Manuscript proposals: info@editurauniversitara.ro / 0745 204 115 //// Tracking orders Individuals / Sales:0745 200 718 / 0745 200 357 Orders Legal entities: 0721 722 783
EN 
Romana
6359.png "Editura Universitara")
Interrogative structures in the written didactic discourse - Constantin-Georgel Stoica
![Interrogative structures in the written didactic discourse - Constantin-Georgel Stoica [1]](https://gomagcdn.ro/domains/editurauniversitara.ro/files/product/original/structuri-interogative-in-discursul-didactic-scris-586642.jpg "Interrogative structures in the written didactic discourse - Constantin-Georgel Stoica [1]")
Publisher: Editura Universitara
Author: Constantin-Georgel Stoica
Edition: I
Pages: 196
Publisher year: 2023
ISBN: 978-606-28-1602-5
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5682/9786062816025
Product Code:
9786062816025
Do you need help?
0745 200 718
/
0745 200 357
- Download (1)
- Authors
- Content
- More details
- Reviews (0)
-
Interrogative structures in the written didactic discourse
Download
CONSTANTIN-GEORGEL STOICA, born in Parscov, Buzau county, completed the first eight years of studies in the "Vasile Voiculescu" Secondary School in his hometown and the four years of high school in the humanities class, majoring in Philology, at the Theoretical High School Radu Vladescu" Patarlagele. Then follow the courses of the Faculty of Theology and Letters, the "Letters" section and a Master's program entitled "Romanian language in European context". In parallel, he also specialized in the IT field. He followed a doctoral internship in Philology at the "Ovidius" University of Constanta, with a thesis on the peculiarities of didactic discourse. Currently, he is a teacher of Romanian language and literature in high school.
He has published numerous articles and studies in his two favorite fields - applied linguistics and teaching of the Romanian language and literature. For many years, he has been part of the organizing team of the International Colloquium "Latinity, Romanity, Romanity", being also an editor in the editorial boards of the periodicals Studii de didactica a la lingua si literatura and Cultura si Comunicare, published by the Bucharest University Press. He is the editorial secretary of the academic journal Diversite et Identite en Europe, in its twentieth year of existence and included in numerous International Databases.
He was part of the teams of several European interdisciplinary research projects.
He has published numerous articles and studies in his two favorite fields - applied linguistics and teaching of the Romanian language and literature. For many years, he has been part of the organizing team of the International Colloquium "Latinity, Romanity, Romanity", being also an editor in the editorial boards of the periodicals Studii de didactica a la lingua si literatura and Cultura si Comunicare, published by the Bucharest University Press. He is the editorial secretary of the academic journal Diversite et Identite en Europe, in its twentieth year of existence and included in numerous International Databases.
He was part of the teams of several European interdisciplinary research projects.
FOREWORD (P. Gh. Barlea) / 9
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS / 15
INTRODUCTION / 19
1.1. Motivation / 19
1.2. Research stage / 24
1.3. Work methods / 30
1.3.1. Discourse analysis from the perspective of speech acts / 31
1.3.2. Logico-semantic analysis of the interrogation / 32
1.3.3. Pragmatic analysis of the written didactic discourse / 33
1.4. Corpus of texts / 35
1.5. Terminological specifications / 39
CHAPTER I
LOGICAL-SEMANTIC BASE OF QUESTIONS / 42
1.1. Erotica - logic of questions / 42
1.2. The logical structure of the questions / 46
1.2.1. A typology of questions from the perspective of logic / 46
1.2.1.1. Decision questions / 47
