Yael Maschler

Metalanguaging and discourse markers in bilingual conversation

This study examines the functions of the bilingual discourse strategy of language alternation in the process of marking boundaries of continuous discourse. The focus is on switched discourse markers – employed, it is argued, to metalanguage the frame of the discourse. The corpus is comprised of audio recordings of over 20 hours of Hebrew-English bilingual conversation. The strategy of language alternation at discourse markers is illustrated, and the switched discourse markers are classified according to Beckers approach to context (1988b) as a source of constraints on text. This classification is then related to the phenomenon of clustering of discourse markers at discourse unit boundaries in both bilingual and monolingual discourse. Finally, cross-linguistic differences in discourse markers are related to a theory of metalanguage. (Discourse analysis, bilingual discourse, discourse markers, languaging, metalanguage, Hebrew/English comparative discourse)

Metalanguage in interaction : Hebrew discourse markers

Metalanguage in Interaction is about the crystallization of metalanguage employed throughout interaction into the discourse markers which permeate talk. Based on close analysis of naturally-occurring Hebrew conversation, it is a synchronic study of the grammaticization of discourse markers, a phenomenon until now mostly studied from a diachronic perspective. It constitutes the first monograph in the fields of Hebrew interactional linguistics and Hebrew discourse markers. The book first presents what is unique to the present approach to discourse markers and gives them an operational definition. Discourse markers are explored as a system, illuminating their patterning in terms of function, structure, and the moments in interaction at which they are employed. Next, detailed analysis of four Hebrew discourse markers illuminates not only the functions and grammaticization patterns of these markers, but also what they reveal about quintessential aspects of Israeli society, identity, and culture. The conclusion discusses commonalities and differences in the grammaticization patterns of the four markers, and relates the grammaticization of discourse markers from interaction to projectability in discourse.

Emergent bilingual grammar: The case of contrast☆

Abstract This study explores the process by which a new, bilingual grammar emerges in interaction in a corpus of over 20 hours of audiotaped Hebrew-English bilingual conversation. In this bilingual grammar, new grammaticizations (Hopper, 1987, 1988) are formed based on the principle of contrast between the two languages, so that juxtapositions of forms from Hebrew and English come to signal structural contrasts in the new system. I investigate the interaction of motivations, both internal and external to the bilingual grammar, for the strategy of high-lighting contrast via language alternation. Internal motivations concern two contrasts in the structure of the bilingual grammar: (1) the contrast between the discourse and the discourse markers framing it and (2) the contrast between discourse markers and conjunctions. External motivations concern contrasts pertaining to the immediate speech situation: (1) pragmatic contrast between contrasting conversational actions carried out in the interaction and (2) referential contrast between contrasting propositions. In the situation of competing motivations (Du Bois, 1985) for iconic contrast, it is shown that external motivations override internal motivations, so that grammaticizations leading to structural contrasts in the new, bilingual grammar are ‘deferred’, and the new, bilingual grammar is indeed provisional and negotiable (Hopper, 1987).

What can bilingual conversation tell us about discourse markers?: Introduction

In the last fifteen years or so we have been witnessing a rising interest in the topic of discourse markers among linguists working in a variety of frameworks (e.g., Bazzanella, 1990; Fleischman & Yaguello (forthcoming); Fraser, 1988, 1990, 1996; Kroon, 1995, 1998; Roulet, Auchlin, Moeschler, Robattel, & Schelling, 1987; Schiffrin, 1987; Schourup, 1985; Watts, 1989, the various studies in Jucker & Ziv, 1998; and those in the recent special issues on discourse markers in monolingual discourse of Discourse Processes (Vol. 24(1), 1997) and The Journal of Pragmatics (Vol. 30, 1998), to mention only a small sampling). Bilingual conversation offers a unique perspective from which to examine discourse markers, because of a phenomenon well known to researchers of bilingual conversation, according to which the verbalization of discourse markers is very often accompanied by the bilingual strategy of language alternation (e.g., Bentahila & Davies, 1995; Bernsten & Myers-Scotton, 1993; Brody, 1987; de Rooij, 1996; Maschler, 1988, 1994; Matras, 1998; Myers-Scotton, 1993a; Nortier, 1989; Salmons, 1990; Sankoff, Thibault, Nagy, Blondeau, Fonollosa, & Gagnon, 1997; Stolz & Stolz, 1994). This phenomenon enables us to contribute several angles to the study of discourse markers.

The Language Games Bilinguals Play: Language Alternation at Language Game Boundaries.

Abstract Working in the tradition of discourse analysis pioneered by Gumperz, this study extends the approach to bilingual conversation. Following other scholars in the field (e.g. Reddy, 1979; Harris, 1981; Becker, 1984c), I am calling into question the code metaphor that underlies much modern linguistics. I extend this criticism to work in ‘code-switching’ in particular and support this theoretical claim by an empirical analysis of over 20 hours of recorded Hebrew-English bilingual conversation. The study describes the bilingual discourse strategy of language alternation as it is shaped by the many constraints imposed on a particular verbal interaction by the context in which the interaction takes place. Wittgensteins notion of language game (1953) is tied to Beckers approach to context as a source of constraints on text (1988). As a highly specified instance of the shaping of bilingual discourse strategies by contextual constraints, this study describes the bilingual discourse strategy of alternating languages at language game boundaries. This strategy of language alternation is argued to be one of the features of bilingual discourse according to which speakers negotiate where one language game ends and the next one begins. I close with a discussion of iconicity of the pattern of language alternation (discourse, conversation, bilingual discourse, code metaphor of language, philosophy of language, iconicity, Hebrew-English bilingualism).1

From sequential to affective discourse marker: Hebrew nu on Israeli political phone-in radio programs

Previous studies of Hebrew nu investigate this discourse marker in casual conversation. The current study explores nu on Israeli political phone-in radio programs and broadens our knowledge both about the functions and grammaticization processes of discourse markers and about some particularities of Israeli political talk radio. The comparison to casual talk reveals both qualitative and quantitative differences. In casual talk, the main function of nu is a sequential one – urging further development of an ongoing topic (69%). In the radiophonic data, the most common role of nu is as a keying token (53%), functioning in the affective realm. Furthermore, the talk-radio data show a wider variety of keys constructed by nu – which range from joking to sheer contempt – clustering closer towards the latter, in contrast to the case of casual talk, manifesting mostly the joking key. Structurally, whereas sequential functions are generally accomplished by stand-alone nu, affective tokens are accompanied by same-speaker talk. The analysis sheds new light on how a sequential token might come to function in the affective realm.

Formulations on Israeli political talk radio: From actions and sequences to stance via dialogic resonance

This article explores the properties of formulations in a corpus of Hebrew radio phone-ins by juxtaposing two theoretical frameworks: conversation analysis (CA) and dialogic syntax. This combination of frameworks is applied towards explaining an anomalous interaction in the collection – a caller’s marked, unexpected rejection of a formulation of gist produced by the radio phone-in’s host. Our analysis shows that whereas previous CA studies of formulations account for many instances throughout the corpus, understanding this particular formulation in CA terms does not explain its drastic rejection by the caller. We therefore turn to an in-depth examination of strategies for lexical and syntactic resonance as a stance-taking device throughout the interaction. In so doing, we not only shed light on the anomalous interaction, but also offer an answer to a provocative question previously put forward by Haddington (2004) concerning which of the two – stances or actions – have more meaningful consequences for the description of the organization of interaction. In the particular interaction analyzed here, stances play the more significant role. We propose that the intersubjective stance-taking of participants may be viewed as a meta-action employed among participants as they move across actions, sequences, and activities in talk.