The Handbook of Discourse Analysis
The Handbook of Discourse Analysis The Handbook of Discourse Analysis
276 Livia Polanyi Written Yiddish Anecdote Title C – Yiddish Anecdote 0 C – Orientation/Narrative C – Action/Narrative a b c B-mod g S(h) j S(k) S(m) p S(q) s t u d B(e or f) h i k l m S(n) q r e f n o Figure 14.1 DPT for What my father did An examination of the DPT for What my father did reveals its hierarchical structure. The events of the narrative mainline are represented as daughters of one coordinate ACTION node, while reported speech, thought and perception are shown as embedded constituents under S nodes. From this purely structural representation, however, it is not clear why the subjects in (l) and (r) are not postposed. For an explanation of this phenomenon we must look further to the semantic representation. 4.4 Evoked in which discourse? As you will recall, LDM analysis of discourse requires that each dcu be tagged for a number of context variables. If we now examine the semantic representation for this text constructed following the LDM, it is clear that the horse and wagon is evoked within the scope of three separate interactional contexts: Interaction 1, involving a Modeled Narrator and a Modeled Story Recipient; Interaction 2, in which the participant set is the Guy who acts as both enunciator of perception and receiver of the enunciation; and Interaction 3, in which the Guy interacts with the crowd at the inn. These three dcus correspond to dcus marked (b), (l), and (r). These are the first mention of horse and wagon in the Yiddish anecdote we have been examining, and the two putative counterexamples to Prince’s generalization. Since the LDM requires tagging of each dcu for Interactional Context as well as for a host of other context types, our analysis provides the machinery to rephrase Prince’s theory of Yiddish expletive ES + Subject Postposing without extending the model at all. The analysis of this under the LDM specifies that any entity mentioned initially in any Interaction Context will be marked in Yiddish as a first mention. In figure 14.2, we have prepared an informal representation of the semantics of this text. 15
The Linguistic Structure of Discourse 277 Interaction 1: Participants: Modeled Narrator and Story Recipient Speech Event 1: Storytelling Discourse Unit 1: Anecdote modality: indicative point of view: omniscient narrator guy goes by an inn GUY leaves his horse and wagon outside GUY goes alone into the inn GUY orders FOOD GUY eats FOOD ← Participants: Modeled Narrator and Story Recipient Speech Event 1: Storytelling modality: indicative point of view: omniscient narrator GUY orders a couple of eggs or GUY orders some chichen GUY gets up ← Participants: Modeled Narrator and Story Recipient Speech Event 1: Storytelling modality: irrealis point of view: omniscient narrator GUY travels further GUY goes outside the inn GUY looks around Interaction 2: Participants: GUY modality: Direct Perception point of view: GUY polarity: negative Horse and wagon exists Interaction 2: Participants: GUY and GUY Speech Event 3: introspection modality: epistemic factivity: “PROBABLE” point of view: GUY thief is among the people GUY goes back into the inn ← Interaction 2: Participants: GUY and GUY Speech Event 3: introspection modality: epistemic factivity: “PROBABLE” point of view: GUY temporal location: “FLASHBACK” THIEF steals horse and wagon Interaction 3: Participants: GUY and INN-CROWD Speech Event 3: making-a-fuss modality: “MUST” point of view: GUY Horse and wagon are returned thief gets scared THIEF goes out THIEF brings back horse and wagon Figure 14.2 Informal semantic representation of What my father did
- Page 247 and 248: Interactional Sociolinguistics 225
- Page 249 and 250: Interactional Sociolinguistics 227
- Page 251 and 252: Discourse as an Interactional Achie
- Page 253 and 254: Discourse as an Interactional Achie
- Page 255 and 256: Discourse as an Interactional Achie
- Page 257 and 258: Discourse as an Interactional Achie
- Page 259 and 260: Discourse as an Interactional Achie
- Page 261 and 262: Discourse as an Interactional Achie
- Page 263 and 264: Discourse as an Interactional Achie
- Page 265 and 266: Discourse as an Interactional Achie
