Project assignment sheet: Part III
Meaning
There is a 1250-word minimum requirement. (You are expected to use more examples and discuss your analysis in more depth). Your project will be evaluated on how well you use your knowledge of theories of morphology, semantics and pragmatics to make an analysis and then use your data to support your claims. You are not limited to including only the above items in your analysis as long as you restrict your analysis to semantics and pragmatics.
(i) Data: Include your notes from the part of your observation journal that you have not turned in yet from project part I.
You are not required to record a complete conversation yet, but you may find it helpful to do so if you are having trouble writing down or finding enough good examples for your analysis.
At the beginning of this part, do not forget to include a title and a brief description of who the interactants are.
Remember that for your analysis you may use data from the observations you made for part I of the project as well.
(ii) Semantic analysis and word-formation:
•Select any two words and discuss them in terms of their referents. Do the words have more than one referent in the context in which they are used?
•Pick one word from your data and analyze it in terms of its semantic features including a discussion of how you chose the categories of semantic features.
•Note any examples of word-formation processes, such as the following: euphemism, coinage, borrowing, compounding, blending, clipping, backformation, or acronyms.
•Is the dictionary meaning of words sufficient to explain how meaning is formulated and transmitted in your transcription? Why or why not? Give examples to support what you say.
(iii) Pragmatic analysis:
•Find four idioms in your transcription and explain what makes them idioms and what they mean.
•Find an example of four categories types of speech acts, such as order, complain, permission, promise, congratulations, etc. in your data and say how what makes each an example (If your data does not contain one or more types of speech acts, simply say so.) Be sure you understand the distinction between the speech act and sentence structure
•Find at least one example each in your data of direct and indirect speech acts.
•Find an utterance in your data in which the speaker is violating (or disobeying) one or more of Grice’s conversational maxims. Explain which maxims are involved. NOTE: Don’t tell that you can not find flouting of maxims- that simply can not be if you have enough data!
•Consider the differences between what is said, how it is said, and what is meant. Whose intentions, the listener’s the speaker’s (or both) are important when considering intention? Or when considering mutual intelligibility? Support your position by using an example from your data.
•How do intonation, pausing and loudness contribute to meaning in the dialog?
Also note that even though this part if your project is more of a “list,” you should use sentences, paragraphs, and section headings where appropriate so is reads like an essay.
—————————————————————————————
Note: As you consider how your data illustrate linguistic theories and principles and as you discuss your conclusions, support your statements with your field-data. Cite relevant examples from your observation journal when you are referring to them.
Remember, there are two quick ways to improve your analysis (and therefore your grade):
(1) Don’t just say, “X occurs in my data”, give an example of X occurring in your data as well.
(2) In addition to claiming that “X occurs in my data” and then giving an example (or examples) of that, also give details about how you know that the example you gave really is an example. Here is an example of a really good answer:
“I noticed many instances of overlap in my data. Overlap is defined as instances when two or more participants in a conversation speak at the same time. In the following example, A and C overlap and the C overlaps them both(put your excerpt from data here)”