32.1426, Review: Discourse Analysis; Syntax: Hoffmann, Kirner-Ludwig (2020)

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-32-1426. Thu Apr 22 2021. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 32.1426, Review: Discourse Analysis; Syntax: Hoffmann, Kirner-Ludwig (2020)

Moderator: Malgorzata E. Cavar (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Student Moderator: Jeremy Coburn, Lauren Perkins
Managing Editor: Becca Morris
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Everett Green, Sarah Robinson, Nils Hjortnaes, Joshua Sims, Billy Dickson
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
           https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Jeremy Coburn <jecoburn at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:10:40
From: Neda Chepinchikj [neda.cepincic at gmail.com]
Subject: Telecinematic Stylistics

 
Discuss this message:
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=36637957


Book announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/31/31-1860.html

EDITOR: Christian  Hoffmann
EDITOR: Monika  Kirner-Ludwig
TITLE: Telecinematic Stylistics
SERIES TITLE: Advances in Stylistics
PUBLISHER: Bloomsbury Publishing (formerly The Continuum International Publishing Group)
YEAR: 2020

REVIEWER: Neda Chepinchikj, University of New South Wales

“Telecinematic Stylistics” is an edited volume that consists of thirteen
different papers on the topic of telecinematic discourse. The chapters are
unified through an introduction that defines key terms in the area of
telecinematic discourse and details the various approaches to analysing
telecinematic discourse, as well as the common pitfalls of both theoretical
and methodological concerns in this interdisciplinary field of research. The
introductory chapter also briefly summarises research to date and presents an
overview of the volume and its organisation.

SUMMARY

The papers in this edited volume are informally organised into two parts,
according to their particular focus of interest. The first part of the book
consists of studies that examine language patterns and their meanings in
televisual talk, whereas the second part presents broader multimodal foci of
analysing telecinematic discourse, which also investigate resources other than
language, such as cinematography, film soundtrack and production. All the
chapters in this volume are contextualised within the wider area of
telecinematic discourse and they each highlight different aspects of its
stylistics.

Pavesi’s paper, which is the first one in the volume, discusses the use of
demonstratives in film dialogues. Through a corpus linguistics approach to
twelve film dialogues from British and American films, the author investigates
the frequency and functions of proximal demonstratives and arrives at a
conclusion that they are very frequent in film speech and have specific
exophoric functions, such as foregrounding objects and narrative moments.
These are also used more frequently to show rather than tell, and they appear
to be more prevalent in televisual speech as opposed to spontaneous
conversations. 

In a similar corpus linguistic vein, Bednarek presents and discusses the
benefits of using the newly created Sydney Corpus of Television Dialogue
(SydTV) for linguistic analysis of American TV dialogue. Through a few
examples from the author’s own research, she indicates the usefulness of this
resource as not only a reference corpus to serve as a baseline for comparison
of data, but also as a resource for analysing any type of linguistic feature,
both in the area of stylistics and also in other sub-disciplines, such as
sociolinguistics and historical and cultural comparative studies.       

Jautz and Minow focus on investigating the formulaic expression [name], we
need to talk in soap opera dialogue using a corpus linguistic method of
analysis. Their findings indicate that this expression is typical of this
televisual genre and its use refers to introducing problem-based talk. The
choices of what follows this utterance are also limited but the utterance
plays a major role in driving the narrative and dramatising the plot in soap
operas. 

Messerli focuses on humour in sitcoms and how it is created using repetition.
He combines a mixed approach, using both quantitative and qualitative
analysis, to examine the multimodal construction of humorous turns in a single
episode of an American sitcom. In his study, the author considers both the
diegetic and extradiegetic planes of telecinematic discourse. In other words,
Messerli points out the impact of the humourous turns for both the characters
in the sitcom and for the benefit of the viewers. In a much layered manner, he
looks at a few levels of repetition: lexical, structural parallelism, prosodic
repetition, repetition of facial expressions and telecinematic repetition. He
further categorises the repetition as either intraturn or inter-turn, with
respect to distance and location of the repetitions. The findings point to
frequent instances of repetition for all three modes: linguistic,
paralinguistic and non-linguistic, as well as the major salience of lexical
inter-turn repetition for text cohesion. 

