Professur Slavische Sprachwissenschaft

Prof. Dr. Peter Kosta Chair Slavic Linguistics, Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures

Forschungsschwerpunte/Research: Biolinguistics, Universals, Theory of Language, Generative Syntax, Formal Semantics, Speech Act Theory, Conversational Analysis

Current Research Projects:

(1) Title of the project: “Differentiated linguistic and genetic explorations of language impairments and disorders within a biolinguistic approach on language faculty and language design (UG)”

Goal: We argue that an understanding of the faculty of language requires substantial interdisciplinary cooperation. One of the possible methods how to get access to what the recent work on biolinguistics has called HL (language faculty in the narrow sense, cf. Chomsky 2005; Hauser, Chomsky, Fitch 2002) is to explore the type of language impairments and disorders that are attested as genetically inherited disorders of different types ensuring at the same time that other deficits of cognition or cognitive capacities based on genetic mutations are not concerned.

Method: Our research focuses on ca. 100 families with genetically inherited and attested language disorders and speech impairments of different types; test groups: preferably monozygotic twins and one more member in the same family, all together 200 test persons

Partners:
Dr. Hartmut Peters (Moleculargenetic diagnostics, Charité Berlin)
PD Dr. Uli Sauerland (Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Berlin)
Prof. Dr. Peter Kosta (Slavic Department, Slavic linguistics, University of Potsdam)
Output: Monograph, articles

 

DRAFT OF THE UPDATED VERSION OF THE PROJECT
Title of the project: "Differentiated linguistic and genetic explorations of language impairments and disorders
within a biolinguistic approach on language faculty and language design (UG)"


I Interdisciplinary research and areas:


Molecular genetics
Biolinguistics
Patholinguistics
Language acquisition
Psycholinguistics
Neurolinguistics
Theory of language and universals
Generative Syntax


II Research objectives:

Research into the genetic basis of the language faculty based on certain (selected) language disorders and impairments

 

III. Research Team:

 

IV Brief description and research objectives:

The following is part of a project between the Department of Slavic Linguistics, University of Potsdam, and the Institute for molecular genetic diagnosis, Charite, Virchow-Klinikum, Berlin, that should be carried out within the next 3-5 years.

It focuses on the biological and genetic Fundamentals of language faculty and is based on various genetically attested language disorders and speech impairments.

We will try to analyze only those types of problems that are not caused by different complex cognitive genetic syndromes
(e.g. Down syndrome, Hypopituitarism, other forms of retarded cognitive development with mental retardation or other genetically related deficits such as mutation of FOXP1 and SLI/MR).

Therefore, we look for test persons which are only genetically healthy subjects in order to investigate the phonological, morphological, syntactic and lexical-semantic language deficits, disorders and impairments.
We want to discover whether the language faculty is constrained by principles of universal grammar which includes human language operations such as composition operation called MERGE and of  the recursive procedure called RECURSION and - if this is so -  whether these basic operations of human language in genetically speech impaired individuals are suspended.
These people will be undertaken, in advance, a genetic analysis of chromosomes subjected to exclude other genetic diseases (mutations).

In quantitative terms, we will have to investigate and test at least 100 subjects of families with preferably mono-or dizygotic twins (concordant or discordant, cf. above).

The control group 1 will study persons with a normal verbal behavior and a healthy language development and thus show no problems in language production and reception of patterns and grammar.

The control group 2 will be subjects with non-specific language disorders of different types of genetic origin (FOXP1 mutations, SLI/MR).

One type of language impairments based on Genes Mutations (including speech-sound disorder)  are explained within the  chromosome region 1p, NA genes, others e.g. for stuttering in the chromosomal region 1q, NA and other genes, in other zones see DF Newbury & A. P. Monaco (2010), Genetic Progress in research on speech and language disorders. In: Neuron 2010, October 21, 68 (2-13): 309-320.

For many years, it has been known that specific language impairment (SSES), an unexpected error of age-appropriate language skills, are highly heritable is. However, the molecular genetic studies were until now concerned with therapy and were often not successful due to the heterogeneity of Diseases and by the prevailing lack of clear genotype-phenotype relationships impeded.