1.2.1.2. Complementary questions / 48
1.2.1.3. Other types of questions / 50
1.2.2. The answers to the questions asked correctly / 52
1.2.2.1. Direct and indirect answers / 52
1.2.2.2. Complete and partial answers / 53
1.2.2.3. Immediate and mediated answers / 53
1.2.2.4. Exhaustive and non-exhaustive answers / 54
1.3. The correct formulation of the questions. A logical-semantic perspective / 54
1.3.1. Four logical conditions necessary for a correct interrogation / 54
1.3.2. Erotetic paralogisms / 55
1.3.3. Erotic semiotics and the conditions for correct questioning / 57
1.3.3.1. Some terminological clarifications / 58
1.3.3.2. Syntactically incorrect questions / 60
1.3.3.3. Semantically incorrect questions and semantically indeterminate questions / 62
1.3.3.4. Pragmatically incorrect questions / 66
CHAPTER II
THE LINGUISTIC PERSPECTIVE IN THE ANALYSIS OF THE INTERROGATION / 69
2.1. Linguistic structure of questions / 69
2.1.1. Syntagmatic level / 70
2.1.2. The paradigmatic level / 73
2.1.3. The semantic level / 78
2.1.4. The pragmatic level / 79
2.2. Total interrogative statements (EIT) / 82
2.2.1. Defining features of EIT / 82
2.2.2. Theoretical aspects / 84
2.2.3. Brief statistical considerations / 86
2.2.4. Total interrogatives with an emphatic peak on the syntactic predication / 87
2.2.4.1. Total interrogative structures in the sentence / 87
2.2.4.2. Total interrogative structures in the phrase / 88
2.2.4.3. Total interrogatives with modulating epistemic verb / 92
2.2.5. Total interrogative structures with emphatic peak on other components of the statement / 96
2.2.6. Particular cases of EIT structures/ 97
2.2.6.1. Negative interrogative structures / 97
2.2.6.2. EIT with assumptions of truth / 98
2.2.6.3. Double and multiple queries / 99
2.2.6.4. Associations of interrogative structures (EIT+EIP, etc.) / 99
2.2.6.5. Associations of interrogative structures with assertive structures / 99
2.2.6.6. The transposition of EIT in indirect speech / 100
2.2.7. Conclusions regarding the total interrogative statements / 100
2.3. Partial interrogative statements (EIP) / 100
2.3.1. Defining features of EIP / 100
2.3.2. Statistical considerations / 101
2.3.3. The constituent identification variables in the EIP / 104 formulation
2.3.3.1. Pronouns and pronominal adjectives / 104
2.3.3.1.1. The interrogative pronoun and adjective which? / 105
2.3.3.1.2. The interrogative pronoun and adjective what? / 108
2.3.3.1.3. Other interrogative pronouns and adjectives / 111
2.3.3.2. Adverbs and adverbial phrases / 113
2.3.4. Particular cases of EIP / 114
2.3.4.1. EIP with non-prototypical theming / 114
2.3.4.2. Associations of two or more partial interrogatives / 115
2.3.4.3. Associations of different interrogative structures / 116
2.3.4.4. Elliptical EIP structures / 116
2.3.5. EIP structures with assertive/imperative/directive values / 117
2.3.6. EIP with non-interrogative structure / 117
2.3.7. Conclusions regarding partial interrogative statements / 118
2.4. Alternative interrogative statements (EIA) / 118
2.4.1. Defining features of EIA / 118
2.4.2. About the logic of disjunction in alternative interrogation / 127
2.4.3. Statistical considerations / 132
2.4.4. Analysis of alternative interrogative statements / 133
2.4.4.1. Disjunction at the level of the phrase / 134
2.4.4.2. Disjunction at the level of the sentence / 142
2.4.4.3. EIA and other interrogative structures - association and transfer / 150
2.4.5. Conclusions regarding alternative interrogative statements / 152
CHAPTER III
INTERROGATION IN THE DIDACTIC DISCOURSE / 155
3.1. Preliminary considerations / 155
3.2. Didactic and erotic communication / 159
3.2.1. The written didactic discourse and the concept of ʽcommunicationʼ / 159
3.2.2. Definition of communication / 161
3.2.3. Interpretations of the concept of ʽcommunication ʼ/ 162
3.2.4. The functions of the written didactic discourse / 163