In the second part of the book, Piazza’s study on the ideology in TV
documentaries about the minority community of travellers and gypsies in the UK
investigates the topic from a multimodal aspect, using critical discourse
analysis (CDA). She is interested in the portrayal of these minority
communities in three British/Irish documentaries, particularly in terms of the
authority voices (the narrators) and their role. Piazza examines the lexical
choices made by the narrators, the questions the interviewers ask and the
visuals in the opening images to arrive at the crux of the ideological
discourse, whose voice are the narrators. Not surprisingly, the stance
identified indicates various degrees of reinforcement of stereotypes and
positioning of the narrators as authorities, rather than balancing the views
with those of the depicted communities. 

In a similar study, Chovanec looks at the interplay between two types of
narration in TV documentaries: voice-over and presenter, or off-screen and
on-screen narrators. He uses a combination of pragmatic analysis and
conversation analysis (CA) to examine the various techniques of diegetic and
extradiegetic narration in a single episode of a British TV documentary
series. Chovanec identifies three points in his study: (1) the role of the
narrator; (2) the interplay of the various narrators’ voices; and (3) the
relationship between the soundtrack and the visual track. All this is
accomplished by a combination of styles of delivery (diegetic and
extradiegetic), but the relationship is complex and there is a perceived lack
of balance between the two voices, owing to their different roles in the
narration. 

Reichelt, in her study of representation of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in
fictional TV, focuses on the portrayal of this kind of characters in TV
series. Using a mixed-method approach (scene analysis of pragmatic competence
and cinematography and pragmatic marker variation) applied to the first four
seasons of the American TV show Parenthood (2010-2015), the author identifies
different modes of co-creating representations of ASD, which, although limited
in number, show a variety of ways of achieving characterisation, using
different multimodal resources (e.g. language patterns, mise en scène, posture
and gaze). Even though these characters are both explicitly and implicitly
depicted as different from the other characters in the show, the author
suggests that there is still a lot of stereotyping involved. 

Unlike the previous studies in this volume, where verbal language (spoken or
written) is either central or salient mode of investigation, Schubert’s paper
focuses entirely on cinematography as a mode of meaning-making and
communication in telecinematic discourse. By applying the cooperative
principle (Grice, 1975) to horror film cinematography, he borrows a pragmatic
concept and analyses film shots, cuts and use of lighting in a set of eight
horror films. The author’s assumption is that visual storytelling in films is
carried out through shots and cuts, which act as the syntax and punctuation in
cinematic discourse. He also posits the salience of producer-recipient
implicature in film discourse and pragmatic similarity between verbal language
and visual cinematic discourse. Schubert exemplifies the visual expressions of
all four maxims of the cooperative principle and demonstrates that these can
be adapted and applied visually in films. 

In addition to films or TV shows as data, the study by Krebs looks at film
trailers as multimodal advertising texts. This study adopts a new approach to
analysing film trailers, which is based on the relevance theory (RT) by
Sperber and Wilson (1986, 1995). The focus here is the interplay between
descriptive and interpretative use of various modes in film trailers and the
way they contribute to the persuasiveness of the product among audiences. The
data consist of only one film trailer for the Lord of the Rings trilogy. The
author finds the application of RT helpful in the process of explaining how
the two exemplary audiences are targeted (those familiar with the books on
which the trilogy is based and those who are not). Another finding of this
study is the “double usage structure of trailers” (p. 216), which presupposes
different uses of speech and writing (descriptively and interpretatively).   