We review inter alia new test methods for determining the relation between phonological output and short-term memory - time the phonology-Short memory interface (PF / STM) - to suggest that a better understanding of the Genetics is possible if other than purely clinical criteria are included.

First, a need to develop a new adequate linguistic method and diagnosis of disorders that is from one viewpoint 1) theoretically sound, and at the same time 2) empirically verifiable, and 3) usable in order to obtain a clear equivalent, e. g. a  quantitative and qualitative 'cognitive tertium comparationis' for the phenotype. Thus, we have to include not only the most discussed theories on language faculty design and LAD (language acquisition device, cf. Chomsky, Fitch, Hauser 2002, Chomsky 2005, Chomsky 2011, Kosta, Peters 2011) but also the recent research in human genetics and language evolution (cf. Horn et al. 2010). As part of the International Network in Biolinguistics (cf. ), we have a very close contact to the upcoming discussion in all these areas.

The identification of these cognitive deficits of language disorders and impairments - the language faculty phenotypes - will be parallelized with the most heritable genotypes - zones as indices and will be interpreted. This will help us to uncover the etiology of developmental disorders.

Group of subjects and research methods:

  1. preferably mono-or dizygotic twins (concordant or discordant)
  2. families with multiple affected / diseased persons
  3. families with a healthy and at least one affected child,
  4. families with a sick person should not only be analyzed from a genetic perspective but from the neurolinguistic one;
  5. Presentation to the experienced pediatrician: Exclusion of genetic syndromes, birth defects or trauma,
    • And implementation of multiple IQ tests, verbal, nonverbal  Clarification of the social environment
    • Request an array-CGH with sufficient resolution (possibly on Referral)
  6. DENT doctor:
    • Exclusion of functional or anatomical disorders
    • Exclusion of stroke (adults)
    • Exclusion from hearing
  7. examination in the language lab / Prof. Kosta
  8. possibly pre-FOXP2 exclusion
  9. ALLL speaks for genetic influence: Exome sequencing depending on patient volume, we should group the analyzed speech disorders !

If you need more information, please, contact me. We would be very interested if you could join in.

With many regards and best wishes,

Prof. Dr. Peter Kosta,
University Potsdam

Dr. Hartmut Peters
Charité, Berlin
Virchow Klinikum
Institut für Medizinische Genetik
Molekulargenetische Diagnostik und Forschung
t: +49 30 450 569 124

 

