“What's in a Name?”: Vocatives in Casual Conversations and Radio Phone-in Calls

McCarthy, Michael; O’Keeffe, Anne

doi:10.1163/9789004334410_010

Cited by 46 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 23 publications

(19 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Vocatives, another linguistic technique explored in the present study, refer to words or phrases that are “recognized as having a social function of expressing participant relationships along with that of summoning or attention-getting” (McCarthy & O’Keeffe, 2003, p. 155). One of the most common vocatives in dyadic interactions is the use of a conversational partner’s name.…”

Section: Implicit Encouragementmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of implicit encouragement and the putative confession on children’s memory reports

Cleveland

Quas

Lyon

2018

Child Abuse & Neglect

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study tested the effects of two interview techniques on children's report productivity and accuracy following exposure to suggestion: implicit encouragement (backchanneling, use of children's names) and the putative confession (telling children that a suspect "told me everything that happened and wants you to tell the truth"). One hundred and forty-three, 3-8-year-old children participated in a classroom event. One week later, they took part in a highly suggestive conversation about the event and then a mock forensic interview in which the two techniques were experimentally manipulated. Greater use of implicit encouragement led to increases, with age, in children's narrative productivity. Neither technique improved or reduced children's accuracy. No increases in errors about previously suggested information were evident when children received either technique. Implications for the use of these techniques in child forensic interviews are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Implicit Encouragementmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of implicit encouragement and the putative confession on children’s memory reports

Cleveland

Quas

Lyon

2018

Child Abuse & Neglect

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, the collocation ‘go ahead’ is used to cede the turn, typically when there has been overlap, as exemplified in (16a). (McCarthy and O'Keeffe, 2003) show that turn management is one of the important uses of vocatives particularly in multi-party dialogue, as illustrated in (16b,c). In such cases the fact that the turn has been assigned to the person addressed is, arguably, part of its conventional meaning.…”

Section: Much Of Our Grammatical Competence Concerns Language Use mentioning

confidence: 99%

Grammar Is a System That Characterizes Talk in Interaction

Ginzburg

Poesio

2016

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much of contemporary mainstream formal grammar theory is unable to provide analyses for language as it occurs in actual spoken interaction. Its analyses are developed for a cleaned up version of language which omits the disfluencies, non-sentential utterances, gestures, and many other phenomena that are ubiquitous in spoken language. Using evidence from linguistics, conversation analysis, multimodal communication, psychology, language acquisition, and neuroscience, we show these aspects of language use are rule governed in much the same way as phenomena captured by conventional grammars. Furthermore, we argue that over the past few years some of the tools required to provide a precise characterizations of such phenomena have begun to emerge in theoretical and computational linguistics; hence, there is no reason for treating them as “second class citizens” other than pre-theoretical assumptions about what should fall under the purview of grammar. Finally, we suggest that grammar formalisms covering such phenomena would provide a better foundation not just for linguistic analysis of face-to-face interaction, but also for sister disciplines, such as research on spoken dialogue systems and/or psychological work on language acquisition.

show abstract

“…McCarthy and O'Keefe (2003) take up these categories, expanding the classification on the basis of their own corpus to the following types: relational vocatives, topic management, badinage, mitigators, turn management, and summons -which, interestingly, Shiina (2007: 17) adduces the functions of interpersonal, conversational, information, and illocutionary force management, apart from the rare case of a highly dramatic stand-alone vocative. Bañón Hernández (1993) finally, enumerates, for stand-alone vocatives, the functions of greeting/showing of respect, exclamation, order, plea, turn management and evaluation (vocativo axiológico), whereas according to him, vocatives integrated in the utterance may have functions of context marking, directing the hearer's attention to a certain part of the speech act, and intensifying or mitigating the illocution or parts of the informational structure.…”

Section: Research Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This function is explicitly mentioned as 'relational vocatives' in McCarthy and O'Keefe (2003) and as 'interpersonal management' in Shiina (2007). Other authors do mention the vocative's relationship-indicating force but without postulating a separate functional category restricted to this kind of use (Bañón Hernández 1993: 103-128;Carranza 1996: 6-7;Mazzoleni 1995: 393-395;Zwicky 1974: 795-796).…”

Section: A) Relational Functionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(Nava Sanchezllanes 2006: 62) Finally, vocative güey may be used to mitigate potentially face-threatening speech acts, such as orders or jokes (cf. the 'badinage' function in McCarthy and O'Keefe 2003), by invoking the positive relationship existing between the interlocutors -see example (12) comes to the vocative, it is by no means as frequent as one might expect. In fact, the pure summoning function is actually quite rare (see McCarthy and O'Keefe 2003: 165).…”

Section: A) Relational Functionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mexican güey – from vocative to discourse marker: a case of grammaticalization?

Kleinknecht¹

2013

Vocative!

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Today's Mexican Spanish is marked by the frequent use of the word güey, which may assume a broad variety of functions: noun, adjective, invective, solidarity marker and discourse marker. This paper traces the development from the noun to the discourse marker, with intermediate stages being ritual insult and expressivity marking. The development is explained in several steps: a process of semantic-pragmatic bleaching from the invective use of güey to its use as a solidarity marker, then a shift of the vocative's attention-getting function from the interpersonal to the discourse level, and finally, a communicative overuse of the expressive function leading to its reanalysis as a discourse structuring element. The original semantics are preserved only insofar as güey is used exclusively within a relationship of solidarity between the collocutors. Finally it will be argued that the development of güey is not an instance of grammaticalization, although there are many similarities: the term routinization is proposed as a hyperonym.

show abstract

“What's in a Name?”: Vocatives in Casual Conversations and Radio Phone-in Calls

Abstract: This paper looks at the use of vocatives across two corpora: the 5-million word Cambridge

Cited by 46 publications

References 23 publications

The effects of implicit encouragement and the putative confession on children’s memory reports

The effects of implicit encouragement and the putative confession on children’s memory reports

Grammar Is a System That Characterizes Talk in Interaction

Mexican güey – from vocative to discourse marker: a case of grammaticalization?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About