- Page 267 and 268: Discourse as an Interactional Achie
- Page 269 and 270: Discourse as an Interactional Achie
- Page 271 and 272: Discourse as an Interactional Achie
- Page 273 and 274: Discourse and Interaction 251 (1987
- Page 275 and 276: Discourse and Interaction 253 that
- Page 277 and 278: Discourse and Interaction 255 there
- Page 279 and 280: Discourse and Interaction 257 costs
- Page 281 and 282: Discourse and Interaction 259 inter
- Page 283 and 284: Discourse and Interaction 261 3 Con
- Page 285 and 286: Discourse and Interaction 263 Grice
- Page 287 and 288: The Linguistic Structure of Discour
- Page 289 and 290: The Linguistic Structure of Discour
- Page 291 and 292: The Linguistic Structure of Discour
- Page 293 and 294: The Linguistic Structure of Discour
- Page 295 and 296: (11) interaction speech event genre
- Page 297: The Linguistic Structure of Discour
- Page 301 and 302: The Linguistic Structure of Discour
- Page 303 and 304: The Linguistic Structure of Discour
- Page 305 and 306: The Variationist Approach 283 varia
- Page 307 and 308: The Variationist Approach 285 model
- Page 309 and 310: The Variationist Approach 287 the s
- Page 311 and 312: The Variationist Approach 289 Table
- Page 313 and 314: The Variationist Approach 291 The s
- Page 315 and 316: The Variationist Approach 293 Table
- Page 317 and 318: The Variationist Approach 295 1 Som
- Page 319 and 320: The Variationist Approach 297 70 60
- Page 321 and 322: The Variationist Approach 299 numbe
- Page 323 and 324: The Variationist Approach 301 Blanc
- Page 325 and 326: The Variationist Approach 303 Vince
- Page 327 and 328: Computer-assisted Text and Corpus A
- Page 329 and 330: Computer-assisted Text and Corpus A
- Page 331 and 332: Computer-assisted Text and Corpus A
- Page 333 and 334: Computer-assisted Text and Corpus A
- Page 335 and 336: Computer-assisted Text and Corpus A
- Page 337 and 338: Computer-assisted Text and Corpus A
- Page 339 and 340: Computer-assisted Text and Corpus A
- Page 341 and 342: Computer-assisted Text and Corpus A
- Page 343 and 344: The Transcription of Discourse 321
- Page 345 and 346: The Transcription of Discourse 323
- Page 347 and 348: The Transcription of Discourse 325
<strong>The</strong> Linguistic Structure <strong>of</strong> <strong>Discourse</strong> 277<br />
Interaction 1: Participants: Modeled Narrator and Story Recipient<br />
Speech Event 1: Storytelling <strong>Discourse</strong> Unit 1: Anecdote<br />
modality: indicative<br />
point <strong>of</strong> view: omniscient narrator<br />
guy goes by an inn<br />
GUY leaves his horse and wagon outside<br />
GUY goes alone into the inn<br />
GUY orders FOOD<br />
GUY eats FOOD<br />
←<br />
Participants: Modeled Narrator and Story Recipient<br />
Speech Event 1: Storytelling<br />
modality: indicative<br />
point <strong>of</strong> view: omniscient narrator<br />
GUY orders a couple <strong>of</strong> eggs or GUY orders some chichen<br />
GUY gets up<br />
←<br />
Participants: Modeled Narrator and Story Recipient<br />
Speech Event 1: Storytelling<br />
modality: irrealis point <strong>of</strong> view: omniscient narrator<br />
GUY travels further<br />
GUY goes outside the inn<br />
GUY looks around<br />
Interaction 2: Participants: GUY<br />
modality: Direct Perception point <strong>of</strong> view: GUY polarity: negative<br />
Horse and wagon exists<br />
Interaction 2:<br />
Participants: GUY and GUY<br />
Speech Event 3: introspection<br />
modality: epistemic<br />
factivity: “PROBABLE”<br />
point <strong>of</strong> view: GUY<br />
thief is among the people<br />
GUY goes back into the inn<br />
←<br />
Interaction 2:<br />
Participants: GUY and GUY<br />
Speech Event 3: introspection<br />
modality: epistemic<br />
factivity: “PROBABLE”<br />
point <strong>of</strong> view: GUY<br />
temporal location: “FLASHBACK”<br />
THIEF steals horse and wagon<br />
Interaction 3: Participants: GUY and INN-CROWD<br />
Speech Event 3: making-a-fuss<br />
modality: “MUST” point <strong>of</strong> view: GUY<br />
Horse and wagon are returned<br />
thief gets scared<br />
THIEF goes out<br />
THIEF brings back horse and wagon<br />
Figure 14.2<br />
Informal semantic representation <strong>of</strong> What my father did
Change language