2. Planned dfg-network – summarizing report of proposals

Urban Voices: Linguistic and communicative diversity in everyday communication

1.) Sociolinguistic parameters (macro)
One aim is to contribute to a better understanding of regional, social, situational, etc. variation within the Russian speech community – in Russia as well as abroad (in Germany). The collection of a more balanced corpus of Russian interaction data including different speech events, covering a wide range of interlocutors with different social backgrounds that will further also be enriched by recordings from migrants’ communities in Russia as well as in Germany is therefore a first milestone. The data may partially include recordings from the ORD corpus.
Linguistic and communicative variation is affected by parameters of the situation and the communicative role as well as the social (sex/gender, age, etc.) and regional background of the speakers. These parameters interact with each other e.g. diatopic variation permeates diaphasic and diastratic variation. Depending on the speech event a parameter can become relevant or be shadowed. By means of variation speakers can highlight a social or communicative role, adopt to an audience, suffice the requirements of an institutional framing, etc. (cf. Krause, Sappok, Brehmer, Stepanova, Thielemann)
A balanced corpus including recordings of the same speaker in different situations, speech events and communicative and social roles throughout his/her speech day reflects a speaker’s ability to switch and adopt according to the situation by linguistic variation and pragmatic style shifts. Especially politeness research has for a long time not paid sufficient attention to the fact that communicative as well as politeness norms vary according to different situational, social, etc. parameters (cf. Brehmer). Communicative style is seen as a resource to index social identity, actively produced by a speaker as a display for his/her interlocutors. Among the sociolinguistics parameters analyzed the factor age is especially innovative within Russian linguistics (cf. Sappok).
Further Russian sociolinguistics has for a long time neglected ‘ethnic styles’ and varieties spoken by migrants. Therefore, the inclusion of recordings from bilinguals / migrants in German cities (B, HH) and further recordings of migrants living in Spb will at least partially fill in this gap. On this basis we will be able to analyze which styles are relevant in the migrant’s everyday communication and which get lost. Further we will be able to describe the influence of e.g. the German language and its pragmatic norms on the development of the pragmatic competence in Russian under conditions of migration.
Summary: linking the micro (linguistic, prosodic, sequential features) with the macro (social meaning), units / parameters on the macro level (sociolinguistic variables/classical dimensions (new accents, so far neglected parameters e.g. age), speech events as a combination of certain parameters (cf. Hymes); maybe other concepts such as Community of Practice (Wenger)
2.) Scope of analysis (micro)
As variation occurs on several layers the scope of analysis is necessarily wide. Stylistically relevant resources stem from several linguistic subsystems; prosodic (e.g. pitch, speech rate, loudness); pragmatic and interactional means underlie variation, too, and characterize a communicative style (cf. Krause, Richter, Stepanova, Thielemann). Here the analyses will reveal which variables on different linguistic levels undergo change and whether or how frequencies of variants indicate the switch to a specific style (cf. Krause). Alternatively a communicative style can be conceived as a complex contextualization cue – a gestalt phenomenon consisting of several heterogeneous features.
As polite (and other) communicative behavior is jointly negotiated on the micro-level of discourse (cf. Brehmer), pragmatic and sequential phenomena are also in the focus of analysis (cf. Brehmer, Markasova, Richter, Thielemann). Further, communicative genres, activities (e.g. agreeing / disagreeing, cf. Richter, speech activities relevant in politeness research, cf. Brehmer) and themes become relevant parameters as they may also be subject to group-specific preferences (cf. Sappok).
This, necessarily, has an impact on methodology: The proposals comprise qualitative as well as quantitative analysis of linguistic variation, prosodic and phonetic analysis, analysis of speech genres and conversation analysis. All research proposals are based on naturally occurring spontaneous linguistic interaction (no reading tasks, DCT, elicited data, interviews, etc., or only in addition, or as tertium comparationis).

Summary: wide scope of analysis, variation regarding features from all ling. subsystems, prosody / phonetics, interactional and sequential phenomena, communicative genres, speech activities, discourse topics; theoretic concept/conceptualization of style
3.) Models/concepts capturing what motivates the observed variation (macro)
Norms guiding communicative behavior and linguistic variation can vary depending on group, situation and speech event. Several second order concepts are mentioned in the proposals in order to describe the norms a specific style or communicative behavior derives from. Politeness research offers concepts to capture norms guiding language use and communicative behavior (e.g. power – solidarity). These concepts can be further elaborated and adapted in describing and explaining communicative behavior (e.g. ‘polite’ aggression, Markasova). Politeness research has largely been restricted to the analysis of data from the educated social layers of society. Paying attention to the fact that politeness norms also underlie social differentiation is a further innovative aspect of the project (cf. Brehmer, Markasova).
Other proposals draw on philosophical (e.g. ‘true’ dialogue, Markasova) or psychological concepts (aggression, dominance, etc., ‘emotive language’/ ‘language of emotions’, sympathy/antipathy, friendliness/aggression) (cf. Stepanova, Graf).
Interlocutors following different norms by default maybe perceived as out-group or may become subject to negative attributions when communicating with representative following other pragmatic norms. Literally interpreting default pragmatics norms leads to social (or cultural) attributions giving rise to prejudice and stereotype (cf. Krause). This process can be revealed by finding and analyzing the pragmatic norms guiding a communicative behavior.
Summary: theoretic / second order concepts motivating stylistic variation as an explanatory tool
4.) Grammar of Russian talk-in-interaction (micro)
A group of proposals focuses on the grammatical peculiarities of talk-in-interaction (Asinovskij, Sherstinova, Kosta). They ask how communicative phenomena affect the shaping of linguistic units or, more precisely, how prosodic, syntactic and communicative (pragmatic) criteria interact in shaping basic units in Russian talk-in-interaction.
Analyses of prosodic, especially rhythmic patterns in Russian talk-in-interaction are planned in order to learn more about the interaction of prosody and syntax in shaping basic communicative units and syntactic structures typical of spoken Russian (Sherstinova).
Syntax of talk-in-interaction is also supposed to be affected by interactional parameters such as e.g. turn-taking and conversational repair – how do these factors influence on-line language production and limit or shape the syntactic structures of Russian (as well as Czech, Polish) talk-in-interaction (cf. Kosta)?
Based on data from talk-in-interaction a grammar for interaction will be completed by the analysis of inflection in spoken Russian: Here an empirically grounded analysis of the grammatical indicators realized at the juncture of words with special focus in the sound implementation is planned (Asinovskij)
Summary: data-based description of grammatical (and prosodic) units in Russian talk-in-interaction, grammatical (prosodic) units are described and conceived as the product of interaction between grammar, prosody and communication

