Šio mokslinio darbo objektas yra vaikų ir jaunimo pokalbiai šiuolaikinėje vokiečių vaikų ir jaunimo literatūroje. Darbe nagrinėjami pokalbio sudarymo būdai, pokalbio struktūra ir struktūrą lemiantys veiksniai. Disertacijoje pokalbis apibrėžiamas kaip lingvistinis vienetas, aprašoma pokalbio struktūra ir jos vienetai. Vaikų pokalbiai analizuojami remiantis pokalbio maksimų teorija, stebimas taisyklių taikymas konstruojant pokalbį bei taisyklių pažeidimai. Tiriamosiose darbo dalyse aptariami pokalbio dalyvių vaidmenys ir jų keitimosi mechanizmai, pokalbio dalių raiškos variantai, verbalinės ir neverbalinės kalbos santykis pokalbyje. Be to, nagrinėjami fonetiniai, leksiniai, morfologiniai, sintaksiniai kalbėjimo vienetai, būdingi vaikų ir jaunimo kalbai, t.y. veikiantys vaikų pokalbio sudarymą, padedantys tiksliau nustatyti adresatą, tiksliau išreikšti mintis, apibūdinantys kalbėtojo statusą bei padedantys kuriant įvaizdį. / The object of the doctoral thesis is children's and youth conversations presented in contemporary German literature composed for children and youth. The author analyses the instruments of conversation construction, its structure and factors which determine it. Since the conversation is defined as a linguistic unit, the thesis discusses its structure and elements. Children's talks have been analysed on the basis of Grice's theory of conversational maxims, which allowed to observe the application of particular rules in conversation construction and their disregard or violations. The conversation analysis has also been developed from other perspectives, such as the roles of interlocutors and the mechanisms of their alteration, the expressive variations of the parts of conversations and the relationship between verbal and non-verbal language. Phonetic, lexical, morphological and syntactic discursive elements typical of the children's and youth language have been discussed as well, since they have a considerable impact on the formation of the children's conversation and help to determine the addressee more adequately, express the ideas more acurately, reveal the true status of the speaker and create the desired image.

<p>Abstract</p><p>This paper aims to determine the validity of the hypothesis that the effective and eloquent use of language can result in shaping beliefs and altering people’s perception of certain phenomena. In order to explore this hypothesis, a speech given by George W. Bush concerning the Iraq war is examined, followed by a brief study of two corpora, the Time Magazine Corpus and the Corpus of Contemporary American English, where the collocationpatterns of the words Iraq, evil and terror are examined. The paper starts by presenting the main concepts upon which this study is based, i.e. mental frames, the co-operative principle and conversational maxims and finally, various rhetoric devices. An analysis section follows, where George Bush’s speech is examined with the help of the concepts mentioned above and the analysis continues with the corpora-study. One of the conclusions drawn in this study is that, indeed, it is possible that language can be successfully used in order to achieve political means, and that there seems to be a shift in the American public’s perception of concepts such as Iraq and terror, visible in the use of language. However, it cannot be said with certainty whether the Bush Administration has managed to dominate public discourse, through a study as minor as this one.</p>

<p>Chatroom conversations often elicit an initial impression of chaos. This is probably chiefly due to disrupted adjacency sequences, but also a result of the language being rich in non-standard linguistic forms and grammar. This study explores chatroom conversations with reference to Grice’s (1975) cooperative principle and the maxims that accompany it, and compares them to real life conversations. The aim is to see whether they differ from real life conversations to the extent expected, and whether these differences give rise to any compensational strategies to ensure successful communication. The results reveal a slightly higher amount of maxim undermining in the chat room than in the real life conversations, but not as high as expected. Accordingly, few compensational strategies need be adopted. It is suggested that the main explanation for these findings is that chatroom users have adapted their conversation patterns to the medium.</p>

Chatroom conversations often elicit an initial impression of chaos. This is probably chiefly due to disrupted adjacency sequences, but also a result of the language being rich in non-standard linguistic forms and grammar. This study explores chatroom conversations with reference to Grice’s (1975) cooperative principle and the maxims that accompany it, and compares them to real life conversations. The aim is to see whether they differ from real life conversations to the extent expected, and whether these differences give rise to any compensational strategies to ensure successful communication. The results reveal a slightly higher amount of maxim undermining in the chat room than in the real life conversations, but not as high as expected. Accordingly, few compensational strategies need be adopted. It is suggested that the main explanation for these findings is that chatroom users have adapted their conversation patterns to the medium.

