of "Auer2014a"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) m |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
|Key=Auer2014a | |Key=Auer2014a | ||
|Year=2014 | |Year=2014 | ||
| − | |Journal=InLiSt | + | |Journal=InLiSt: Interaction and Linguistic Structures |
| − | | | + | |Number=54 |
|URL=http://www.inlist.uni-bayreuth.de/issues/54/inlist54.pdf | |URL=http://www.inlist.uni-bayreuth.de/issues/54/inlist54.pdf | ||
| − | |Abstract=This paper focuses on two basic principles in the dialogical emergence of self-contained linguistic units ('sentences') in interaction: projection and latency. Both are elementary for the synchronization of participants' minds in what I call the online emergence of syntax. Projection enables speakers and recipients to predict – on the basis of what has been said so far – structural slots in the emergent syntactic gestalt more or less accurately. Latency, on the other hand, relates a new utterance to the structure of the preceding one(s). It links the structure of an emergent syntactic gestalt to that of previous, already complete syntactic gestalts. | + | |Abstract=This paper focuses on two basic principles in the dialogical emergence of self-contained linguistic units ('sentences') in interaction: projection and latency. Both are elementary for the synchronization of participants' minds in what I call the online emergence of syntax. Projection enables speakers and recipients to predict – on the basis of what has been said so far – structural slots in the emergent syntactic gestalt more or less accurately. Latency, on the other hand, relates a new utterance to the structure of the preceding one(s). It links the structure of an emergent syntactic gestalt to that of previous, already complete syntactic gestalts. I will show that projection and latency can easily be observed in mundane conversational phenomena that happen time and again in everyday interaction. These phenomena provide 'live' evidence of their relevance and are available without experimental elicitation techniques. |
| − | I will show that projection and latency can easily be observed in mundane conversational | ||
| − | phenomena that happen time and again in everyday interaction. These phenomena provide | ||
| − | 'live' evidence of their relevance and are available without experimental elicitation techniques. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 10:11, 11 December 2019
| Auer2014a | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Auer2014a |
| Author(s) | Peter Auer |
| Title | The temporality of language in interaction: Projection and latency |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | IL, Temporality, Projection, Latency, online syntax, analepsis, co-constructions, terminal overlap, syntactic ambiguity, ellipsis |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2014 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | InLiSt: Interaction and Linguistic Structures |
| Volume | |
| Number | 54 |
| Pages | |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This paper focuses on two basic principles in the dialogical emergence of self-contained linguistic units ('sentences') in interaction: projection and latency. Both are elementary for the synchronization of participants' minds in what I call the online emergence of syntax. Projection enables speakers and recipients to predict – on the basis of what has been said so far – structural slots in the emergent syntactic gestalt more or less accurately. Latency, on the other hand, relates a new utterance to the structure of the preceding one(s). It links the structure of an emergent syntactic gestalt to that of previous, already complete syntactic gestalts. I will show that projection and latency can easily be observed in mundane conversational phenomena that happen time and again in everyday interaction. These phenomena provide 'live' evidence of their relevance and are available without experimental elicitation techniques.
Notes