Proposals / research focus of participants

Marion Krause, HH
The social impact of linguistic variation in intraethnic and interethnic discourse situations

Variation as a fundamental characteristic of linguistic systems seems to differ qualitatively and quantitatively with regard to different communicative situations. This diaphasic and diastratic variation  is overlapped by  the diatopic factor (see Erofeeva E. 2005 for a comparison between inhabitants of Perm and St. Petersburg). Current research argues that variation is one of the means people use for framing and constructing communicative situations actively (see also the term of contextualization introduced by Gumperz).  Theories like accommodation (Giles 1991) and auditory design (Bell 2001) offer an approach to the interactional grounding of speech variation.  By choosing different styles which are characterized by special kinds and numbers of variation on all levels of the linguistic system, people convey socially relevant meaning (Coupland 2007).
Systematic variation of the place and character of communicative situation (family – workplace – institution) and ethnic belonging of the interlocuters  (Russians – migrants)  will bring us to the following questions:

  1. Which variables on different linguistic levels undergo change?
  2. Do frequencies of variants indicate the switch to a special style?
  3. To which amount and within which linguistic domains is accommodation involved (including adaption as well as separation)?
  4. Which information can be inferred about the discursive construction and maybe, reframing of the communication situation  –  for instance, on dimensions like solidarity and power?  Who gets which position? What are the salient linguistic indicators?
  5. What is the dynamic of such discursive construction with respect to the social character of interaction? Do exist discursive patterns which in fact convey stereotypes and  latent prejudices? 

The research design combines quantitative, variationist methods, especially in case of phonetic variants, with the qualitative approach of discourse linguistics. The latter zooms into the interactional structure of communication with respect to the social load of linguistic means. The observance of interethnic communication within different  social placement should be considered as a novelty in Russian linguistics.

Christian Sappok
Interaction between generations: A lifespan approach to everyday communication.

The crucial dimensions of sociolinguistic variation are, following Chambers 1995, sex, gender, so­cial status – and generation. Pioneering work on the latter can be found in N. Coupland and J.F. Nussbaum 1993: Discourse and Lifespan Identity, Sage Publications. Basic aspects are (1) the lan­guage development over the life span, cf. K. de Bot and R.W. Schrauf 2010: Language develop­ment over the life span; (2) the positions and styles a speaker of one generation adopts when com­mu­nicating with a partner from a different generation or designed (A. Bell 1984: Language style as audience design. Language and Society 13, 145-204) as a speaker of a different generation. Investi­ga­tions of this orientation can be classed as poor in Russian oriented linguistics and elsewhere.
The ORD material offers rich access to oral inter-generational communication as the speakers are systematically ordered along the lifespan dimension, and as they interact with people of different generations – own or other. Observation of these discourse constellations can be expected to reveal relevant insights into the contemporary space of Russian sociolinguistic variation. The research methodology includes all domains of discourse, from linguistic categories and variants in the proper sense to parameters of voice, discourse situation and text (themes and genres), expecting that all are actively used in the interaction of generations.

