Cover not available

Article published In: Meaning in Interaction: Studies in memory of Jack Bilmes
Edited by Arnulf Deppermann and Elwys De Stefani
[Interactional Linguistics 3:1/2] 2023
► pp. 67–92

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

Ad-hoc-compounds in spoken German

(When) do we need compositionality?

ORCiD logo with link | Leibniz Institute for the German Language, Mannheim
Published online: 25 April 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/il.22007.hel
Abstract
Occasionalisms, i.e., non-lexicalized ad-hoc-expressions that are coined for a specific occasion, are a recurrent phenomenon in verbal interactions. Even though recipients have not heard those novel word formations before, they can still understand them. This paper reports on a study from an Interactional Linguistics perspective which explores ad-hoc-expressions in spoken German, such as streichelmichbärchenpärchen (‘stroke-me-little-bear-couple’) and windeldroge (‘diaper-drug’). It draws on an analysis of 934 ad-hoc-compounds in a corpus of German interaction. These typically do not cause a problem of understanding, because their meaning is inferable due to different resources that help recipients understand unfamiliar expressions: a specific word formation with a high degree of compositionality, cues or anchoring in the prior context or common ground. While a compositional word formation is not always necessary to sufficiently understand meaning in interaction due to other resources, opaque word formation has its limits when it comes to understanding the meaning of an expression especially when recipients cannot rely on other resources to understand the expression.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Morphology and word formation in Interactional Linguistics
  • 3.Ad-hoc-expressions, compositionality and meaning
  • 4.Data and methods
  • 5.Ad-hoc-compounds in spoken German: Repair or no repair?
    • 5.1Word formation
    • 5.2Contextual cues and anchors in prior context
    • 5.3Common ground
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (54)
References
Antaki, C., Biazzi, M., Nissen, A., & Wagner, J. (2008). Accounting for moral judgments in academic talk: The case of a conversation analysis data session. Text & Talk, 281, 1–30. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aronoff, M. (1983). A decade of morphology and word formation. Annual Review of Anthropology, 121, 355–375. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bilmes, J. (2011). Occasioned semantics. A systematic approach to meaning in talk. Human Studies 34(2), 129–153. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bushnell, C. (2012). Talking the talk: The interactional construction of community and identity at conversation analytic data sessions in Japan. Human Studies, 351, 583–605. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brennan, S. E., & Clark, H. H. (1996). Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22(6), 1482–1493.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carter, R. (2004). Language and Creativity: The Art of Common Talk. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, H. H. (1977). Bridging. In P. N. Johnson-Laird & P. C. Wason (Eds.), Thinking: Readings in cognitive science (pp. 411–420). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1996). Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, H. H. & Gerrig, Richard J. (1990). Quotations as demonstrations. Language, 66(4), 764–805. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Consten, M., Knees, M., & Schwarz-Friesel, M. (2007). The function of complex anaphors in texts. In Monika Schwarz-Friesel, Manfred Consten & Mareile Knees (Eds.), Anaphors in Text: Cognitive, formal and applied approaches to anaphoric reference (pp. 81–102). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Costello, F. J., & Keane, M. T. (2005). Compositionality and the pragmatics of conceptual combination. In E. Machery, M. Werning, & G. Schurz (Eds.), The compositionality of meaning and content. Volume II: Applications to Linguistics, Psychology, and Neuroscience (pp. 203–216). Frankfurt am Main: Ontos. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cruse, D. A. (1986). Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Deppermann, A. (2005). Conversational interpretation of lexical items and conversational contrasting. In A. Hakulinen, & M. Selting (Eds.), Syntax and Lexis in Conversation (pp. 289–317). Benjamins: Amsterdam. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2011). Notionalizations: The transformation of descriptions into categorizations. In A. Deppermann (Ed.), Formulation, Generalization, and Abstraction in Interaction. Human Studies, 34(2), 155–181. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2020). Interaktionale Semantik. In J. Hagemann, & S. Staffeldt (Eds.), Semantiktheorien II (pp. 235–278). Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Deppermann, A. & De Stefani, E. (2019). Defining in talk-in-interaction: Recipient-design through negative definitional components. Journal of Pragmatics, 1401, 140–155. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Deppermann, A. & Schmidt, A. (2021). How shared meanings and uses emerge over an interactional history: Wabi Sabi in a series of theater rehearsals. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 54(2): 203–224. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Stefani, W. (2020). ‘Nel senso (che)’ in Italian conversation: Turn-taking, turn-maintaining and turn-yielding. In Y. Maschler, S. Pekarek Doehler, J. Lindström, & L. Keevallik (Eds.), Emergent Syntax for Conversation: Clausal Patterns and the Organization of Action (pp. 25–54). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Donalies, E. (2005). Die Wortbildung im Deutschen. Ein Überblick. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Downing, P. (1977). On the creation and use of Englisch compound nouns. Language 53(4), 810–842. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drew, P. (1997): „Open“ Class Repair Initiators in Response to Sequential Sources of Troubles in Conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 28(1), 69–101. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dunbar, G. (2005): The Goldilocks Scenario: Is noun-noun compounding compositional? In E. Machery, M. Werning & G. Schurz (Eds.). The compositionality of meaning and content. Volume II: Applications to Linguistics, Psychology, and Neuroscience (pp. 217–228). Frankfurt am Main: Ontos. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fox, B. A., Hayashi, M. & Jasperson, R. (1996). Resources and repair: A cross-linguistic study of syntax and repair. In E. Ochs, Elinor, E. A. Schegloff & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and Grammar (pp. 185–237). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gagné, C. L. & Spalding, T. L. (2015). Noun-noun compounds. In P. O. Müller, I. Ohnheiser, S. Olsen, & F. Rainer (Eds.), Word-Formation: An International Handbook of the Langua-ges of Europe. Volume 21 (pp. 1144–1159). Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Georgakopoulou, A. (2015). Small stories research. Methods – Analysis – Outreach. In A. De Fina, & A. Georgakopoulou (Eds.), Handbook of narrative analysis (pp. 255–271). Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hawkins, J. A. (1978): Definiteness and indefiniteness. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Helmer, H. & Zinken, J. (2019). Das Heißt (“That Means”) for Formulations and Du Meinst (“You Mean”) for Repair? Interpretations of Prior Speakers’ Turns in German. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 52(2): 159–176. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Helmer, H. (2020). How do speakers define the meaning of expressions? The case of German x heißt y (“x means y”). Discourse Processes, 57(3): 278–299. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2022). Okkasionalismen im gesprochenen Deutsch. Bedeutungserklärungen zwischen Notwendigkeit und interaktiver Ressource. Deutsche Sprache, 2/2022, 97–123Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hein, K. (2017). Modeling the properties of German phrasal compounds within a usage-based constructional approach. In C. Trips, & J. Kornfilt (Eds.), Further investigations into the nature of phrasal compounding (pp. 119–149). Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hohenhaus, P. (1996). Ad-hoc-Wortbildung. Terminologie, Typologie und Theorie kreativer Wortbildung im Englischen. Frankfurt am Main: Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007). How to do (even more) things with nonce words (other than naming). In J. Munat (Ed.), Lexical Creativity, Texts and Contexts (pp. 15–38). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ikoma, M. & Werner, A. (2007). Prosodie der Modalpartikel schon: Wahrnehmung verschiedener Interpretationen. In E.-M. Thüne, & F. Ortu (Eds.), Gesprochene Sprache – Partikeln (pp. 129–139). Frankfurt am Main: Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keevallik, L. (2011). Grammar for adjusting assumptions: The Estonian enclitic -gi/-ki in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 431, 2879–2896. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kendrick, K. H. (2015). Other-initiated repair in English. Open Linguistics, 1(1), 164–190. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kitzinger, C. & Mandelbaum, J. (2013). Word Selection and Social Identities in Talk-in-Interaction. Communication Monograph, 80(2), 1–23. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klos, V. (2011). Komposition und Kompositionalität. Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der semantischen Dekodierung von Substantivkomposita. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marzo, D. (2015). Motivation, compositionality, idiomatization. In P. O. Müller, I. Ohnheiser, S. Olsen, & F. Rainer (Eds.), Word-Formation: An International Handbook of the Languages of Europe. Volume 2 (pp. 984–1001). Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nguyen, H. T. (2012). Social interaction and competence development: Learning the sequential organization of a communicative practice. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 11, 127–142. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Olsen, S. (2015). Composition. In P. O. Müller, I. Ohnheiser, S. Olsen, & F. Rainer (Eds.), Word-formation. An International Handbook of the Languages of Europe. Volume 1 (364–386). Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ronneberger-Sibold, E. (2015). Word creation. In P. O. Müller, I. Ohnheiser, S. Olsen, & F. Rainer (Eds.), Word Formation: An international Handbook of the Languages of Europe. Volume 1 (pp. 485–500). Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ryder, M. E. (1994). Ordered Chaos. The Interpretation of English Noun-Noun Compounds. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schlücker, B. (2012). Die deutsche Kompositionsfreudigkeit. Übersicht und Einführung. In L. Gaeta, & B. Schlücker (Eds.), Das Deutsche als kompositionsfreudige Sprache. Strukturelle Eigenschaften und systembezogene Aspekte (pp. 1–25). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Selting, M. (2004). Listen: Sequenzielle und prosodische Struktur einer kommunikativen Praktik – ein,e Untersuchung im Rahmen der Interaktionalen Linguistik. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 231, 1–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Selting, M., Auer, P., Barth-Weingarten, D., Bergmann, J., Bergmann, P., Birkner, K., Couper-Kuhlen, E., Deppermann, A., Gilles, P., Günthner, S., Hartung, M. & Kern, F. et al. (2011). A system for transcribing talk-in-interaction: GAT2. Translated and adapted for English by E. Couper-Kuhlen and D. Barth-Weingarten. Gesprächsforschung –Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion, 121, 1–51.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sikveland, R. O., & Stokoe, E. (2020). Should police negotiators ask to “talk” or “speak” to persons in crisis? Word selection and overcoming resistance to dialogue proposals. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 53(3), 324–340. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Simmler, F. (1998). Morphologie des Deutschen. Flexionsund Wortbildungsmorphologie. Berlin: Weidler.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stevanovic, M. (2017). Managing Compliance in Violin Instruction: The Case of the Finnish Clitic Particles –pa and –pAs in Imperatives and Hortatives. In M.-L. Sorjonen, L. Raevaara & E. Couper-Kuhlen (Eds.), Imperative turns at talk: The design of directives in action (pp. 357–380). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stumpf, S. (2018). Textsortenorientierte Wortbildungsforschung. Desiderate, Perspektiven und Beispielanalysen. Zeitschrift für Wortbildung, 2(1), 165–194. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2021a): Occasional word formations in written and spoken German. Neologica, 151, 151–169.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2021b). Passe-partout-Komposita im gesprochenen Deutsch. Konstruktionsgrammatische und interaktionslinguistische Zugänge im Rahmen einer pragmatischen Wortbildung. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik, 49(1), 33–83. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weber, T. (2014). Funktion und Bedeutung von Wortneubildungen in telefonischen Beratungsgesprächen. In S. Michel, & J. Tóth (Eds.), Wortbildungssemantik zwischen Langue und Parole. Semantische Produktionsund Verarbeitungsprozesse komplexer Wörter (pp. 205–226). Stuttgart: ibidem.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Deppermann, Arnulf & Elwys De Stefani
2023. Meaning in interaction. Interactional Linguistics 3:1-2 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Koole, Tom
2023. Meaning as referential work. Interactional Linguistics 3:1-2 ► pp. 167 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 december 2025. 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue