Article published in:
Functions of Language
Vol. 27:2 (2020) ► pp. 113–142

Practices of indexing discrepant assumptions with German ich dachte (‘I thought’) in talk-in-interaction

| Leibniz Institute for the German Language, Mannheim
| Leibniz Institute for the German Language, Mannheim
This paper studies practices of indexing discrepant assumptions accomplished by turn-constructional units with ich dachte (‘I thought’) in German talk-in-interaction. Building on the analysis of 141 instances from the corpus FOLK, we identify three sequential environments in which ich dachte is used to index that an assumption which a speaker (has) held contrasts with some other, contextually salient assumption. We show that practices which have been studied for English I thought are also routinely used in German: ich dachte is a means to manage epistemic incongruencies and to contrast an incorrect with a correct assumption in narratives. In addition, ich dachte is also used to account for the speaker’s own prior actions which may have looked problematic because they built on misunderstandings which the speaker only discovered later. Moreover, ich dachte-practices may also be used to create comic effects by reporting an earlier, absurd assumption. The practices are discussed with regard to their role in regaining common ground, in managing relationships, in maintaining the identity of a rational actor, and in terms of their exploitation for other conversational interests. Special attention is paid to how co-occurring linguistic features, and sequential and pragmatic factors, account for local interpretations of ich dachte.
Published online: 16 June 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.00031.dep
References

References

Aijmer, Karin
1997  I think: An English modal particle. In Toril Swan & Olaf Jansen Westvik (eds.), Modality in Germanic languages, 1–47. Berlin: Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Berend, Nina
2005 Regionale Gebrauchsstandards – Gibt es sie und wie kann man sie beschreiben? In Ludwig M. Eichinger & Werner Kallmeyer (eds.), Standardvariation. Wie viel Variation verträgt die deutsche Sprache?, 143–170. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar
Betz, Emma & Andrea Golato
2008 Remembering relevant information and withholding relevant next actions: The German token ‘ach ja’. Research on Language and Social Interaction 41(1). 55–98. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Edward Finegan
1989 Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text 9. 93–124. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bogaert, Julie van
2010 A constructional taxonomy of “I think” and related expressions: Accounting for the variability of complement-taking mental predicates. English Language and Linguistics 14(3). 399–427. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011  I think and other complement-taking mental predicates: A case of and for constructional grammaticalization. Linguistics 49. 295–332.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J.
2008 The comment clause in English: Syntactic origins and pragmatic developments. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clift, Rebecca
2016 Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth
2007 Assessing and accounting. In Elizabeth Holt & Rebecca Clift (eds.), Reporting talk: Reported speech in interaction, 81–119. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Dagmar Barth-Weingarten
2011 A system for transcribing talk-in-interaction: GAT2. Translated and adapted for English by Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen & Dagmar Barth-Weingarten. Gesprächsforschung 12. 1–51. http://​www​.gespraechsforschung​-ozs​.de​/heft2011​/px​-gat2​-englisch​.pdf (21 Dec. 2016.)
Declerck, Renaat & Susan Reed
2005 What is modal about I thought that…? English Language and Linguistics 9(2). 311–332. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf, Nadine Proske & Arne Zeschel
(eds.) 2017 Verben im interaktiven Kontext. Bewegungsverben und mentale Verben im gesprochenen Deutsch. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf & Silke Reineke
2017 Epistemische Praktiken und ihre feinen Unterschiede: Verwendungen von ich dachte in gesprochener Sprache. In Arnulf Deppermann, Nadine Proske & Arne Zeschel (eds.), 337–375.Google Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf, Feilke Helmuth & Angelika Linke
2016 Sprachliche und kommunikative Praktiken: Eine Annäherung aus linguistischer Sicht. In Arnulf Deppermann, Helmuth Feilke & Angelika Linke (eds.), Sprachliche und kommunikative Praktiken, 1–23. Berlin: Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf & Thomas Schmidt
2014 Gesprächsdatenbanken als methodisches Instrument der Interaktionalen Linguistik – Eine exemplarische Untersuchung auf Basis des Korpus FOLK in der Datenbank für Gesprochenes Deutsch (DGD2). In Mitteilungen des Deutschen Germanistenverbandes 1/2014 4–17. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul
1987 Po-faced receipts of teases. Linguistics 25. 219–253. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, John W.
2007 The stance triangle. In Robert Englebretson (ed.), Stancetaking in discourse, 139–182. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Enfield, Nicholas J.
