15,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: GRIN Verlag
- Sprache: Englisch
Seminar paper from the year 2007 in the subject English Language and Literature Studies - Linguistics, grade: 2,3, Technical University of Chemnitz, course: Hauptseminar "Pragmatics", language: English, abstract: In traditional grammar books question types as well as spoken (or written) interaction are explained very theoretically, far from being practically orientated and therefore often not applicable to interaction in practice. While in grammar books sentence structure is always precisely ordered, in naturally occurring spoken language we often deal with syntactically incomplete utterances which are not exactly arranged as described in grammar books Furthermore, the most important difference between theory and real life is that grammar books focus on form is described rather than function. (see Weisser, 2002:3). From these differences several problems arise which I will examine in this paper. In the first section I will give a general definition of the term question as well as a classification of question types according to Quirk et al. (1985). In the second part I will analyse each question type by working out the differences between the theory of Quirk et al. (1985) and Tsui (1992). On the one hand, I will always compare the theory of Quirk et al. with the contrastive, more practically orientated theory of Tsui. On the other hand, I will substantiate Tsui’s theory with examples from the trainline corpus in order to demonstrate that her analysis is correct. Further, I will analyse to which extent the trainline examples are applicable to the theories.
Das E-Book können Sie in Legimi-Apps oder einer beliebigen App lesen, die das folgende Format unterstützen:
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2007
Ähnliche
Page 1
Page 3
1. Introduction
In traditional grammar books question types as well as spoken (or written) interaction are explained very theoretically, far from being practically orientated and therefore often not applicable to interaction in practice. While in grammar books sentence structure is always precisely ordered, in naturally occurring spoken language we often deal with syntactically incomplete utterances which are not exactly arranged as described in grammar books Furthermore, the most important difference between theory and real life is that grammar books focus on form is described rather than function. (see Weisser, 2002:3). From these differences several problems arise which I will examine in this paper.
In the first section I will give a general definition of the termquestionas well as a classification of question types according to Quirk et al. (1985). In the second part I will analyse each question type by working out the differences between the theory of Quirk et al. (1985) and Tsui (1992). On the one hand, I will always compare the theory of Quirk et al. with the contrastive, more practically orientated theory of Tsui. On the other hand, I will substantiate Tsui’s theory with examples from the trainline corpus in order to demonstrate that her analysis is correct. Further, I will analyse to which extent the trainline examples are applicable to the theories.
Although Quirk et al.’s analysis is more extensive, I will concentrate on the items which can be compared with Tsui’s investigation. Consequently, some aspects will remain unanalysed in my examination.
2. Questions: A definition and classification
Firstly, Quirk et al. (1985:804) definequestionsas a semantic class which is “primarily used to seek information on a specific point”. In contrast, Tsui (1992:89) states that “sometimes an utterance is identified as a ‘question’ because it is interrogative in form and sometimes because it expects an answer or some verbal performance from the addressee”. Tsui (ibid.) points out that in the studies “the term ‘question’ is sometimes taken as a syntactic category and sometimes a discourse category; as a result, the term remains vague and ill - defined.” In contrast, Tsui (op. cit.:90) rather considers the classification in terms of function.
Secondly, Quirk et al. (1985:806) suggest to divide questions into three major classes “according to the type of reply they expect”:
