/LING
|
Update: February 24, 2023 The new version of Termout.org is now online, so this web site is now obsolete and will soon be dismantled. |
Lista de candidatos sometidos a examen:
1) pragmatic (*)
(*) Términos presentes en el nuestro glosario de lingüística
1) Candidate: pragmatic
Is in goldstandard
1
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines209 - : There is a constant interplay between these two overarching characteristics of academic speech, which is by nature an information-rich genre, but in which interaction between the participants is also of paramount importance, and the formulaic expression identified here serve to highlight these dual pragmatic features (Simpson, 2004: 60 ).
2
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines319 - : We have seen that several researchers have tried to account for ser and estar based on syntactic, semantic and pragmatic approaches. This just shows how complex it is to characterize the behavior of the two Spanish copulas. Leaving aside the controversial topic of whether the relevant distinctions are encoded in the syntax, the semantics, the pragmatics of either, the copulas or the whole predication, most of the influential proposals seem to converge on the following general picture: Predicates with ser and estar give rise to different interpretations: ser predicates are generally (but not necessarily ) associated with properties that are perceived to last, to be permanent, to be inherent while estar predicates are commonly (but not always) associated with properties that are perceived as temporary, non-inherent and easy to change. Thus, most analyses agree that ser predicates are more relaxed than estar predicates in temporal terms. Importantly, ser is seen as disconnected from the
3
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines382 - : In Romanian, a pro-drop language, the syntactic position of subject may be occupied by a full pronoun (eu, tú, etc. I, you, etc.), but most often the pronoun is omitted since the category of subject is rendered by the verb form (vorbesc, vorbeşti etc. I speak, you speak, etc.). If a full pronoun is used in the syntactic position of subject, it may have pragmatic meanings: the speaker either wants to emphasize his/ her position while uttering the words or the speaker wants to differentiate him/ herself from the interlocutor .
4
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines417 - : Nonetheless, Bednarek (2008) warns that semantic prosody cannot always be identified as a pragmatic element. The author continues explaining that collocational clashes can only result in pragmatic meanings when items exhibit “a very strong preference” (Bednarek, 2008: 127 ) for negative or positive meanings. Consequently, we have to bear in mind that semantic prosody is not a “pragmatic backdrop” (Sorli, 2013: 108). In Sorli’s words, it has to be understood as “a result of empirically identifiable elements of the meaning structure” (Sorli, 2013: 108).
5
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines453 - : This section concentrates on offers in English. Such an illocutionary category (i.e. ‘offering’)is based on the social convention whereby we are expected to act in ways that are beneficial to other people. This social convention underlies what ^[108]Leech (1983) called the cost-benefit pragmatic scale within his theory of politeness: polite acts are those in which we maximize benefit and minimize cost to others . But the social convention is more complex. An accurate (and technical) formulation is provided in ^[109]Ruiz de Mendoza and Baicchi (2007) under the label of Cost-Benefit Cognitive Model. Here, for the sake of simplicity, we sketch out, in a non-technical way, some of its central assumptions:(i) if we identify a state of affairs that is not beneficial to other people, we should alter it in such a way that it becomes beneficial to them; (ii) if we are aware of a state of affairs that could be of benefit to others, we should do our best to bring it about, but (iii) if we suspect that
6
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines530 - : Drawing upon the fact that translation is a shared endeavor (^[80]Bugel, 2013) that promotes immersion “in a socioculturally authentic environment [that] best enables foreign language learners to acquire the linguistic, cultural, social, and pragmatic content” (^[81]Stewart, 2007: 86 ), the current research project calls for a socially-based theoretical standpoint. Thus, this investigation is rooted in Activity Theory (AT) while seeking to expand our understanding of the impact of outreach embedded in the professionally-oriented Spanish classroom.
