Figure - uploaded by Brian Clancy
Content may be subject to copyright.
Frequency results for response tokens candidates in OANC (face-to-face) versus OANC (switchboard) corpora (normalised per million words)
Source publication
This chapter employs a range of different corpora to examine pragmatic variation within the same language in some detail. However, before we begin the corpus work, it is worth exploring the study of linguistic variation in general. The first point of note is that the study of language variation has traditionally focused on phonological, lexical and...
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... levels described in Table 7.1 all have an influence on intralingual pragmatic choice (i.e. pragmatic variation within the same language), both for native and non-native speakers. ...Context 2
... this case we opted for the former approach. Word frequency lists for the spoken OANC face-to-face data and the OANC switchboard data were generated and the items that have been identified in the literature as response tokens, both minimal and non-minimal, were extracted from the frequency lists and presented in Table 7.2 . These frequency results reflect the raw frequencies for each item and are not indicative of the items' turn position (we expand further on this point in relation to our more detailed treatment of uh and well ). ...Context 3
... frequency results reflect the raw frequencies for each item and are not indicative of the items' turn position (we expand further on this point in relation to our more detailed treatment of uh and well ). Therefore Table 7.2 represents a list of response token candidates. ...Context 4
... 2003McCarthy, , 2015). In general, as Table 7.2 demonstrates, the frequencies are higher in the switchboard corpus than in the face-to-face corpus due to the nature of the speech event. ...Context 5
... these cases, the response tokens function to signal that the conversation is entering this phase while simultaneously functioning to maintain interpersonal relationships (see also Schegloff and Sacks, 1973;Jefferson, 1973;Button, 1987;Hartford and Bardovi-Harlig, 1992;Carter and McCarthy, 2006). As Table 7.2 demonstrates, in the face-to-face corpus there is a notable drop in frequency after the first and second response token items, um (9790 occurrences) and uh (8690) respectively, to well (3375). ...Context 6
... the purposes of further comparison, we decided to compare two of the most frequent minimal and non-minimal response tokens, um and well respectively, from the face-to-face data to the occurrences of these tokens in the switchboard data. The combined frequency of both items is approximately the same in both datasets -they account for 13,165 occurrences in face-to-face and 12,660 in the switchboard data (see Table 7.2 ). However, the frequency difference, across tokens, is much higher in the face-to-face data; um has 6415 more occurrences than well , whereas in the switchboard data well has 540 more occurrences than um . ...Context 7
... the frequency difference, across tokens, is much higher in the face-to-face data; um has 6415 more occurrences than well , whereas in the switchboard data well has 540 more occurrences than um . Tottie (2015) treats uh and um as variants of one variable UHM but in Table 7.2 they are listed separately and are not included in the counts for uh-huh and um-hum which are treated as distinct items. ...Context 8
... this iterative sifting process, we were able to identify those items that occurred in a turn-initial position (in general, coding for turn position in the turn-taking process is not a straightforward matter; see Tottie (2015) for more on this issue). Table 7.3 provides the frequency for each item in turn-initial position, subdivided into a comparison between their occurrences in the face-to-face data and their occurrences in the switchboard data. ...Context 9
... order to more closely examine these results, both um and well were further examined in relation to their function in turn-taking. Table 7.3 Occurrences of um and well at turn-initial position in the OANC sub-corpora based on 100-item downsample for each 1) Based on these concordance lines, what initial hypotheses might be generated in relation to the position of um in turns in contemporary spoken British English? 2) How do these initial, tentative results compare to those in Table 7.3 ? ...Context 10
... order to more closely examine these results, both um and well were further examined in relation to their function in turn-taking. Table 7.3 Occurrences of um and well at turn-initial position in the OANC sub-corpora based on 100-item downsample for each 1) Based on these concordance lines, what initial hypotheses might be generated in relation to the position of um in turns in contemporary spoken British English? 2) How do these initial, tentative results compare to those in Table 7.3 ? ...Context 11
... 7.3 Occurrences of um and well at turn-initial position in the OANC sub-corpora based on 100-item downsample for each 1) Based on these concordance lines, what initial hypotheses might be generated in relation to the position of um in turns in contemporary spoken British English? 2) How do these initial, tentative results compare to those in Table 7.3 ? In order to step up the analysis a little, in Table 7.4 , the turn-initial instances of both um and well were examined as to whether they had a floor-yielding role (i.e. as a backchannel rather than being used by the speaker in an attempt to take over the floor), or a floor-grabbing function (i.e. acknowledging the previous speaker turn but then followed by a contribution which 'takes' the conversational floor) (see extracts 7.1 and 7.2). ...Context 12
... example, the concordance analysis could be extended to every occurrence of uh and well in both sub-corpora in order to build a complete picture of the patterning of these items. Alternatively, this approach could be extended to include other items in Table 7.2 , such as yeah or really . Finally, these results could be compared to other corpora of spoken English across different varieties in order to investigate the patterning of this fundamental feature of the turn-taking system which fulfils a very particular, but nonetheless vital, pragmatic function. ...Context 13