Nadine Thielemann, HH
Communicative styles as a display of social identity

If we conceive social identity as something that is actively constructed and displayed, then communicative and speech styles become an important resource to display a social identity. Speakers have a variety of communicative styles at their disposal so that they can highlight and activate a certain social identity according to the situation they are in. It is up to them whether they make a certain social identity relevant and display it for their interlocutors or not. As the ORD-data include recordings of the same speaker in several speech events and as the taped informants interact in very different speech events the data offer access to a variety of speech styles. The material will further be enriched by recordings from Russian speaking migrants in HH which will help to reveal which stylistic registers are actively employed in a migrant’s speech community and which become less relevant in a migrant’s everyday day communication.
Methodologically the research will be rooted in contexualisation theory (Gumperz, Auer, diLuzio). Communicative style is a complex contextualisation cue consisting of a bundle of features (linguistic, prosodic, interactional / pragmatic) that index meanings such as social identity. As the data include the recordings all aspects that may become stylistically relevant can be analysed, because in line with Sandig, Selting, Irvine, Tannen, ... style is a gestalt phenomenon that can only be analytically decomposed. The effect of a style is only achieved by co-occurrence of several style features (linguistics, prosodic, pragmatic). In a first step the features of the observed styles have to be decomposed in order to arrive at a linguistic description of the stylistic registers which reflect the communicative competence of the speakers. In a second step the stylistic registers of the Russians from the ORD-data and the ones from the migrants’ group will be compared. This will – at least in a further perspective – help to gain insight into the process how pragmatic competence in a heritage language develops under conditions of migration.

Bernhard Brehmer, HH
Politeness in Interaction: The Case of Russian

The use of forms of politeness and address in Russian has been studied mainly relying on data that were collected via questionnaires or extracted from electronic corpora (often with a bias towards literary texts as sources). Sometimes these data are supported by further evidence from the researcher’s own (impressionistic) observations on norms of verbal behaviour in Russian. However, real interactional data which also allow to account for the dynamics of polite or impolite behaviour are hardly used and analyzed systematically, which is certainly due to the very time consuming task of collecting and transcribing authentic speech in different naturally occurring situations. One further drawback of these previous studies is that they presuppose a certain kind of (internal) homogeneity of the Russian culture with regard to what is considered polite behaviour in a given context (and mostly research is carried out on the verbal behaviour of “educated” speakers).
The proposed study tries to fill this gap in politeness research on Russian by systematically analyzing authentic speech in a variety of social and communicative situations (informal gatherings at home, in the workplace, at institutions, interactions between family members, friends, fellow workers, anonymous interlocutors, interlocutors from different social and regional backgrounds etc.). It thus aims at including research on Russian politeness on a micro level that takes into account that politeness is negotiated jointly by the speaker and the addressee (see Eelen 2001, Watts 2003, Mills 2003). However, it will not stop on the micro level of analysis, but also try to combine micro and macro level views on politeness in Russian by adopting a frame based view on politeness that was proposed by Terkourafi (2005). This model aims at uncovering regularities of co-occurrence between expressions realizing particular acts (e.g. requests, apologies, thanking) and types of contexts (i.e. certain types of speakers [characterized by sex, age, social class, regional background etc.] interacting with a certain type of addressee [characterized by sex, age, social class, regional background etc.] with whom the speaker is in a certain type of relationship and while the interaction takes place in a certain type of setting). By using quantitative methods for the analysis of these correlations, the study will contribute to a finer grained understanding of how polite behaviour is achieved in particular encounters than existing approaches by taking into account more diverse settings and speaker-addressee-constellations and using authentic data. Furthermore, comparable data could be collected in different Russian cities (or rural areas as well), thus contributing to a better understanding of regional variation in verbal politeness behaviour in Russia.

Elena Markasova, Spb
Verbal aggression in the every-day speech (One speaker’s day)

The every-day speech is very aggressive often. Forms of speech aggression are inseparably connected with the speech dominance of one of the speakers. A true dialogue always presupposes the speakers consideration of the listeners’ feelings, tastes, and intellect. Common evaluation of the situation  and common knowledge  and understanding may be absent in a dialogue, and then any participant of the conversation may be free to choose a model of conversational behavior.  The peculiarities of "polite" speech aggression of different social groups will demonstrated on the basis of "One Speech Day” corpus. I am going to investigate forms of "polite aggression» in connection with suppression of the interlocutor. The sphere of my interests is the reciprocal remark of the addressee:
- "Prediction" of the future events in the dialogue as an aggression marker
- Speech reaction to the speaker’s feelings as a marker of communicative domination.

Nicole Richter, Jena
Agreeing and disagreeing in every day conversation and academic discourse

The planned study is aimed at various types of agreement and disagreement in oral discourse. Speakers structure their answers differently, so that reactions might consist of pure rejection or approval, but also suggestions of alternatives or even questions. There seems to be a pragmatic difference in these kinds of reactions which also imply either cooperative or non-cooperative behaviour.
In the responses the following characteristics are to be analysed: phonetic-prosodic cues (such as pitch intervals, pitch level, tempo and pauses), text structuring devices (especially with turn taking) and rhetoric elements that typically occur with agreement and disagreement.
This analysis shall lead to more insight into the structure of several discourse types which is also fundamental for intercultural academic as well as economic cooperation.

Elena Graf, München
[Language of emotions / Linguistic, pragmatic and prosodic features of emotive language]

The fact that our everyday speech is considerably different from a read speaking style is well known. Thus, the data of the “One-Speaker’s-Day-Corpus” with its recordings of our everyday speech opens numerous opportunities to precisely investigate the distinction between a spontaneous and a prepared speaking style. The differences between these two styles can be found on each language level, beginning with the prosodic peculiarities and lexical specifics of the extemporaneous speech up to the special features on the morpho-syntactic level (including the emphatic means of word formation and specifics of word order). Furthermore, such pragmatic means as the use of particles and other pragmatic markers (hesitation markers, parentheses etc.) as well as the interdependence between the functions of interjections and their intonational realization can be analyzed on the basis of the empirical corpus data. My special interest lies also in research of the “language of emotions”, which is more specific for spontaneous speech and penetrates all the spheres of language.

Svetlana Stepanova, Spb
Prosodic characteristics of speech depending on the communicative situation

1) In the previous stage of research the average individual speech rate of each of  40 informants from Corpora “ORD” was defined. There were found the factors significantly affecting the rate as an integral characteristic of speech: sex, age, level of speech competence, as well as the length of the utterance.
The next step will be identifying features of the speaker's speech rate in various communication roles: in the situation of communication with parents / children, with friends / colleagues, with chief/subordinate…). Not only common tempo characteristics are undoubtedly interesting, but also the correlation of  the informant’s speech rate with communicator’s rate, its correspondence with speaker’s social role and psychological interaction (sympathy / antipathy, friendliness / aggression).
2)The study will not be limited by the analysis of the rate as integral feature of speech in a particular communicative situation. It is well-known that in different types of utterances the rate as a linguistically significant feature may act as an important factor of the main vs. less important information from the speaker’s point of view. Although all studies have been based on reading tasks thoroughly selected for it, analyses of spontaneous speech might verify or clarify the earlier described results.
3) However, the speech rate rarely is the only prosodic feature used for semantic opposing of an utterance. All the prosodic features (tempo, pausing, pitch, intensity, timbre) can be extracted from the speech to show the nuances of meaning and emotions in an utterance. The third part of my research work in the project "Urban Voices: linguistic and communicative diversity in everyday communication" will be a complex studying of intonation which expresses agressiveness in speech (in the records of the ORD).

Tatiana Sherstinova, Spb
[Rhythmic patterns in Russian talk-in-interaction]