7
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines562 - : Mihatsch, W. (2020). A semantic-map approach to pragmatic markers: The complex approximation / mitigation / quotation / focus marking . En I. Oliveira Duarte & R. Ponce de León Romeo (Eds.), Marcadores Discursivos. O Português como Referência Contrastiva (137-162). Frankfurt a.M. et al.: Peter Lang. [ [293]Links ]
8
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines583 - : Flores-Ferrán, N. (2012). Pragmatic variation in therapeutic discourse: An examination of mitigating devices employed by Dominican female clients and a Cuban American therapist . En J. C. Félix Brasdefer & D. A. Koike (Eds.), Pragmatic variation in first and second language contexts: Methodological issues; Impact: studies in language and society (pp. 81-112). Filadelfia: John Benjamins. [ [147]Links ]
9
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines600 - : In what follows, I will provide the percentages of occurrence of the different pragmatic functions identified across the different sections of the three disciplines under analysis (see [154]Figures 2 and 3 below ). The two main sections have been kept separate in order to obtain a general picture of how different functions are deployed in each of the sections, bearing in mind their main rhetorical function(s).
Evaluando al candidato pragmatic:
1) predicates: 5 (*)
5) identified: 3
6) semantic: 3 (*)
8) sorli: 3
9) sections: 3
12) syntactic: 3 (*)
13) beneficial: 3
14) pronoun: 3 (*)
15) convention: 3 (*)
pragmatic
Lengua: eng
Frec: 204
Docs: 75
Nombre propio: 1 / 204 = 0%
Coocurrencias con glosario: 5
Puntaje: 5.681 = (5 + (1+4.90689059560852) / (1+7.67948009950545)));
Candidato aceptado
Referencias bibliográficas encontradas sobre cada término
(Que existan referencias dedicadas a un término es también indicio de terminologicidad.)| pragmatic |
: Aijmer, K. & Simon-Vandenbergen, A. (2006). Pragmatic markers in contrast. Ámsterdam: Elsevier. : Albelda, M. & Estellés, M. (en prensa). Mitigation revisited. An operative and integrated definition of the pragmatic concept, its strategic values and its linguistic expression. Journal of Pragmatics. : Along the same lines, Stubbs (2001a) underlines the pragmatic and discourse function of semantic prosody, so he prefers the term ‘discourse prosody’. In fact, Stubbs (2001a: 65) underlines the attitudinal nature of semantic prosody by stating that: : Andersen, G. (2001). Pragmatic markers and sociolinguistic variation: A relevance-theoretic approach to the language of adolescents. Ámsterdam: John Benjamins. : Baron-Cohen, S. (1988). Social and pragmatic deficits in autism: Cognitive or affective?. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 18(3), 379-402. : Beeching, K. (2016). Pragmatic mMarkers in British English: Meaning in social interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. : Botting, N. (2002). Narrative as a tool for the assessment of linguistic and pragmatic impairments. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 18(1), 1-21. : Chapman, S. B., Highley, A. P. & Thompson, J. L. (1998). Discourse in fluent aphasia and Alzheimer’s disease: Linguistic and pragmatic considerations. Journal of Neurolinguistics: Special Issue, 11, 55-78. : Cots, J. (1998). Teaching by chatting. A pragmatic analysis of instructor-student conversations at an American university. Lérida: Ediciones de la Universidad de Lérida. : Crismore, A. & Vande Kopple, W. (1997b). Hedges and readers: Effects on attitudes and learning. En R. Markkanen & H. Schröder (Eds.), Hedging and discourse: Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts (pp. 83-114). Berlin: W. de Gruyter. : Gallardo, S. (2005a). Pragmatic support of medical recommendations in popularization texts. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(6), 813-835. : Garcés, P. & Bou, P. (2004). A pragmatic account of lListenership: Implications for Foreign/Second Language teaching. Revista alicantina de estudios ingleses, 17, 6-57. : Göpferich, S. (1995). A pragmatic classification of LSP texts in science and technology. Target, 7(2), 305-326. : Hamilton, H. E. (1994b). Requests for clarification as evidence of pragmatic comprehension difficulty: The case of Alzheimer's disease. Discourse analysis and applications: Studies in adult clinical populations, 185-199. : Hays, S. J., Niven, B., Godfrey, H. & Linscott, R. (2010). Clinical assessment of pragmatic language impairment: A generalisability study of older people with Alzheimer’s disease. Aphasiology, 18(8), 693-714. : Horn, L. R. (2000). From if to iff: Conditional perfection as pragmatic strengthening. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 289-326. : Johnson, R. (2000). Manifest rationality. A Pragmatic Theory of Argument. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. : Kolyaseva, A. (2018). The new Russian quotative tipa: Pragmatic scope and functions. Journal of Pragmatics, 128, 82-97. : Kronmüller, E., Morisseau, T. & Noveck, I. A. (2014). Show me the pragmatic contribution: A developmental investigation of contrastive inference. Journal of child language, 41(5), 985-1014. : Kulakova, E. & Nieuwland, M. S. (2016). Pragmatic skills predict online counterfactual comprehension: Evidence from the N400. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 1-11. doi: 10.3758/s13415-016-0433-4 : Loureda, Ó., Cruz, A. Rudka, M., Nadal, L., Recio, I. & Borreguero Zuloaga, M. (2015). Focus particles in information processing: An experimental study on pragmatic scales with Spanish incluso. En A. M. De Cesare & C. Andorno (Eds.), Linguistik Online, 71(2), 129-152. : Luukka, M. & Markkanen, R. (1997). Impersonalization as a form of hedging. En R. Markkanen & H. Schröder (Eds.), Hedging and discourse. Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts (pp. 168-187). Berlin: W. de Gruyter. : Maynard, C. & Leicher, S. (2007). Pragmatic annotation of an academic spoken corpus for pedagogical purposes. En E. Fitzpatrick (Ed.), Corpus Linguistics beyond the word: Corpus research from phrase to discourse. Ámsterdam: Rodopi. : Moldovan, A. (2009). Pragmatic considerations in the interpretation of denying the antecedent. Informal Logic, 29(3), 309-326. : Myers, G. (1989). Pragmatic politeness in scientific articles. Applied linguistics, 10, 1-35. : Ninio, A. & Snow, C. (1996). Pragmatic development. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. : Once the corpora had been tagged, they were queried for verb booster tags using the same online tool. In the last stage of this study, the concordances obtained were examined manually in order to analyse the co-text of boosters and evaluate their pragmatic functions. : Perkins, M. R. (2008). Pragmatic impairment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. : Schulz, K. & van Rooij, R. (2006). Pragmatic meaning and non-monotonic reasoning: The case of exhaustive interpretation. Linguistics and Philosophy, 29, 205-250. : Shirkhani, S. & Tajeddin, Z. (2017). Pragmatic corrective feedback in L2 classrooms: Investigating EFL teachers’ perceptions and instructional practices. Teaching English Language, 11(2), 25-56. : Similarly, Zupnik (1994: 340) defines deixis as ‘a pragmatic phenomenon’, explaining it through “the relationship between the structure of languages and the contexts in which they are used.” : Slabakova, R. & Montrul, S. (2008). Aspectual shifts: Grammatical and pragmatic knowledge in L2 acquisition. En J. M. Liceras, H. Zobl & H. Goodluck (Eds.), The Role of Formal Features in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 452-483). Nueva York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. : Sorli, M. (2013). Forms of encoding pragmatic meaning: Semantic prosody. A lexicographic perspective. Lingue e Linguaggi, 10, 95-111. : Taavitsainen, I. & A. Jucker (2008). Speech acts now and then. Towards a pragmatic history of English. En A. H. Jucker & I. Taavitsainen (Eds.), Speech Acts in the History of English (pp. 1-26). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. : Tao, H. & Thompson, S. A. (1991). English backchannels in Mandarin conversations: A case study of superstratum pragmatic ‘interference’. Journal of Pragmatics, 16(3), 209-223. : Walton, D. (1996). A pragmatic theory of fallacy. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press. : Wilson, D. (2004). Pragmatic Theory. London: UCL Linguistics Dept [em línea]. Disponível em: [64]http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/nick/pragtheory/ : Wilson, J. (1990). Politically speaking: The pragmatic analysis of political language. Oxford: Blackwell. : Zupnik, Y. (1994). A pragmatic analysis of the use of person deixis in political discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 21, 339-383. |