Contraction of negatives as evidence of variance in register-specific interactive rules

This study investigates the contraction of negatives in a carefully chosen corpus of discourse and writing, to permit comparison of the relative influences of various linguistic and social parameters on contraction. Evidence is presented that negative contraction is conditioned by interactional and other register variables. The point is made that the pragmatic as well as morphological interpretation of negatives entails that negative contraction and auxiliary contraction should be distinguished from each other. Although a Cognitive Prominence Principle predicts noncontraction when the negative conveys semantically focal information, a Social Agreement Principle predicts contraction. This is because it would be face-threatening (and, therefore, in conversation analysis terms "dispreferred") to focus on disagreement, which is most often the semantic information conveyed by negatives. This hypothesis is examined using corpora which differ along several dimensions. The most important of these (for this study) appear to be the interactional versus informational register dimensions (Finegan, 1994). Data from instructional (workshop presentations), confrontational (political debates), and casual conversational material are contrasted with comparable reading style materials. The following general results are predicted. The Cognitive Prominence Principle will take over in informational contexts when disagreement is acceptable or neutralized. The Social Agreement Principle will take over in more interactional contexts where disagreement is not acceptable. The results are of interest to the student of focus, the sociolinguist concerned with dialect, register, and style variation, and even the speech technician. From a sociolinguistic perspective, any analysis of linguistic data must consider the influence of the situations of use on variation in given linguistic features; the characteristic pattern for the use of language in a particular situation determines what is now referred to as "register" (Finegan, 1994). Most sociolinguistic studies isolate one social situation to analyze; fortunately, the linguistic variable to be discussed here—contraction—has been analyzed in various registers. The present study takes advantage of previous

[1]  M. Yaeger-Dror.  The influence of changing group vitality on convergence toward a dominant linguistic norm: An Israeli example , 1988 .

[2]  Beverly Cleary,et al.  Ramona Quimby, Age 8 , 1981 .

[3]  J. M. Atkinson.  Structures of Social Action: Contents , 1985 .

[4]  N. Coupland.  Style-shifting in a Cardiff work-setting , 1980, Language in Society.

[5]  Steven E. Clayman,et al.  Displaying Neutrality in Television News Interviews , 1988 .

[6]  Deborah Schiffrin,et al.  Jewish argument as sociability , 1984, Language in Society.

[7]  Tertu Nevalainen.  Adverbial focusing and intonation , 1987 .

[8]  Gösta Bruce,et al.  On the analysis of prosody in spontaneous speech with exemplification from Swedish and French , 1992, Speech Commun..

[9]  Elinor Ochs,et al.  Planned and unplanned discourse , 1979 .

[10]  G. Pullum,et al.  CLITICIZATION VS. INFLECTION: ENGLISH N'T , 1983 .

[11]  A. Bell.  Language style as audience design , 1984, Language in Society.

[12]  Mohsen Ghadessy.  Register analysis : theory and practice , 1993 .

[13]  H. Giles,et al.  Contexts of Accommodation , 1993 .

[14]  Sally Jackson,et al.  Relevance and digressions in argumentative discussion: A pragmatic approach , 1992 .

[15]  E. Schegloff,et al.  The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation , 1977 .

[16]  Florien J. van Beinum.  The role of focus words in natural and in synthetic continuous speech: Acoustic aspects , 1992, Speech Commun..

[17]  J. F. M. Hunter.  How Do You Mean? , 1968 .

[18]  Anne Cutler,et al.  Prosody: Models and measurements , 1983 .

[19]  S. Nooteboom,et al.  Accents, focus distribution, and the perceived distribution of given and new information: An experiment. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  MASKED NEGOTIATION IN A JAPANESE WORK SETTING , 1995 .

[21]  Sheri Hunnicutt,et al.  A text-to-speech system for british English, and issues of dialect and style , 1987, ECST.

[22]  P. Brown,et al.  Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena , 1978 .

[23]  Michael Mulkay.  Agreement and disagreement in conversations and letters , 1985 .

[24]  A. Bell.  Hit and Miss: Referee Design in the Dialects of New Zealand Television Advertisements. , 1992 .

[25]  G. Fant,et al.  Speech , Music and Hearing Quarterly Progress and Status Report Preliminaries to the study of Swedish prose reading and reading style , 2007 .

[26]  Beverly Cleary,et al.  Ramona the Pest , 1968 .

[27]  Ralf D. Brown,et al.  THE PRONOUNS OF POWER AND SOLIDARITY , 1968 .

[28]  W. Ainsworth.  Advances in speech, hearing and language processing , 1990 .

[29]  Jan Svartvik,et al.  The London-Lund corpus of spoken english , 1990 .

[30]  Christopher Brumfit,et al.  Literacy, Language and Learning , 1986 .

[31]  Lauri Carlson,et al.  Focus and Dialogue Games , 1984 .

[32]  A. Firth.  The discourse of negotiation : studies of language in the workplace , 1995 .

[33]  George Psathas,et al.  Talk and Social Structure , 1995 .

[34]  M. Yaeger-Dror.  Linguistic analysis of dialect “correction” and its interaction with cognitive salience , 1993, Language Variation and Change.

[35]  M. Selting,et al.  Emphatic speech style mdash; with special focus on the prosodic signalling of heightened emotive involvement in conversation , 1994 .

[36]  E. Goffman.  The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life , 1959 .

