Uptaking Construction
1. General
1.1. Label
Uptaking Discourse Particle Construction
1.2. Reasons for construction status
The construction contributes form and meaning aspects not provided by the lexical material inside the construction.
1.3. Examples
mjcb_1_02: um well I have some, free time on (P) almost every day. except for Fridays, Fridays are bad. um so any day besides Friday is probably, we can probably
fi(nd), work out a time.
fkcf_1_03: /h#/
well next week I'm out of town, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday, so, (P) perhaps, Monday afternoon?
fkcf_1_05: how 'bout the next week,
mjcb_1_06:
um that's fine. how 'bout uh, next Thursday. after lunch.
2. Language Information
2.1. Comments
2.2. Language
English
2.3. Variety
The construction seems to occur in all spoken, dialogical varieties of English.
2.4. Speech Community
It is not restricted to a particular speech communicty.
2.5. Language Contact
(to be filled out if the construction influenced by constructions from another languages)
2.6. Time Period
(time period of construction)
2.7. Stage of Acquisition
(comments on age and circumstances of the acquisition)
3. Form
3.1. Syntax
3.1.1. Comments
3.1.2. Internal
3.1.2.1. Valency
(information on valency relationships inside the construction)
3.1.2.2. Constituency
The construction comprises two free slots: one for a discourse particle (or sometimes a combination of two discourse particles), one for a following utterance.
The construction comes with a certain intonation contour: Uptaking discourse particles are usually uttered with falling intonation, sometimes with fall-rise intonation contours.
3.1.3. External
3.1.3.1. Category
discourse particle
3.1.3.2. Structural Position
The construction occurs at the beginning of a new speaker turn.
3.2. Morphology
3.2.1. Comments
Discourse particles are morphologically simple, and the construction does not add any complexity to this.
3.2.2. Internal
3.2.2.1. Morphological Properties of Elements
Discourse particles are morphologically simple, and the construction does not add any complexity to this.
3.2.3. External
3.2.3.1. Morphological Properties of Construction
Discourse particles are morphologically simple, and the construction does not add any complexity to this.
4. Meaning
4.1. Semantics
4.1.1. Comments
The construction does not contribute semantic information in the narrow sense.
4.1.2. Internal
4.1.2.1. Frame
(frame evoked)
4.1.2.1.1. Event
(event type)
4.1.2.1.2. Participants
(description of the participants, e.g. as 'selection restrictions')
4.1.2.2. Truth-Conditional Information
(information on the truthconditional properties of the construction)
4.1.2.2.1. Negation
(peculiar behaviours with respect to negation)
4.1.2.2.2. Scope
(description of the scope of the construction)
4.1.3. External
4.1.3.1. Semantic Class
(semantic category)
4.1.3.2. Relation to Construction-External Semantic Elements
(description of semantic relations outside of the construction)
4.1.3.3. Truth Relations
(information on the truthconditional relationships of the construction)
4.1.3.3.1. Semantic Presuppositions
(semantic presupposition)
4.1.3.3.2. Semantic Entailments
(semantic entailments)
4.2. Pragmatics
4.2.1. Comments
The function of this construction is to signal a relevant relationship between the current utterance and the previous with respect to perception, understanding, as well as information structural and interpersonal relationship.
4.2.2. Internal
Depending on the contribution of the discourse particle inside the construction, the construction will signal successful perception and understanding of the previous utterance without committing the speaker to agreement. Moreover, it will signal that the current utterance is related to the previous one.
4.2.3. External
4.2.3.1. Indexical Properties
4.2.3.1.1. Deixis
(linguistic and extralinguistic domains indexed)
4.2.3.1.2. Intertextuality
It links the current utterance to the previous one produced by another speaker.
4.2.3.2. Interpersonal Function
Depending on the contribution of the discourse particle inside the construction, the construction will signal successful perception and understanding of the previous utterance (without committing the speaker to agreement) and relevant relationship between the current utterance and the one produced by the communication partner, thus showing high evaluation of the partner's utterance.
4.2.3.3. Speaker attitude
Depending on the contribution of the discourse particle inside the construction, the construction will signal successful perception and understanding of the previous utterance - without committing the speaker to agreement. Especially if the current speaker does not agree with the previous speaker, the construction can preserve the partner's face by showing high evaluation of the partner's utterance.
4.2.3.4. Speech Act Function
none.
4.2.3.5. Rhetorical Function
The construction ratifies the partner's previous utterance as perceived and understood.
4.2.3.6. Style
none.
4.2.3.7. Pragmatic Presuppositions / Implicature
(modality, epistemic, emotion)
4.3. Discourse Properties
4.3.1. Internal
4.3.1.1. Turn Constructional Status
It occurs turn-initially after a previous speaker's contribution but does not constitute a TCU itself.
4.3.1.2. Within-Turn Position
turn-initial
4.3.2.External
4.3.2.1. Sequential Context
The construction occurs turn-initially after an utterance produced by the communication partner.
4.3.2.2. Position in Text- and Dialogue-Structure
The construction occurs turn-initially after an utterance produced by the communication partner. It claims that the current utterance is related relevantly to the previous.
4.3.2.3. Sequence Type
(type of sequence)
4.4. Information Structure
4.4.1. Internal
4.4.1.1. Topic - Comment
(contribution to topic-comment structure)
4.4.1.2. Focus
(placement of focus)
4.4.2. External
4.4.2.1. Signaled Information Status
(status of information as given, new, inferable, etc.)
4.4.2.2. Information Status Requirements
(information status requirements)
4.5. Data
4.5.1. Introspection
---+++ 4.5.2. Authentic data
4.5.2.1. Source data properties
The examples cited above are from the Verbmobil corpus (here the CMU corpus), yet the construction occurs ubiquitously in spontaneous conversation/dialogue.
4.5.2.2. Methods of Analysis
The functions of discourse particles are usually analysed by means of discourse analytic methods.
4.6. Literature
Kerstin Fischer (2006): Frames, constructions and invariant meanings: The functional polysemy of discourse particles. In Fischer, K. (ed.): Approaches to Discourse Particles. Studies in Pragmatics 1, Amsterdam: Elsevier, pages 427-447.
Kerstin Fischer (2000): From Cognitive Semantics to Lexical Pragmatics: The Functional Polysemy of Discourse Particles. Mouton de Gruyter: Berlin, New York.
5. Relations to other constructions
5.1. Subtypes
5.1.1. Diachronic
(relations to subtypes of the construction through time)
5.1.2. Synchronic
Discorse particles occuring in the Uptaking construction may also occur in Framing and Repair constructions.
5.2. Supertypes
5.2.1. Diachronic
(relations to more general constructions through time)
5.2.2. Synchronic
(relations to more general constructions)
5.3. Paradigmatic Relations
(relations to constructions of the same category)