The words and messages in apps are part of a conversation between people and their technology that we take part in every day. As technology becomes increasingly embedded into our daily lives, we form relationships with our devices and our apps. While we might think of these relationships as different, our behaviors and interactions with technology are still shaped by the social world, and these messages found in apps are based on existing patterns in face-to-face conversation. UX writing is the process of creating these messages in user experiences, which facilitate people's social interactions between apps and other digital products. Interacting with apps and other digital products is inherently social, and by using conversational language as a driving component of UX writing and Human-Computer Interaction, we can also cast User Experience (UX) as a type of communicative exchange between a person and an app, and therefore User Experience (UX) as conversation. Through qualitative interviews and usability testing with native and non-native English speakers, this research explores what type of language style works best for a global audience in these conversations with our apps and how we can strategically apply conversational patterns to improve the experience of users. Abstrakt Slova a zprávy v...

Abstract This paper aims to determine the validity of the hypothesis that the effective and eloquent use of language can result in shaping beliefs and altering people’s perception of certain phenomena. In order to explore this hypothesis, a speech given by George W. Bush concerning the Iraq war is examined, followed by a brief study of two corpora, the Time Magazine Corpus and the Corpus of Contemporary American English, where the collocationpatterns of the words Iraq, evil and terror are examined. The paper starts by presenting the main concepts upon which this study is based, i.e. mental frames, the co-operative principle and conversational maxims and finally, various rhetoric devices. An analysis section follows, where George Bush’s speech is examined with the help of the concepts mentioned above and the analysis continues with the corpora-study. One of the conclusions drawn in this study is that, indeed, it is possible that language can be successfully used in order to achieve political means, and that there seems to be a shift in the American public’s perception of concepts such as Iraq and terror, visible in the use of language. However, it cannot be said with certainty whether the Bush Administration has managed to dominate public discourse, through a study as minor as this one.

After Donald Trump won the presidency, his use of social media has gotten massive attention because of its incredibly inappropriate content. Many people question how appropriate his use of Twitter is, and in the linguistic field prominent voices point out that the former businessman does not have the skills to speak; he only talks (McWhorter, 2017). As America’s President with views of his own about worldly events, it is of special interest to see how people interact with him online. Because of the low 39% approval rating, one can assume that many disagree with him, possibly in a way involving irony. One sub-type of irony is described as “the use of words to express something other than and especially the opposite of the literal meaning” (Merriam-Webster, 2018), and it is reasonable to assume that some responses to Trump’s tweets use irony to present an alternative view of his actions or opinions. The study sets out to find replies to Trump’s tweets that are ironic and identify if they correspond to earlier developed theories of irony. The replies are examined to determine which of Grice’s maxims of conversation that is flouted the most. The data included 337 replies of which 78 (23%) were shown to follow an ironical pattern, mostly in order to ridicule and condemn Trump. 88 % of all comments disagree with Trump’s tweets. The most applicable theory of irony is the echoic interpretation theory by Wilson and Sperber, and the most flouted maxim is relevance. / Sedan Donald Trump ställde upp i presidentvalet och till slut vann valet, har hans användning av sociala medier fått mycket uppmärksamhet p.g.a dess olämpliga innehåll. Många har ifrågasatt lämpligheten i hans Twitter-användning, och lingvistiskt sett menar framstående röster att den tidigare företagsmannen inte äger förmågan att tala; han kan bara prata; och det gör han på Twitter som USA:s president och ger sin egen syn på världsliga händelser. Därför är det av intresse att titta på hur människor reagerar och tilltalar honom på nätet. Med tanke på hans låga popularitetssiffra på 39%, kan det förmodas att många inte håller med honom, och att ironi används som ett sätt att uttrycka en annan åsikt. Ironi beskrivs som “användningen av ord för att uttrycka någonting annat eller speciellt det motsatta av den bokstavliga meningen” (översatt från Merriam-Webster, 2018), vilket är hypotetiskt förväntat i svar till Trumps tweets. Denna studie syftar till att identifiera ironiska kommentarer på Trumps tweets och se om de överensstämmer med tidigare utvecklade teorier kring ironi. Även analys av vilken av Grices konversationsmaximer som bryts oftast görs i studien. Studiens data inkluderar 337 kommentarer, av vilka 78 (23%) är ironiska, oftast med intention att förlöjliga och fördöma Trump. 88% av alla kommentarer håller inte med om innehållet i Trumps tweets. Den mest applicerbara ironi-teorin var “echoic interpretation” teorin (Wilson &amp; Sperber), medan den mest ignorerade konversationsmaximen var relevans.