Kirner-Ludwig’s contribution to this volume examines how linguistic choices
are made in period films set in the Middle Ages. Through a cognitive-pragmatic
approach, the author focuses on identifying pseudo-medieval linguistic
features that are used in medieval-themed films, examining only the fan
transcripts made on the basis of the selected films (twelve feature films).
Applying a corpus-based analysis, the author focuses on spoken and written
language in the selected films and identifies a number of linguistic features,
such as pseudo-archaisms, various lexico-semantic choices and code-switching
between English and Latin, which are specific to this sub-genre. What the
findings show, however, is that these linguistic features are inaccurate and
inauthentic as to the exact period portrayed. Other findings of the study
indicate that there is no consistency in the use of the identified language
features as language does not appear to play a crucial role in the period
authenticity of the films, but it is rather subordinate to the visual
component thereof.

There are two chapters in this volume that discuss adaptation and translation
of content between two different media. The first one is Sanchez-Stockhammer’s
study of the film adaptation of comics and the other one is Dahne and Piazza’s
paper on closed captions for the deaf in TV shows. The former study focuses on
the translatability of comic books onto screen, using the example of Hergé’s
Tintin comic books and Spielberg’s film adaptation of these comics (The
Adventures of Tintin, 2011). It is a qualitative study that focuses on the use
of speech and writing in both media. The findings show a number of
modifications that take place in the process of film adaptation, which can be
found in the dialogues, representations of sound, voice, accent, thoughts and
the use of written language on screen. The adaptations and modifications made
in the translation process are seen as necessary in spite of the fact that
both media are predominantly visual.       

The latter study offers an investigation into the closed captions (CC) for the
deaf and hard of hearing and the reasons behind the choices made in creating
these. The authors are also interested in the impact of these choices on the
interpretation of the narrative and characters by the deaf audiences. The
study analyses one particular American TV show, Breaking Bad (2008-2013), and
also uses two interviews as part of the data, one with a deaf person,
representing the voice of the audience, and another with a professional
captioner. Using a translation studies framework and a cognitive approach with
a Closed Caption Relevance Model (CCRM), following Gutt’s (2000) translation
model, the study analyses and compares the CC text with the corresponding
audio-visual text from the TV show. The study reveals that the decisions
regarding what is captured in the CC text are based on the importance of sound
in context. Due to spatio-temporal constraints, not all audio is captured in
the CC text and the selectivity relies on the editorial decisions related to
conveying relevant information to the audience. In this case, the matters of
function generally prevail over authenticity and faithfulness to the source
text (i.e. the audio-visual track of the TV show).

The last chapter in the volume discusses the concept of metapragmatic
awareness in cinematic discourse. Gordejuela applies this concept to the
analysis of cinematic devices that create self-reflexivity and construct
meaning. The case study is Hitchock’s film Notorious (1946), but the author
also refers to some other films by Hitchcock to illustrate the concept as it
underlies the cinematic discourse of this particular film author. The premise
Gordejuela makes is that cinematic discourse functions pragmatically as any
other discourse and that metapragmatic awareness involves both the filmmaker
and the viewers, but it is essential that the viewers recognise the author’s
intention in using specific cinematic devices. Such devices in Hitchcock’s
films are tunnel shots, stairs and suspicious drinks, which all serve as
cohesive and meaning-making techniques in his cinematic discourse.  

EVALUATION

The present volume is a valuable addition to the area of telecinematic
stylistics and it is a very useful read for both novice and seasoned scholars
and researchers in this area. The volume’s introductory chapter skilfully
contextualises the specific field of study and summarises the most relevant
concepts, approaches and debates and offers an overview of the latest
knowledge in the field. Furthermore, all the thirteen studies have been
coherently collocated within the context of telecinematic stylistics. These
studies present a wide variety of topics, data, theoretical frameworks,
approaches and methods, which all pertain to various extents to the burgeoning
field of telecinematic stylistics. Thus, the relevance of the various studies
included in this volume is significant, while their diversity attests to the
wealth and potential of research in this domain.