3.3. Bloom's taxonomy and interrogative structures in written didactic discourse / 164
3.3.1. Preliminaries / 164
3.3.2. From psychology to linguistics in Bloom's taxonomy / 165
3.3.3. The premises of a case study / 167
3.3.3.1. Level of "synthesis" / 168
3.3.3.2. Level of "evaluation" / 169
3.3.3.3. Level of "understanding" / 169
3.3.3.4. "Application" level / 170
3.3.3.5. "Knowledge" level / 172
3.3.4. Bloom's cognitive levels and interrogative occurrences from the textbook of the "Art" publishing house for the twelfth grade (Case Study 1) / 172
3.4. Interrogative structures and formal evaluations (Case Study 2) / 176
3.4.1. Premise of the case study / 176
3.4.2. A pragmatic analysis of evaluation / 177
3.5. Conclusions regarding the discursive-cognitive aspect of the interrogations / 183
GENERAL CONCLUSIONS / 184
BIBLIOGRAPHY / 189
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS / 15
INTRODUCTION / 19
1.1. Motivation / 19
1.2. Research stage / 24
1.3. Work methods / 30
1.3.1. Discourse analysis from the perspective of speech acts / 31
1.3.2. Logico-semantic analysis of the interrogation / 32
1.3.3. Pragmatic analysis of the written didactic discourse / 33
1.4. Corpus of texts / 35
1.5. Terminological specifications / 39
CHAPTER I
LOGICAL-SEMANTIC BASE OF QUESTIONS / 42
1.1. Erotica - logic of questions / 42
1.2. The logical structure of the questions / 46
1.2.1. A typology of questions from the perspective of logic / 46
1.2.1.1. Decision questions / 47
1.2.1.2. Complementary questions / 48
1.2.1.3. Other types of questions / 50
1.2.2. The answers to the questions asked correctly / 52
1.2.2.1. Direct and indirect answers / 52
1.2.2.2. Complete and partial answers / 53
1.2.2.3. Immediate and mediated answers / 53
1.2.2.4. Exhaustive and non-exhaustive answers / 54
1.3. The correct formulation of the questions. A logical-semantic perspective / 54
1.3.1. Four logical conditions necessary for a correct interrogation / 54
1.3.2. Erotetic paralogisms / 55
1.3.3. Erotic semiotics and the conditions for correct questioning / 57
1.3.3.1. Some terminological clarifications / 58
1.3.3.2. Syntactically incorrect questions / 60
1.3.3.3. Semantically incorrect questions and semantically indeterminate questions / 62
1.3.3.4. Pragmatically incorrect questions / 66
CHAPTER II
THE LINGUISTIC PERSPECTIVE IN THE ANALYSIS OF THE INTERROGATION / 69
2.1. Linguistic structure of questions / 69
2.1.1. Syntagmatic level / 70
2.1.2. The paradigmatic level / 73
2.1.3. The semantic level / 78
2.1.4. The pragmatic level / 79
2.2. Total interrogative statements (EIT) / 82
2.2.1. Defining features of EIT / 82
2.2.2. Theoretical aspects / 84
2.2.3. Brief statistical considerations / 86
2.2.4. Total interrogatives with an emphatic peak on the syntactic predication / 87
2.2.4.1. Total interrogative structures in the sentence / 87
2.2.4.2. Total interrogative structures in the phrase / 88
2.2.4.3. Total interrogatives with modulating epistemic verb / 92
2.2.5. Total interrogative structures with emphatic peak on other components of the statement / 96
2.2.6. Particular cases of EIT structures/ 97
2.2.6.1. Negative interrogative structures / 97
2.2.6.2. EIT with assumptions of truth / 98
2.2.6.3. Double and multiple queries / 99
2.2.6.4. Associations of interrogative structures (EIT+EIP, etc.) / 99
2.2.6.5. Associations of interrogative structures with assertive structures / 99
2.2.6.6. The transposition of EIT in indirect speech / 100
2.2.7. Conclusions regarding the total interrogative statements / 100
2.3. Partial interrogative statements (EIP) / 100
2.3.1. Defining features of EIP / 100
2.3.2. Statistical considerations / 101
2.3.3. The constituent identification variables in the EIP / 104 formulation
2.3.3.1. Pronouns and pronominal adjectives / 104
2.3.3.1.1. The interrogative pronoun and adjective which? / 105
2.3.3.1.2. The interrogative pronoun and adjective what? / 108
2.3.3.1.3. Other interrogative pronouns and adjectives / 111
2.3.3.2. Adverbs and adverbial phrases / 113
2.3.4. Particular cases of EIP / 114
2.3.4.1. EIP with non-prototypical theming / 114
2.3.4.2. Associations of two or more partial interrogatives / 115
2.3.4.3. Associations of different interrogative structures / 116
2.3.4.4. Elliptical EIP structures / 116
2.3.5. EIP structures with assertive/imperative/directive values / 117
2.3.6. EIP with non-interrogative structure / 117
2.3.7. Conclusions regarding partial interrogative statements / 118
2.4. Alternative interrogative statements (EIA) / 118
2.4.1. Defining features of EIA / 118
2.4.2. About the logic of disjunction in alternative interrogation / 127
2.4.3. Statistical considerations / 132
2.4.4. Analysis of alternative interrogative statements / 133
2.4.4.1. Disjunction at the level of the phrase / 134
2.4.4.2. Disjunction at the level of the sentence / 142
2.4.4.3. EIA and other interrogative structures - association and transfer / 150
2.4.5. Conclusions regarding alternative interrogative statements / 152
CHAPTER III
INTERROGATION IN THE DIDACTIC DISCOURSE / 155
3.1. Preliminary considerations / 155
3.2. Didactic and erotic communication / 159
3.2.1. The written didactic discourse and the concept of ʽcommunicationʼ / 159
3.2.2. Definition of communication / 161
3.2.3. Interpretations of the concept of ʽcommunication ʼ/ 162
3.2.4. The functions of the written didactic discourse / 163
3.3. Bloom's taxonomy and interrogative structures in written didactic discourse / 164
3.3.1. Preliminaries / 164
3.3.2. From psychology to linguistics in Bloom's taxonomy / 165
3.3.3. The premises of a case study / 167
3.3.3.1. Level of "synthesis" / 168
3.3.3.2. Level of "evaluation" / 169
3.3.3.3. Level of "understanding" / 169
3.3.3.4. "Application" level / 170
3.3.3.5. "Knowledge" level / 172
3.3.4. Bloom's cognitive levels and interrogative occurrences from the textbook of the "Art" publishing house for the twelfth grade (Case Study 1) / 172
3.4. Interrogative structures and formal evaluations (Case Study 2) / 176
3.4.1. Premise of the case study / 176
3.4.2. A pragmatic analysis of evaluation / 177
3.5. Conclusions regarding the discursive-cognitive aspect of the interrogations / 183
GENERAL CONCLUSIONS / 184
BIBLIOGRAPHY / 189
The work presented by Constantin Georgel Stoica has a declared practical purpose. The author aims to sensitize the authors of written didactic texts, i.e. the authors of school textbooks, regarding the optimization of the formulation of questions in this type of speech. The premise from which it starts is that there is a very large formative potential in binary structured speech acts in the "question-answer" exchange, and the observation it makes, right from the beginning of its approach, is that questions are formulated in the respective texts few and with big logical-syntactic organization problems. So the other observation on which the proposed research is based - namely, that young people do not know how to ask and do not seem to want to ask about many things - has an explanation: since the adults who are in charge of their training they have the same defects, it is no wonder that the students show them with all serenity.
Practically, the author of the work discussed here is convinced that some more correctly and interestingly formulated interrogative structures would stimulate the critical thinking of the receivers, would lead to more courageous opinions and attitudes in social life, would favor self-reflexivity and interpersonal communication, in general. The interrogative structures are an integral part, the author tells us, of what we call "language cultivation", in all aspects, a process that is closely related to the general formation of the human personality.