[37]  David Brazil,et al.  The communicative value of intonation in English , 1985 .

[38]  Ian Hutchby,et al.  Confrontation talk: Aspects of ‘interruption’ in argument sequences on talk radio , 1992 .

[39]  Ellen F. Prince,et al.  Toward a taxonomy of given-new information , 1981 .

[40]  Björn Granström,et al.  The use of speech synthesis in exploring different speaking styles , 1992, Speech Commun..

[41]  D. O'Shaughnessy,et al.  Linguistic modality effects on fundamental frequency in speech. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[42]  E. Goffman,et al.  Forms of talk , 1982 .

[43]  M. Yaeger-Dror.  Intonational Prominence On Negatives in English , 1985 .

[44]  Paul Hirschbühler,et al.  Changes in verb position in French negative infinitival clauses , 1994, Language Variation and Change.

[45]  C. Fowler.  Differential Shortening of Repeated Content Words Produced in Various Communicative Contexts , 1988, Language and speech.

[46]  Deborah Schiffrin,et al.  Language change and variation , 1989 .

[47]  E. Finegan.  Language : Its Structure and Use , 1989 .

[48]  Allan Bell,et al.  Contexts of Accommodation: Audience accommodation in the mass media , 1991 .

[49]  E. Goody.  Questions and politeness : strategies in social interaction , 1978 .

[50]  E. Schegloff.  From interview to conrontation: Observations of the bush/rather encounter , 1988 .

[51]  Michael Halliday,et al.  Cohesion in English , 1976 .

[52]  Björn Granström,et al.  Neglected dimensions in speech synthesis , 1992, Speech Commun..

[53]  Nikolas Coupland,et al.  Dialects in Contact , 1988 .

[54]  William Labov,et al.  The exact description of a speech community , 1989 .

[55]  Olle Engstrand,et al.  Systematicity of phonetic variation in natural discourse , 1992, Speech Commun..

[56]  T. Nevalainen.  Intonation and discourse type , 1992 .

[57]  G. Tottie.  REJECTIONS, DENIALS, AND EXPLANATORY STATEMENTS ‐ A REPLY TO FRETHEIM , 1987 .

[58]  C. Fowler,et al.  Talkers' signaling of new and old. words in speech and listeners' perception and use of the distinction , 1987 .

[59]  S. Newell,et al.  The social confrontation episode , 1988 .

[60]  Malcah Yaeger-Dror,et al.  Register as a variable in prosodic analysis: The case of the English negative , 1996, Speech Commun..

[61]  T. Sebeok,et al.  Style in language , 1962 .

[62]  Jo Ann Goldberg,et al.  Amplitude Shift: A MECHANISM FOR THE AFFILIATION OF UTTERANCES IN CONVERSATIONAL INTERACTION , 1978 .

[63]  John J. Gumperz,et al.  Discourse strategies: Prosody in conversation , 1982 .

[64]  Gillian R Brown,et al.  Prosodic Structure and the Given/New Distinction , 1983 .

[65]  Graham Button,et al.  Answers as interactional products: two sequential practices used in interviews , 1987 .

[66]  Jim Schenkein.  Studies in the organization of conversational interaction , 1978 .

[67]  David Brazil.  The Intonation of Sentences Read Aloud , 1984 .

[68]  M. Atwood.  Life Before Man , 1979 .

[69]  Julia Hirschberg,et al.  Disambiguating Cue Phrases in Text and Speech , 1990, COLING.

[70]  Jaakko Hintikka,et al.  Cognitive Constraints on Communication , 1984 .

[71]  H. Levin,et al.  The Prosodic and Paralinguistic Features of Reading and Telling Stories , 1982 .

[72]  Anita M. Pomerantz.  Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes , 1984 .

[73]  Douglas Biber,et al.  Variation across speech and writing: Methodology , 1988 .

[74]  Margret Selting.  The role of intonation in the organization of repair and problem handling sequences in conversation , 1988 .

[75]  E. Goffman.  The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life , 1959 .

[76]  Julia Hirschberg,et al.  Accent and Discourse Context: Assigning Pitch Accent in Synthetic Speech , 1990, AAAI.

[77]  I. Hutchby.  The Pursuit of Controversy: Routine Skepticism in Talk on `Talk Radio' , 1992 .

[78]  D. Tannen.  Conversational Style: Analyzing Talk Among Friends , 1984 .

[79]  Karen L. Adams,et al.  Creating Inequality: Breaking the Rules in Debates , 1990 .

[80]  Donald Hindle,et al.  THE SOCIAL AND SITUATIONAL CONDITIONING OF PHONETIC VARIATION , 1979 .

[81]  D. Greatbatch.  On the institutional character of institutional talk: the case of news interviews , 1991 .

[82]  Walt Wolfram,et al.  Convergent explanation and alternative regularization patterns: Were/weren't leveling in a vernacular English variety , 1994, Language Variation and Change.

[83]  W. Labov.  Contraction, Deletion, and Inherent Variability of the English Copula. , 1969 .

[84]  Garrison Keillor,et al.  Lake Wobegon Days , 1985 .

[85]  Sociolinguistic Variation: Data, Theory and Analysis , 1995 .

[86]  Jenny Cheshire,et al.  Urban British Dialect Grammar , 1989 .

[87]  Matthew Lennig,et al.  Acoustic measurement of linguistic change : the modern Paris vowel system , 1978 .