Loading...

Reframing Reformulation: A Theoretical-Experimental Approach

Evidence from the Spanish Discourse Marker "o sea"

by Shima Salameh Jiménez (Author)
©2021 Thesis 214 Pages

Summary

Reformulation studies offer a recent debate on reformulation and its semasiological-onomasiological treatment. Some researchers argue for a clear distinction between reformulation and other functions such as conclusion or correction; others defend the existence of different subtypes of reformulation based on such other functions, which are expressed by the same group of discourse markers in different languages. Both approaches are valid although their arguments and theoretical basis are opposed. The book presents an Eye-Tracking proposal to complement this debate experimentally. Results support an onomasiological approach to reformulation since experimental boundaries for each function (paraphrase, reformulation, conclusion and correction) have been detected.

Table Of Contents

  • Cover
  • Title
  • Copyright
  • About the author
  • About the book
  • This eBook can be cited
  • Acknowledgments
  • Abstract
  • Table of contents
  • Tables
  • Figures
  • Introduction
  • Theoretical background
  • The novelty of the method: A necessary justification
  • Research objectives
  • Chapter 1 Reformulation and reformulation discourse markers: The form-function trap
  • 1.1. Introduction
  • 1.2. Discourse markers and polyfunctionality: A trigger of the form-function trap
  • 1.2.1. Approaches to polyfunctionality
  • 1.2.2. Reformulation markers
  • 1.3. Reformulation studies and reformulation markers
  • 1.3.1. First studies on reformulation
  • 1.3.1.1. Gülich & Kotschi (1983)
  • 1.3.1.2. Roulet (1987)
  • 1.3.2. Bridge studies
  • 1.3.2.1. Charolles & Coltier (1986)
  • 1.3.2.2. Murat & Cartier-Bresson (1987)
  • 1.3.2.3. Gülich & Kotschi (1987a)
  • 1.3.3. Subsequent studies
  • 1.3.3.1. Fuentes (1993)
  • 1.3.3.2. Rossari (1990, 1994)
  • 1.3.3.3. Gülich & Kotschi (1995)
  • 1.3.3.4. Martín Zorraquino & Portolés (1999)
  • 1.3.3.5. Noren (1999)
  • 1.3.3.6. Del Saz (2003)
  • 1.3.3.7. Murillo (2007)
  • 1.3.3.8. Garcés (2006, 2008)
  • 1.4. Summary
  • Chapter 2 The form-function trap: A bridge between theory and experimentation
  • 2.1. Introduction
  • 2.2. The Pons-Murillo polemic (2013, 2016, 2017)
  • 2.2.1. Exclusive approach to reformulation (Pons 2013, 2017)
  • 2.2.2. Inclusive approach to reformulation (Murillo, 2016)
  • 2.3. Comparing exclusive and inclusive approaches
  • 2.3.1. Onomasiology vs. semasiology
  • 2.3.2. Onomasiology vs. relevance theory and polyphony approaches to conclusion
  • 2.3.3. Onomasiology vs. semasiology to approach correction
  • 2.4. When reformulation meets experimental pragmatics: Advantages of a new approach
  • Chapter 3 Experimental pragmatics and eye-tracking methods: Theoretical and technical concepts
  • 3.1. Introduction
  • 3.2. Visual attention parameters in eye-tracking reading: Movements and duration
  • 3.2.1. Eye movements
  • 3.2.2. Time measurements
  • 3.3. Technical skills: Eye-tracker system selection
  • 3.4. Experimental design: Basic steps
  • Chapter 4 Reframing reformulation through eye-tracking experiments: Experiment design
  • 4.1. Introduction
  • 4.2. Experimental hypotheses
  • 4.2.1. Temporal hypotheses
  • Step 1. Establishing hypotheses
  • 4.2.2. Movement hypotheses
  • 4.2.3. Experimental variables
  • Step 2. Selection of variables
  • Step 3. Reading contents employed
  • 4.3. Data compilation: Experiment design
  • 4.3.1. Basic experiment conditions
  • Step 4. Number of participants
  • Step 5. Distribution of participants and sentence replications (themes)
  • Step 6. Randomization
  • Step 7. Selection of participants (features)
  • Step 8. Materials design: Software
  • 4.3.2. Designing contexts
  • Step 9. Contexts
  • 4.3.3. Designing sentences
  • Step 10. Sentences
  • Step 11. Sentence design: Main decisions
  • 4.4. Statistical methods: Classical statistics vs. new statistics
  • 4.4.1. Introduction: From raw data to statistical results
  • 4.4.2. Decision regression trees
  • 4.4.3. Mixed linear regression models
  • Chapter 5 Measuring reformulation: A bridge between theory and experiments
  • 5.1. Introduction
  • 5.2. Validation tests and their organization
  • 5.2.1. Visual description and eye-movement count
  • 5.2.2. Decision regression trees
  • 5.2.3. Linear mixed regression models
  • 5.3. Paraphrase
  • 5.3.1. Visual description and manual count
  • 5.3.1.1. Fixation count (FC)
  • 5.3.1.2. Progressive (PF) and regressive fixations (RF)
  • 5.3.1.3. Regressions in and out of AOI
  • 5.3.2. Decision trees and ocular movements
  • 5.3.3. Mixed-models and paraphrase: Testing temporal measurements
  • 5.4. Reformulation
  • 5.4.1. Visual description and manual count
  • 5.4.1.1. Fixation count (FC)
  • 5.4.1.2. Progressive (PF) and regressive fixations (RF)
  • 5.4.1.3. Regressions in and out of AOI
  • 5.4.2. Decision trees and ocular movements
  • 5.4.3. Mixed models and reformulation
  • 5.5. Conclusion
  • 5.5.1. Visual description and manual count
  • 5.5.1.1. Fixation count (FC)
  • 5.5.1.2. Progressive (PF) and regressive fixations (RF)
  • 5.5.1.3. Regressions in and out of AOI
  • 5.5.2. Decision trees and ocular movements
  • 5.5.3. Mixed models and conclusion
  • 5.6. Correction
  • 5.6.1. Visual description and manual count
  • 5.6.1.1. Fixation count (FC)
  • 5.6.1.2. Progressive (PF) and regressive fixations (RF)
  • 5.6.1.3. Regressions in and out of AOI
  • 5.6.2. Decision trees and ocular movements
  • 5.6.3. Mixed models and correction
  • 5.7. Accepted/rejected hypotheses and research questions: Summary
  • Chapter 6 Conclusions
  • References
  • Appendix 1. Statistical report. Mixed-models
  • Appendix 2. Statistical report. Comparison between mixed-models. Percentages