However, in order to do this operation in full knowledge of the cause, two series of facts must be known very well:
The particularities of interrogative structures, from a logical-semantic, morpho-syntactic and phonetic perspective; these particularities determine the type of questions and their selection according to the training goal pursued.
The mechanisms for the formation of critical thinking, by capitalizing on language-thinking relationships, and from here, the strategies that are required in the formulation of the requirements-questions in didactic texts.
The author meticulously prepares the ground for the analyzes that can give a clear picture of these structures, writing a theoretical chapter on the logical-semantic basis of interrogations, then one on the grammatical and stylistic-pragmatic implications of "interrogation" type statements. The information provided by a rich, diversified, updated bibliography is synthesized in them.
In the first sequence listed here, detailed references are made to what the author calls the "problem research directions" of the interrogations, seen as "types of judgment", since the time of Eugeniu Sperantia, in the first decades of the last century: "the research analytics, adequacy research, exhaustiveness research and implication research". Applying this grid, we arrive at "decision questions and supplementary questions, depending on their possible judgments and answers". Then another grid is applied, complementary, proposed, more recently, by Petre Botezatu, which results in a new series of specific statements: "single alternative questions, complete list questions, non-exclusive questions", as well as two types considered "special ": the suggestive question and the rhetorical question. From other logicians, "four doublets of possible answers are taken: direct/indirect; complete/partial; immediate/mediated; exhaustive/non-exhaustive".
In the same chapter, the author capitalizes on the older acquisitions about erotic semiotics, which include "erotic syntax, erotic semantics and erotic pragmatics", very useful for the analysis of interrogative statements.
By combining this information with the sources that focus on the strictly linguistic aspects of the interrogations, from the next chapter, we arrive at new classifications. It is about "syntactically incorrect questions", i.e. about "statements with an interrogative syntactic structure, but which are not questions or statements without an interrogative syntactic structure, but which, however, function as questions". When he gets to stripping the corpus of work, the author will find out how frequent these are in the texts with an official formative character, unfortunately. The second subtype in this large category is not too rare either. It is about "semantically correct or incorrect questions" or "semantically (un)determined questions". Practically, it is shown in the paper, we are talking about questions that provide the answer directly or, conversely, about questions that can only be answered with "Yes" or "No", or, even worse, about questions that cannot be answered a logical answer. Only after this theoretical "infrastructure" is completed, do the actual analyses.
The corpus of texts on which these analytical approaches are carried out is very rich, the author selecting questions formulated by the authors of Romanian language and literature textbooks from various levels of the high school cycle, published by four publishing houses. There are a total of about twenty large texts, representative of the written didactic discourse, from which more than 700 interrogative structures are extracted. Of course, only some of these are cited, since the exploitation of all the examples that would illustrate a certain (sub)type of question would needlessly occupy a very large space in the economy of the paper. Those retained for their potential as "samples" of adequacy or inadequacy to the rigors of the didactic discourse offer a telling picture of the level at which didactic auxiliaries for the formal system of cultivation of the Romanian language and literature are located.
The principles, methods and work tools that are used are related to these logical-semantic and morpho-syntactic peculiarities of the studied examples. First of all, the method of descriptive grammar is required, with elements of structuralism and "grammar of meaning", because the questions represent a certain act of thinking reflected in specific speech acts.
Taking the analysis models proposed by Andra Serbanescu, an authority in the field, the author brings into discussion the "three typologies of pragmatic definitions of interrogation", proposed in the monograph of the linguist from Bucharest: "the question as a behavioral pattern - the "information search" type; the question as a speech act - an utterance that occupies a key position in the dialogue discourse; the question as an enunciative modality - a non-declarative statement constructed by formally modifying a declarative statement".
Pragmalinguistics is often called upon, because "both the question and the answer are subject to some constraints, called by the same Andra Serbanescu "pragmatic conditions of interrogatives: the existence of the need for information, the existence of information, the desire to make this information known" .