It is especially welcoming to read about the various degrees of innovation
undertaken by some of the contributing scholars to this edited volume. Most of
them are related to finding out new ways to approach the analysis of
telecinematic material, such as Schubert’s application of the cooperative
principle to film cinematography and Kreb’s adaptation of relevance theory to
analysing film trailers. Others, on the other hand, show innovation and
creativity in the type of data they select for analysis, particularly in those
cases where the choice of data pertains to minority, or even marginalised,
communities in the wider society. Examples of these are the studies by Piazza
on the ideological framing in TV documentaries of the travellers’ and gypsies’
communities in the UK, Dahne and Piazza’s study on the use of closed captions
for the purpose of the deaf and hard of hearing audiences, and Reichelt’s
paper on autism spectrum disorder representation in fictional television. 

Another strength of the volume is that the variety of the studies also relates
to the various foci of investigation, i.e. some studies either explore one
mode of communication (usually language in its written or spoken form),
whereas others combine a few modes and thus adopt a broader, multimodal
perspective on telecinematic discourse. This is also reflected in the
aforementioned organisation of the volume into two parts. The variety of
studies included also extends to the perspectives taken: some chapters are
more theoretically laden, while others are more focused on methodology and
analytical tools for investigating telecinematic discourse. An example of the
former is Messerli’s study of humour repetition in sitcoms, while an example
of the latter is Bednarek’s chapter on the Sydney’s Corpus of Television
Dialogue.

Even though most of the studies included in this volume take a deep and
systematic approach to the analysis of their chosen data, at times there may
appear certain discrepancies between the proposed scope and the actual data
used, as well as the reported findings. Messerli, for example, offers a highly
in-depth analysis of humour repetition which is limited to a single sitcom
episode. Thus, it is a little difficult to know if the findings of this
analysis do actually apply to the entire sitcom from which this episode is
sourced, let alone other sitcoms. Similarly, Krebs’ analysis of a single film
trailer is very systematic and thorough but it is at the same time very
limited in terms of the classification of the two kinds of audiences and their
reception of the trailer as an advertising product. The question remains if
this hold true for other similar film trailers that advertise book-to-screen
adaptations. Furthermore, how does this novel approach work for film trailers
that are not based on book adaptations? Another similar example comes from
Reichelt’s study. As compelling as her analysis of televisual representations
of ASD people is, the data set is limited to only one TV show. Thus, readers
would be left with questions about the extent of stereotypical representations
of ASD people in fictional television more broadly.  

To conclude, Telecinematic Stylistics offers a diverse and fresh look at this
growing area of research and brings together a number of valuable
contributions from both well-known and emerging scholars in this field. It is
reassuring to see that this area of research is growing and producing
innovative and creative ways of knowledge generation. 

REFERENCES

Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.),
Syntax and 
semantics (pp. 41-58). Vol. 3. Speech acts. New York: Academic Press.   

Gutt, E.-A. (2000). Translation and relevance: Cognition and context.
Abingdon: Taylor and 
Francis.     

Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1986). Relevance theory: Communication and
cognition. Oxford: 
Blackwell. 

Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance theory: Communication and
cognition. (2nd ed). 
Oxford: Blackwell.


ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Dr Neda Chepinchikj is a linguist and an educator. Her teaching background is
in English as an Additional Language and Intercultural Communication. She has
taught at a number of universities in Australia and overseas. Her research
interests include telecinematic discourse, multimodal conversation analysis,
language and gender and sociolinguistics. She has published papers in renowned
journals and is writing her first book at the moment. She currently works at
the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia.





------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***************************    LINGUIST List Support    ***************************
 The 2020 Fund Drive is under way! Please visit https://funddrive.linguistlist.org
  to find out how to donate and check how your university, country or discipline
     ranks in the fund drive challenges. Or go directly to the donation site:
                   https://crowdfunding.iu.edu/the-linguist-list

                        Let's make this a short fund drive!
                Please feel free to share the link to our campaign:
                    https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
 


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-32-1426	
----------------------------------------------------------