2006 Social consequences of common ground. In Nicholas Enfield & Stephen C. Levinson (eds.), Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition and interaction, 399–430. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
2008 Common ground as a resource for social affiliation. In István Kecskés & Jacob Mey (eds.), Intention, common ground and the egocentric speaker-hearer, 223–254. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar
Englebretson, Robert
(ed.) 2007 Stancetaking in discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Erman, Britt
1987 Pragmatic expressions in English: A study of you know, you see and I mean in face-to-face conversation. Stockholm: Almquist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
2001 Pragmatic markers revisited with a focus on you know in adult and adolescent talk. Journal of Pragmatics 33(10). 1337–1359. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fetzer, Anita
2008 ‘And I think that is a very straight forward way of dealing with it’: The communicative function of cognitive verbs in political discourse. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 27(4). 384–396. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014  I think, I mean and I believe in political discourse: Collocates, functions and distribution. Functions of Language 21(1). 67–91. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fetzer, Anita & Marjut Johansson
2010 Cognitive verbs in context: A contrastive analysis of English and French argumentative discourse. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 15(2). 240–266. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fox Tree, Jean E. & Josef C. Schrock
2002 Basic meanings of you know and I mean . Journal of Pragmatics 34(6). 727–747. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving
1974 Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Golato, Andrea
2010 Marking understanding versus receipting information in talk: Achso. and ach in German interaction. Discourse Studies 12(2). 147–176. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Golato, Andrea & Emma Betz
2008 German ach and achso in repair uptake: Resources to sustain or remove epistemic asymmetry. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 27. 7–37. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles
1981 Conversational organization: Interaction between speakers and hearers. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Günthner, Susanne
1996 The prosodic contextualization of moral work: An analysis of reproaches in ‘why’-formats. In Margret Selting & Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen (eds.), Prosody in conversation: Interactional studies, 271–302. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Günthner, Susanne & Paul Hopper
2010 Zeitlichkeit & sprachliche Strukturen: Pseudoclefts im Englischen und Deutschen. Gesprächsforschung 11. 1–28.Google Scholar
Helmer, Henrike, Silke Reineke & Arnulf Deppermann
2016 A range of uses of negative epistemic constructions in German: ich weiß nicht as a resource for dispreferred actions. Journal of Pragmatics 106. 97–114. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John
1984 A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In John Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action, 299–345. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
2006 Cognition in Discourse. In Hedwig te Molder & Jonathan Potter (eds.), Conversation and cognition, 184–202. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
2010 Conversation Analysis: Practices and methods. In David Silverman (ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice, 3rd edn., 208–230. London: Sage.Google Scholar
2012a Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45(1). 1–29. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012b The epistemic engine: Sequence organization and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45(1). 30–52. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013a Epistemics in conversation. In Jack Sidnell & Tanya Stivers (eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis, 370–394. Malden, MA: Wiley.Google Scholar
2013b Action formation and its epistemic (and other) backgrounds. Discourse Studies 15(5). 551–578. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John & Geoffrey Raymond
2005 The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly 68(1). 15–38. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Imo, Wolfgang
2005 A Construction Grammar approach to the phrase “I mean” in spoken English. InLiSt (Interaction and Linguistic Structure) 42. 1–37.Google Scholar
2007 Construction Grammar und Gesprochene-Sprache-Forschung. Konstruktionen mit zehn matrixsatzfähigen Verben im Gesprochenen Deutsch. Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009 Konstruktion oder Funktion? Erkenntnisprozessmarker (change-of-state-token) im Deutschen. In Susanne Günthner & Jörg Bücker (eds.), Grammatik im Gespräch, 57–86. Berlin: Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010 Das Adverb jetzt zwischen Zeit- und Gesprächsdeixis. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik 38(1). 25–38. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail
2004 ‘At first I thought’: A normalizing device for extraordinary events. In Gene H. Lerner (ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation, 131–167. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kärkkäinen, Elise
2003 Epistemic stance in English conversation: A description of its interactional functions with a focus on I think. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006 Stance taking in conversation: From subjectivity to intersubjectivity. Text & Talk 26(6). 699–731. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009  I thought it was pretty neat: Social action formats for taking a stance. In Stef Slembrouck, Miriam Taverniers & Mieke Van Herreweghe (eds.), From ‘Will’ to ‘Well’: Studies in Linguistics, 293–304. Gent: Academia.Google Scholar
2012  I thought it was very interesting: Conversational formats for taking a stance. Journal of Pragmatics 44(15). 2194–2210. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Keevallik, Leelo
2011 The terms of not knowing. In Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada & Jakob Steensig (eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation, 184–206. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William & Joshua Waletzky
1967 Narrative analysis. In June Helm (ed.), Essays on the verbal and visual Arts, 12–44. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Laury, Ritva & Marja-Liisa Helasvuo
2016 Disclaiming epistemic access with ‘know’ and ‘remember’ in Finnish. Journal of Pragmatics 106. 80–96. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lindström, Jan & Susanna Karlsson
2016 Tensions in the epistemic domain and claims of no-knowledge: A study of Swedish medical interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 106. 129–147. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Östman, Jan-Ola
1981 You know: A discourse functional approach. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pekarek Doehler, Simona
2011 Clause-combining and the sequencing of actions: Projector constructions in French talk-in-interaction. In Ritva Laury & Ryoko Suzuki (eds.), Subordination in conversation, 103–148. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016 More than an epistemic hedge: French je sais pas ‘I don’t know’ as a resource for the sequential organization of turns and actions. Journal of Pragmatics 106. 148–162. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita
1980 Telling my side: “Limited access” as a “fishing” device. Sociological Inquiry 50. 186–198. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1986 Extreme case formulations: A way of legitimizing claims. Human Studies 9(2–3). 219–229. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Potter, Jonathan
1997 Discourse analysis as a way of analysing naturally occurring talk. In David Silverman (ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice, 144–160. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Quasthoff, Uta
1980 Erzählen in Gesprächen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey
1992 Lectures on conversation. 2 Vols. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1996a Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In Elinor Ochs, Emmanuel A. Schegloff & Sandra Thompson (eds.), Interaction and grammar, 52–133. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Scheibmann, Joanne
2000  I dunno: A usage-based account of the phonological reduction of don’t in American English conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 32(1). 105–124. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Selting, Margret, Peter Auer, Dagmar Barth-Weingarten, Jörg Bergmann, et al.
2009 Gesprächsanalytisches Transkriptionssystem 2 (GAT2). Gesprächsforschung 10. 353–402. http://​www​.gespraechsforschung​-ozs​.de​/heft2009​/px​-gat2​.pdf (21 Dec. 2016.)
Smith, Michael Sean
2013 “I thought” initiated turns: Addressing discrepancies in first-hand and second-hand knowledge. Journal of Pragmatics 57. 318–330. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A.
2002 “Object complements” and conversation: Towards a realistic account. Studies in Language 26(1). 125–164. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A. & Anthony Mulac
1991 The discourse conditions for the use of the complementizer that in conversational English. Journal of Pragmatics 15(3). 237–251. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Weatherall, Ann
2011  I don’t know as a prepositioned epistemic hedge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 44(4). 317–337. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Weinrich, Harald
1993 Textgrammatik der deutschen Sprache. Mannheim: Dudenverlag.Google Scholar
Wooffitt, Robin
1991 ‘I was just doing X ... when Y’: Some inferential properties of a device in accounts for paranormal experiences. Text 11(2). 267–288. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zeschel, Arne
2017  Denken und wissen im gesprochenen Deutsch. In Arnulf Deppermann, Nadine Proske & Arne Zeschel (eds.), 249–335.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Laury, Ritva, Marja-Liisa Helasvuo & Janica Rauma
2020.  In Fixed Expressions [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 315], ► pp. 133 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 08 february 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.