←13 | 15→

Tables

Tab. 1.Reformulation markers in Spanish (Martín Zorraquino & Portolés, 1999, pp. 4122–4139)

Tab. 2.Discourse connection established by Sp. quiero decir in exemplification contexts.

Tab. 3.From first to bridge reformulation studies. PR represents paraphrastic reformulation; NPR represents nonparaphrastic reformulation. Shaded cells are approached as subtypes of reformulation. See also Murillo (2007) and Pons (2013).

Tab. 4.Classification of reformulation operations based on Rossari (1990: 353).

Tab. 5.Del Saz’s classification of reformulation and its markers (Del Saz, 2003, p. 242).

Tab. 6.Differences between exclusive and inclusive approaches in Pons (2013, 2017) and Murillo (2016).

Tab. 7.Temporal and movement parameters selected.

Tab. 8.Relationship between dependent, independent variables, and conditions.

Tab. 9.Participant distribution in the experiment. T. 1 and T. correspond to each theme (replication) of the experiment.

Tab. 10.Contexts employed in each function and theme.

Tab. 11.Contexts employed in each function and theme.

Tab. 12.Critical sentences per function in Spanish. Themes 1 and mixed.

Tab. 13.Critical sentences per function in English. Themes 1 and mixed.

Tab. 14.Abbreviations for variables employed in manual count.

Tab. 15.Contexts and critical sentences for paraphrase in the experiment.

Tab. 16.Manual count of total eye movements in paraphrases introduced by a discourse marker.

Tab. 17.Manual count of total eye movements in paraphrases introduced without a discourse marker.

Tab. 18.Total reading time. Paraphrase.

Tab. 19.First-pass reading time. Paraphrase.

Tab. 20.Second-pass reading time. Paraphrase.

Tab. 21.Contexts and critical sentences for paraphrase in the experiment.

Tab. 22.Manual count of total eye movements for reformulation introduced by a discourse marker.

←15 | 16→

Tab. 23.Manual count of total eye movements for reformulation without a discourse marker.

Tab. 24.Total reading time. Reformulation.

Tab. 25.First-pass reading time. Reformulation.

Tab. 26.Second-pass reading time. Reformulation.

Tab. 27.Context and critical sentences for conclusion in the experiment.

Tab. 28.Manual count of total eye movements for conclusion introduced by a discourse marker.

Tab. 29.Manual count of total eye movements for conclusion without a discourse marker.

Tab. 30.Total reading time. Conclusion.

Tab. 31.First-pass reading time. Conclusion.

Tab. 32.Second-pass reading time. Conclusion.

Tab. 33.Conclusion. Overview M1–M2 in sentences with and without a discourse marker.

Tab. 34.Overview of conclusion.

Tab. 35.Contexts and critical sentences for correction in the experiment.

Tab. 36.Manual count for total eye movements in correction introduced by a discourse marker.

Tab. 37.Manual count for total eye movements in correction without a discourse marker.

Tab. 38.Total reading time. Correction.

Details

Pages
214
Year
2021
ISBN (PDF)
9783631854075
ISBN (ePUB)
9783631854082
ISBN (MOBI)
9783631854099
ISBN (Hardcover)
9783631850398
DOI
10.3726/b18379
Language
English
Publication date
2021 (May)
Published
Berlin, Bern, Bruxelles, New York, Oxford, Warszawa, Wien, 2021. 214 pp., 9 fig. col., 37 fig. b/w, 41 tables.

Biographical notes

Shima Salameh Jiménez (Author)

Shima Salameh teaches and researches in the areas of linguistics and pragmatics. Her research interests include experimental pragmatics, discourse segmentation and discourse markers synchronically and diachronically addressed.

Previous

Title: Reframing Reformulation: A Theoretical-Experimental Approach