A pilot study of Russian everyday speech revealed a number of interesting rhythmic features: 1) Russian spontaneous utterances tend to isochrony of their parts, 2) temporal-rhythmic patterns do not refer strictly to particular linguistic levels, and 3) distribution of speech elements (e. g., sounds, syllables, words, syntactic groups) into pseudoisochronic speech beats mainly depends on significance of the correspondent element for communication process. Moreover, it looks like that rhythm patterns are the most stable elements in generation of spontaneous speech, adapting to which people have either to use extra words (including “senseless” ones, which are often called parasitic words), or to change normal syntactic order of the utterance (up to complete elipsis of some elements). Because of this, it seems extremely important to find and describe typical rhythmic patterns in spontaneous speech, as well as to study mechanisms of their combination and possible adaptation in real everyday communication.
Thus, the main aim of rhythmic aspect of the given research is to find these basic temporal patterns in spontaneous speech. We think that most easily such patterns may be found in frequent elementary utterances, which people use in everyday interaction. By elementary utterances we understand short verbal and non-verbal ones consisting of one or more words or word-like elements, which has no more than 7 syllables. Realizations of most frequent Russian utterances will be analyzed from phonetic and statistic points of view, their typical temporal templates will be found and described.  We will take into consideration several main phonetic points: 1) ideal and real number of syllables, 2) stress position, 3) number of assumed pseudoisochronic beats, 4) mean beat length of an utterance, and 5) temporal proportionality of linguistic units measured in beats. When elementary rhythmic structures are described, we can study rhythmic structure of continual utterances. As rhythm is closely connected with syntax, a study of correlation between main rhythmic structures and frequent syntactic structures is planned as well. Having described rhythmic and syntactic patterns typical for spontaneous speech as a whole, we may further describe the limits of their modifications in speech of individual people, groups of people and concrete communicative scenarios and conditions. 
The expected results: 1) the list of Russian typical rhythmic structures, 2) the list of Russian typical syntax structures, 3) the description of modification of these patterns taking into account linguistic and communicative diversity of everyday communication.
This is a new and innovative approach, which is possible just in case of processing of representative corpus of real spontaneous speech of good quality, such as the ORD corpus of Russian spontaneous speech and its expansion modules (recordings of different social groups and migrants’ speech). The last are planned to be created in the framework of the Network implementation.

Aleksandr Asinovskij, Spb
[Inflection in Russian talk-in-interaction]

The subject of research is sound form of Russian inflections, which is planned to be investigated on linguistic material of the ORD Russian corpus of Everyday Interaction.
The task of the study is to extend the empirical basis of grammatical description of the Russian language by fixing samples of the real functioning of grammatical indicators, which are realized at the juncture of words (at sandhi-position).
The aim of this part of the project is to make a pilot description of Russian complex inflectional system in the aspect of sound implementation.
The result of the research will be a part of the monograph, provided with audio examples illustrating use of inflections in spoken Russian speech.

Peter Kosta, Potsdam
Spoken Syntax

The following project is concerned with a central issues in Pragmatics and Syntax of spoken speech between the notion of sentence as 'perfect, highly economic' linguistic unit of an abstract system of rules and notions of language faculty (in the sense of faculty of language in the narrow sense), fulfilling  economy and perfection of language design, vs. utterance as the externalization of these notions (as tokens) including the imperfections of production and comprehension (misunderstandings, conversational implicatures, indirect speech acts, conflicts) . The project will be based on the CA and International Linguistics Analysis where the perspective of the participants and interlocutors is taken. We base our approach methodologically and theoretically on the bottom-up analysis of TCUs and turn allocational units (TAU). Our former work on type-token relation and relevance owes much to the analysis of Sperber & Wilson (1986/ 2005).

The following questions arise in this context:

What is the role of interruptions, corrections and meta-commentaries in discourse on the formal and semantic levels of utterance and speech acts of urban corpora?

Why do these procedures seem to be limited in some cases and how do interlocutors handle vagueness and ambiguity in discourse?

How do interfaces (of sound-meaning) propagate language creativity in discourse?

How does configurationality and projectivity  appear in syntax of spoken language?

We shall concentrate on data of Russian, Polish and Czech urban corpora (CNK, RNK, IPIPAN) including also Bilinguals in Berlin and Potsdam.

References:

Sperber, D. & D. Wilson (1986b/1995) Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford. Blackwell.

Kontakt

Universität Potsdam
Institut für Slavistik
PF 601553
14415 Potsdam
Tel.: 0331/ 977-4160
Fax.: 0331/ 977-4165
E-Mail:
slavistik-info@rz.uni-potsdam.de

Studierende im Hörsaal