Abstract
Based on a video recording of conversational British English, this paper tests within the framework of Multimodal Discourse Analysis whether two different subordinate structures are evenly integrated to their environment. Subordinate constructions have been described in linguistics as dependent forms elaborating on primary elements of discourse. Although their verbal characteristics have been deeply analysed, few studies have focused on the articulation of the different communicative modalities in their production or provided a qualified picture of their integration. The main hypothesis is based on the capacity of subordinate constructions to show distinct forms of autonomy depending on their syntactic type, thus expressing different degrees of break. Beyond showing that subordinate constructions are not evenly dependent on their environment depending on how speakers use the prosodic and kinetic modalities to express greater (in)dependency, the results suggest that the creation of a break mainly relies on prosodic cues. Changes in the modal configuration throughout the sequence suggest modalities are dynamic and flexible resources for integrating or demarcating subordinate constructions in function of their syntactic type.
Highlights
This article discusses subordination in spontaneous speech, the sequences containing subordinate constructions operating at the syntactic level of modification (e.g., Huddleston & Pullum, 2002).In syntactic studies, modifiers refer to elements specifying or elaborating upon some primary features (Halliday, 1985), often described as additions to propositional contents in the host or embedding structure (Quirk et al, 1985, p. 1058; Huddleston & Pullum, 2002, p. 1048)
The analysis evaluates the autonomy of subordinate constructions on a linear organisational mode
After identifying and measuring the most relevant cues expressing boundaries in the different modalities drawing on our assumptions, the two syntactic types can be differentiated in terms of autonomy
Summary
This article discusses subordination in spontaneous speech, the sequences containing subordinate constructions operating at the syntactic level of modification (e.g., Huddleston & Pullum, 2002).In syntactic studies, modifiers refer to elements specifying or elaborating upon some primary features (Halliday, 1985), often described as additions to propositional contents in the host or embedding structure (Quirk et al, 1985, p. 1058; Huddleston & Pullum, 2002, p. 1048). Modifiers refer to elements specifying or elaborating upon some primary features (Halliday, 1985), often described as additions to propositional contents in the host or embedding structure While some heads inherently require reference to a dependent, which may be considered the head's argument, other dependents are not inherently presupposed by their head and are considered modifiers. They merely provide a further semantic characterisation of the referent (or state of affairs) expressed by the head, or supplement the head with additional information. Well-known examples of modifiers are relative clauses (van Rijn, 2017)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
