The functions of prosody in the reported speech of rural Southwestern Nicaraguans
Palabras clave:
evidentiality, identity, personal narratives, pitch, stanceResumen
This paper contributes new evidence of the evidential and stance-taking functions of prosody in reported speech. Analysis of direct reported speech in an understudied vernacular Spanish suggests that prosody: (1) marks the boundaries of reported speech, (2) marks boundaries between multiple story-world voices, and (3) serves as a stance-taking device. Pitch average and, to a lesser extent, pitch range, were found to play a role in contextualizing reported speech. Pitch shifts tended to accompany reported speech as a unit rather than centering on a flanking intonational phrase boundary, although post-hoc analysis suggests an effect for prosodic breaks preceding reported speech. A mixed-methods analysis answers a call to assess the simultaneous functions of prosody in marking reported speech and in stance-taking. Pitch changes consistently marked dialogic reported speech, while changes in voice quality, rate, and rhythm variably accompanied salient linguistic markers in the reported speech of in- and out-group characters.
Descargas
Referencias
Aikhenvald, A. (2004). Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Auer, P. (Ed.). (2007). Style and social identities: Alternative approaches to linguistic heterogeneity. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). “Discourse in the novel.” In M. Holquist (Ed.), The dialogic imagination (pp. 259-422). Austin: University of Texas Press.
Biber, D. & Finegan, E. (1988). “Adverbial stance types in English.” Discourse Processes, 11, pp. 1-34.
Bolden, G. (2004). “The quote and beyond: Defining boundaries of reported speech in conversational Russian.” Journal of Pragmatics, 36(6 ), pp. 1071-1118.
Bucholtz, M. (2005). “Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach.” Discourse Studies, 7(4-5), pp. 585- 614.
Cabedo, A. (2007). “Caracterización prosódica del estilo directo de habla en la con-versación coloquial.” Estudios de Lingüí stica Universidad de Alicante, 21, pp. 1-13.
Canellada, M. J. y Madsen, J.K. (1987). Pronunciación del español. Lengua hab-lada y literaria. Madrid: Castalia.
Chafe, W. & Nichols, J. (Eds.). (1986). Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology. Norwood, N. J.: Ablex.
Chappell, W. (2015). “Formality strategies in Managua, Nicaragua: A local vs. global approach.” Spanish in Context, 12(2), pp. 221-254.
Christiansen, A. (2014). “El vos es el dialecto que inventamos nosotros, la forma correcta es el tú.” Borealis: An International Journal of Hispanic Linguistics, 3(2), pp. 259-297.
Coulmas, F. (Ed.). (1986). Reported speech: Some general issues. Direct and indirect speech. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Couper-Kuhlen, E. (1998). “Coherent voicing: On prosody in conversational reported speech.” Pragmatics and Beyond New Series, pp. 11-34.
Diewald, G. & Smirnova, E. (Eds.). (2010). Linguistic realization of evidentiality in European languages. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
Eckert, P. (2008). “Variation and the indexical field.” Journal of Sociolinguistics, 12(4), pp. 453-476.
Estellés-Arguedas, M. (2015). “Expressing evidentiality through prosody? Pro-sodic voicing in reported speech in Spanish colloquial conversations.” Journal of Pragmatics, 85, pp. 138-154.
Estellés-Arguedas, M. & Albelda Marco, M. (2014). “Evidentials, politeness and prosody in Spanish: A corpus analysis.” Journal of Politeness Research, 10(1), pp. 29-62.
Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Goodwin, C. (2007). “Interactive footing.” In E. Holt & R. Clift (Eds.), Report-ing talk: Reported speech in interaction (pp. 16-46). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gumperz, J. J. & Cook-Gumperz, J. (1982). “Introduction: Language and the communication of social identity.” Language and Social Identity, pp. 1-21.
Günthner, S. (1997). “The contextualization of affect in reported dialogues.” In S. Niemeier & R. Dirven (Eds.), The language of emotions. Conceptualization, expression, and theoretical foundation (pp. 247-276). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Günthner, S. (1999). “Polyphony and the ‘layering of voices’ in reported dia-logues: An analysis of the use of prosodic devices in everyday reported speech.” Journal of Pragmatics, 31(5), pp. 685-708.
Jansen, W., Gregory, M. L. and Brenier, J. M. (2001). “Prosodic correlates of directly reported speech: Evidence from conversational speech.” In ISCA Tutorial and Research Workshop (ITRW) on Prosody in Speech Recognition and Understanding.
Klewitz, G. & Couper-Kuhlen, E. (1999). “Quote-unquote? The role of prosody in the contextualization of reported speech sequences.” Journal of Pragmatics, 9(4), pp. 459-485.
Lipski, J. M. (1994). Latin American Spanish. London: Longman.Lipski, J. M. (2008). Varieties of Spanish in the United States. Georgetown Uni-versity Press.
Maier, E. (2014). “Japanese reported speech: Towards an account of perspective shift as mixed quotation.” In E. McCready, K. Yabushita & K. Yoshimoto (Eds.), Formal approaches to semantics and pragmatics: Japanese and beyond(pp. 135-154). Netherlands: Springer.
Maldonado, C. (1999). “Discurso directo y discurso indirecto.” En I. Bosque y V. Demonte (Eds.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española (vol. 3), (pp. 3549-3596). Madrid: Espasa Calpe.
Navarro Tomás, T. (1944). Manual de entonación española. New York: Hispanic Institute in the United States (1974. 4th ed. Madrid: Ediciones Guadarrama).
Ochs, E. & Capps, L. (1996). “Narrating the self.” Annual Review of Anthropology, 25(1), pp. 19-43.
Oliveira Jr, M. & Cunha, D. A. (2004). “Prosody as marker of direct reported speech boundary.” In Speech Prosody 2004, International Conference.
Quilis, A. (1993) Tratado de fonología y fonética españolas. Madrid: Arco.
Selting, M., Auer, P., Barden, B., Bergmann, J., Couper-Kuhlen, E., Günth-ner, S., Meier, C., Quasthoff, U., Schlobinski, P. & Uhmann, S. (1998). “Gesprächsanalytisches transkriptionssystem (GAT).” Linguistische Berichte, 34(173), pp. 91-122.
Tannen, D. (1986). “Introducing constructed dialogue in Greek and American conversational and literary narrative.” Direct and indirect speech, 3, pp. 11-32.
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2021 Semas
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
Aquellos autores que tengan publicaciones con esta revista aceptan los términos siguientes:
- Los autores garantizarán a la revista el derecho de primera publicación de su obra, el cual estará simultáneamente sujeto a la Licencia de reconocimiento de Creative Commons que permite a terceros compartir la obra bajo los mismos acuerdos en que está formulada la Licencia que se especifica, siempre que se indique su autor y su primera publicación en esta revista.
- Los autores podrán adoptar otros acuerdos de licencia no exclusiva de distribución de la versión de la obra publicada siempre que se indique la publicación inicial en esta revista.
- Se permite y recomienda a los autores la difusión de su obra a través de Internet, lo cual podría producir intercambios interesantes y aumentaría las citas de la obra publicada.
Los trabajos publicados en Semas. Revista de Lingüística Teórica y Aplicada se publican bajo los términos que se indican en la Licencia de Creative Commons con la Atribución 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4).