... let us consider the written British English as represented by the BAWE -if we are to apply our definition of a PM to the results shown in Table 7.5 , primary amongst these: their optionality, their textual and interpersonal functions, and the fact that they have little or no semantic meaning, then the four-word cluster on the other hand (highlighted) is the only item to meet the criteria as a PM within the top five most frequent items. All the other items listed in Table 7.5 are syntactic fragments frequently used in the construction of a phrase, clause or sentence. ...Context 14
... let us consider the written British English as represented by the BAWE -if we are to apply our definition of a PM to the results shown in Table 7.5 , primary amongst these: their optionality, their textual and interpersonal functions, and the fact that they have little or no semantic meaning, then the four-word cluster on the other hand (highlighted) is the only item to meet the criteria as a PM within the top five most frequent items. All the other items listed in Table 7.5 are syntactic fragments frequently used in the construction of a phrase, clause or sentence. ...Context 15
... I don't know and Do you know? have literal, semantic meaning connected to factuality and (un)certainty. Items with semantic meaning have not been eliminated from the counts in Table 7.6 . The instances of multi-word units shown in Table 7.6 that have purely semantic, as opposed to pragmatic, meaning were not eliminated from the counts, as to attribute these frequency results purely to the lexical system would be to miss the interpersonal element that is associated with them and, by extension, their pragmatic role in the structure of discourse and the establishment and maintenance of relationships. ...Context 16
... with semantic meaning have not been eliminated from the counts in Table 7.6 . The instances of multi-word units shown in Table 7.6 that have purely semantic, as opposed to pragmatic, meaning were not eliminated from the counts, as to attribute these frequency results purely to the lexical system would be to miss the interpersonal element that is associated with them and, by extension, their pragmatic role in the structure of discourse and the establishment and maintenance of relationships. For example, the three linguistic items highlighted in Table 7.6 are associated with either you or I , demonstrating the interactive nature of many of the most frequent units in spoken language. ...Context 17
... instances of multi-word units shown in Table 7.6 that have purely semantic, as opposed to pragmatic, meaning were not eliminated from the counts, as to attribute these frequency results purely to the lexical system would be to miss the interpersonal element that is associated with them and, by extension, their pragmatic role in the structure of discourse and the establishment and maintenance of relationships. For example, the three linguistic items highlighted in Table 7.6 are associated with either you or I , demonstrating the interactive nature of many of the most frequent units in spoken language. Second, you know and I don't know have been associated with the realm of linguistic politeness. ...Context 18
... importance of the study of pragmatic markers is evidenced by their prominence on spoken corpus word frequency lists. For example, we can see from Table 7.6 that items with the potential to function as PMs such as you know and I don't know are the most frequent two-word and three-word units respectively. Therefore, corpus word frequency evidence highlights a considerable number of high frequency PMs that play a crucial role in the organisation and management of spoken discourse. ...Context 19
... tokens chosen for analysis are: the adjunctive VCMs (and) (all) (that) kind of thing ; (and) (all) (that) sort of thing ; (and) (all) (that) type of thing ; and the disjunctive VCMs or whatever ; or something and or anything . The normalised frequency results for these selected adjunctives are presented in Table 7.8 shows that what have traditionally been referred to in the literature as adjunctives are, overall, more common in spoken academic discourse than in the discourse of family and close friends. ...Context 20
... 2016). Table 7.9 illustrates the frequency results for the search item * that type of thing in the COCA corpus overall and in the individual spoken, fiction, magazine, newspaper and academic sections. ...Context 21
... can be seen, * that type of thing occurs predominantly in the spoken component of COCA, with only one occurrence of the adjunctive in the academic component. This appears to contradict the findings of Table 7.8 . ...Context 22
... disjunctive or something has been shown to function to mark utterance content as inaccurate or approximate, or to indicate alternative options and express tentativeness In contrast to Table 7.8 , Table 7.10 shows that disjunctives are notably more frequent than adjunctives in both the discourse of intimates and spoken academic discourse. 15034 in relation to offers, proposals or requests (Overstreet, 1999;Clancy, 2016). ...Context 23
... disjunctive or something has been shown to function to mark utterance content as inaccurate or approximate, or to indicate alternative options and express tentativeness In contrast to Table 7.8 , Table 7.10 shows that disjunctives are notably more frequent than adjunctives in both the discourse of intimates and spoken academic discourse. ...Context 24
... spoken academic settings there may be a reluctance, especially on the part of students, to indicate inaccuracy, approximation or tentativeness in their spoken interactions, given that their tutors/lecturers may be present and that they might be graded on content. This may account for the lower frequency of the disjunctive VCMs in Table 7.10 . Table 7.11 illustrates the frequency results for or whatever in the overall COCA corpus and its component parts. ...Context 25
... may account for the lower frequency of the disjunctive VCMs in Table 7.10 . Table 7.11 illustrates the frequency results for or whatever in the overall COCA corpus and its component parts. ...Context 26
... 7.11 illustrates the frequency results for or whatever in the overall COCA corpus and its component parts. Although the frequency counts appear to support the hypothesis that disjunctives are more frequent in spoken discourse than in academic discourse, there is a much greater frequency difference between or whatever in the spoken and academic components of COCA than is evident in Table 7.10 . How might this frequency discrepancy be explained? ...Context 27
... we freely admit that this chapter is predominantly focused on spoken language and expressions such as thanks or cheers may be used in informal speech contexts, representations of which are not widely contained in the Google books corpus, or, in the case of cheers , may have changed its use as a speech act of toasting to one of gratitude (see Schauer and Adolphs, 2006), neither, to borrow Scott' s (2017) keyword analogy, are we comparing apples with phone boxes. Therefore, in order to examine more thoroughly the results from As can be seen, Table 7.12 demonstrates that the frequencies for both thank and thanks have in fact dropped, though in the case of thanks not by very much, in the years between the collection of the Spoken BNC1994, completed in 1994, and the Spoken BNC2014, collected between 2012 and 2016. ...Context 28
... the results for thank, thanks and cheers represent collocation by significance -the higher the log-likelihood score, the stronger the evidence that the items collocating is not purely due to chance. The top ten collocates of thank are illustrated in Table 7.13 . The default parameters automatically set by CQP were used for Tables 7.13 to 7.15 -collocates are within -/+3 items of the node. ...Context 29
... default parameters automatically set by CQP were used for Tables 7.13 to 7.15 -collocates are within -/+3 items of the node. Punctuation marks have been excluded from the collocation lists for each item but extralinguistic information such as UNCLEAR in Table 7.13 and NAME in Table 7.15 has been included. The collocates of thank reveal quite a lot about the patterns that occur with it. ...Context 30
... default parameters automatically set by CQP were used for Tables 7.13 to 7.15 -collocates are within -/+3 items of the node. Punctuation marks have been excluded from the collocation lists for each item but extralinguistic information such as UNCLEAR in Table 7.13 and NAME in Table 7.15 has been included. The collocates of thank reveal quite a lot about the patterns that occur with it. ...Context 31
... and Adolphs (2006: 129) emphasise the importance of knowing how to politely refuse an offer, suggesting that 'the ability to express gratitude and at the same time to refuse a proposition is one of the main skills that students might need to possess in a native speaker context' . Table 7.14 demonstrates the top ten collocates for thanks in the Spoken BNC2014. ...Context 32
... to thank , thanks is prone to repetition and reciprocation and collocates with both thank and also, in this case, cheers (in position 4). There are also other items we first encountered in Table 7.13 such as much , oh and okay . ...Context 33
... second element is that it can be used as a toast rather than as an expression of gratitude and we further discuss this in relation to its collocates here. The third element is the frequency issue -as Table 7.12 has shown. In the past 20 years or so the use of thank and thanks has become slightly less frequent, whereas the use of cheers has almost tripled in its frequency of use. ...Context 34
... the past 20 years or so the use of thank and thanks has become slightly less frequent, whereas the use of cheers has almost tripled in its frequency of use. The top ten collocates for cheers are illustrated in Table 7.15 . Again, Table 7.15 shows these items to be collocates of one another, demonstrating their tendency towards repetition and reciprocity indicating their interactivity. ...Context 35
... top ten collocates for cheers are illustrated in Table 7.15 . Again, Table 7.15 shows these items to be collocates of one another, demonstrating their tendency towards repetition and reciprocity indicating their interactivity. ...Context 36
... it should also be noted that in Table 7.15 cheers collocates with bye and this connection, also noted by Schauer and Adolphs (2006), is a problematic one and highlights the challenges associated with the corpus pragmatic analysis of IFIDs as well as pragmatic annotation (see Chapters 3 and 6 ). ...Context 37
... does, however, point towards the possibility of cheers being involved in three different speech act types: toast, gratitude and leave-taking. This, coupled with cheers ' tendency towards heightened interactivity, as evidenced through its collocating with terms of address, and with the spoken language characteristic of the Spoken BNC2014 (see Love et al ., 2017), may account for its rise in frequency in Table 7.15 . Indeed, we might speculate that the data collection devices, personal smart phones utilised for the Spoken BNC2014, allowed for more interactivity given that smart phones are far less intrusive than the devices employed as part of the collection of the demographically sampled component of the Spoken BNC1994. ...Similar publications
The present article compares online machine translations and human translations in the aim of describing variation effects in Spanish output segments. Our survey focuses in a counterfactual construction existing both in English and Spanish but whose uses and frequencies differ in each language. English perfective should have predicates have a forma...
Humans first appeared on the planet about 3.5 million years ago and like most biota, they settled near wetlands because of the availability of food and water. The ancestors of our species understood and knew that water, wetlands, and healthy landscapes were essential for life. In Taiwan, the indigenous people have a long history being a part of and...
Background/Objectives: Previous studies have examined the role of working memory in cognitive tasks such as syntactic, semantic, and phonological processing, thereby contributing to our understanding of linguistic information management and retrieval. However, the real-time processing of phonological information—particularly in relation to supraseg...
