Introducing constructed dialogue in Greek and American conversational and literary narrative

Tannen, Deborah

doi:10.1515/9783110871968.311

Cited by 183 publications

(197 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

168

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As noted by , there is a tradition of sociolinguistically informed work documenting the existence of variation in narrative styles across (researcher-determined) groups, often defined by nationality, class, race/ethnicity, and/or region Mintz 1996, Miller et al 1997;Tannen 1984Tannen , 1986. Some of this scholarship involves intergroup comparisons.…”

Section: Group-specific Narrative Styles and "Cultural Identities"mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Handbook of Narrative Analysis

Herman¹,

Vervaeck²

2015

204

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Group-specific Narrative Styles and "Cultural Identities"mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Handbook of Narrative Analysis

Herman¹,

Vervaeck²

2015

204

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…While early work on reported speech and prior text largely focuses on the role of repetition and attribution, later studies, including Tannen's (1986Tannen's ( , 2007 when speech uttered in one context is repeated in another, it is fundamentally changed even if 'reported' accurately. In many, perhaps most, cases, however, material represented as dialogue was never spoken by anyone else in a form resembling that constructed, if at all.…”

Section: Reported Speech and Sharing Of Prior Textmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While early work on reported speech and prior text largely focuses on the role of repetition and attribution, later studies, including Tannen's (1986Tannen's ( , 2007 research on constructed dialogue and Johnstone et al's (1994) research on intertextual repetition, have focused on the ways that so-called reported speech is altered when imported into new interactional environments in spoken language. Tannen (2007: 112) argues that: when speech uttered in one context is repeated in another, it is fundamentally changed even if 'reported' accurately.…”

Section: Reported Speech and Sharing Of Prior Textmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing Participation through Modal Affordances on Twitter

Draucker

Collister

2015

Open Library of Humanities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fawn Draucker and Lauren Collister, 'Managing Participation through Modal Affordances on Twitter ' (2015) On Twitter, retweets function as a method of reporting speech and spreading the talk of other users. We propose that changes to the interface and mechanisms of Twitter have led to the coexistence of two complementary forms of retweeting. The Preserving Retweet, enabled by the Twitter interface, directly reports speech and retains attribution to the original author, but it does not allow for any modification or indication of stance.The Adapting Retweet, a user-created norm studied by boyd et al. (2010), allows users the option to add comments to pre-existing tweets but resulting in confusion in attribution. Using an updated form of Goffman's participation framework, we analyze the use of these two types of retweets and their impact on attribution. Draucker and Collister: Managing Participation through Modal Affordances on Twitter 2 IntroductionAll language use builds on previous instances of what Becker (1995) calls 'languaging'; therefore all talk is implicitly connected to the voices of past experiences. One way for speakers to negotiate the history of their talk is by using the resource often referred to as reported speech. Reported speech, while not necessarily an exact repetition of a previous speaker's words, is used by speakers to explicitly assign responsibility for portions of their talk to prior voices. Goffman's (1981) approach to participation, discussed in more detail below, has laid the groundwork for many studies investigating this tangle of voices in spoken discourse (e.g. Goodwin & Goodwin, 2004;Hill & Zepeda, 1992;Irvine, 1996;Levinson, 1988). Few studies, however, focus on the ways that reported speech and participation function in rapidly changing computer-mediated conversational environments.In this study, we describe the dialectic relationship between the evolution of the interface of the microblogging platform Twitter and the extant practices and needs of its user base regarding reported speech. In 2009, the designers of Twitter added a new feature to the medium to accommodate the user-created manual practice of sharing prior text from other Twitter users, most often using the notation 'RT' to indicate that the material was being 'retweeted.' This interface change allowed tweeters to more easily share others' tweets with their own followers through the simple click of a button, with minimal imposition of the user's own voice on the prior text. We focus here on this change to the Twitter interface and its impact on the practice of sharing prior texts on this platform, attending to the ways in which users incorporate the new feature into their extant practices and how this allows them to negotiate the interplay of voices and the assignment of responsibility in ways that are particular to Twitter.We begin with an introduction to Twitter as a platform of communication to situate the analysis in context. Following this introduction, we provide background information on reported speech, a ...

show abstract

“…* Four instance of <thing was> occurred in the Rankin novels; one occurred in dialog and the other three occurred in free indirect speech, which is "constructed dialogue" according to Tannen 1986and "heteroglossic" according to Bakhtin 1981[1953, both cited in Johnstone 2008: 60. These are primarily from personal blogs and represent a very informal and highly involved style which include lots of contractions and elisions, as well as being minimally edited.…”

Section: Register Distribution Of Ts Variantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contextually determined fixity and flexibility in “thing” sentence matrixes

Delahunty¹

2011

Yearbook of Phraseology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes the semantics and pragmatics of Thing sentences (TSs) and derives them from the sentence's lexis and syntax. It describes several rhetorical and discourse management uses of the form and argues that these arise because the TS clause is simultaneously presupposed and focused. It shows that TSs are realized as a set of formal variants appearing to manifest a range of fixity and flexibility: some may be produced either analytically or holistically, others only holistically. Data from the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) and other sources shows that most TSs occur at the informal end of the register spectrum, in registers typically produced under time pressure, which is also where the less flexible variants tend to occur. The paper proposes a source and conditions for the creation of discourse management expressions like TSs and identifies linguistic elements from which they may be constructed and a diachronic trajectory for their origination, development, and extinction.

show abstract

Introducing constructed dialogue in Greek and American conversational and literary narrative

Cited by 183 publications

References 16 publications

The Handbook of Narrative Analysis

The Handbook of Narrative Analysis

Managing Participation through Modal Affordances on Twitter

Contextually determined fixity and flexibility in “thing” sentence matrixes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About