Finally, the utterances selected for this research are subject to evaluations carried out from the perspective of discourse analysis and from the perspective of speech acts. For the quantitative analysis, the principles of linguistic statistics are applied.
The central chapter, entitled "Linguistic perspective in the analysis of interrogation", continues the detailing of the fundamental types, resulting from the combination of the above-mentioned classification criteria. Practically, three of the respective sub-chapters are dedicated to these analyses, operated according to the fundamental criterion of the main types of questions - total, partial and alternative.
The author observes that the texts that are the object of his investigations are interwoven with questions from the category of "partial interrogative statements", marked by the use of "words with interrogative value" (pronouns and interrogative adjectives, adverbs and interrogative adverbial phrases) as well as a descending intonational contour , in principle. Their percentage is 70.33% of the total examples extracted, of which 37.67% are introduced by the pronoun or adjective "ce?", 29.67% - by "which?", with their casual or locutionary forms, the rest being completed by "who?" or by the adverbs "when?", "where?", "how?", "how much?" And so on
On the following places are the total questions (with an emphatic emphasis on the syntactic predication, in the majority) and those called "alternatives", because they require a choice answer of the "A or B" type.
In all these three major divisions, special situations are analyzed: questions that contain in their structure a presumption of truth, variants in the sentence or in the phrase, multiple disjunctions, various forms of transfers and mixes of statements, false interrogations, interrogations with non-interrogative syntax, transfers in indirect speech s.a.
A final chapter of the work aims at the didactic perspective of the interrogation problem, as a logical and linguistic structure. After a somewhat superfluous presentation of the concepts of "communication", "discourse (didactic)", the results obtained through two case studies, based on the principles of B.S. Bloom's taxonomy, are presented.
The conclusions of this close analytical approach pivot around the idea of the biunivocal relationship "language/thinking", with an emphasis on the possibilities of formative action targeting each of its components.
Approaching a type of speech not very well accepted in the philological environment, although it has its particularities and its importance in verbal communication, comparable to any other type of speech, the author puts in a new light the theoretical acquisitions regarding the nature of interrogative utterances.
The bibliographical sources, quite recent and varied, are processed carefully and honestly, and the personal analyses, even if some grammatical solutions can still be discussed, are made with the best intentions and with the visible involvement of a young philologist, despite didacticism parade. The writing is neat, correct, the demonstrations are convincing and based on a very rich sample material.
All this gives an indisputable applied value to the book signed by Constantin Georgel Stoica.
Univ. Prof. dr. emeritus Petre Gheorghe Barlea
Practically, the author of the work discussed here is convinced that some more correctly and interestingly formulated interrogative structures would stimulate the critical thinking of the receivers, would lead to more courageous opinions and attitudes in social life, would favor self-reflexivity and interpersonal communication, in general. The interrogative structures are an integral part, the author tells us, of what we call "language cultivation", in all aspects, a process that is closely related to the general formation of the human personality.
However, in order to do this operation in full knowledge of the cause, two series of facts must be known very well:
The particularities of interrogative structures, from a logical-semantic, morpho-syntactic and phonetic perspective; these particularities determine the type of questions and their selection according to the training goal pursued.
The mechanisms for the formation of critical thinking, by capitalizing on language-thinking relationships, and from here, the strategies that are required in the formulation of the requirements-questions in didactic texts.
The author meticulously prepares the ground for the analyzes that can give a clear picture of these structures, writing a theoretical chapter on the logical-semantic basis of interrogations, then one on the grammatical and stylistic-pragmatic implications of "interrogation" type statements. The information provided by a rich, diversified, updated bibliography is synthesized in them.
In the first sequence listed here, detailed references are made to what the author calls the "problem research directions" of the interrogations, seen as "types of judgment", since the time of Eugeniu Sperantia, in the first decades of the last century: "the research analytics, adequacy research, exhaustiveness research and implication research". Applying this grid, we arrive at "decision questions and supplementary questions, depending on their possible judgments and answers". Then another grid is applied, complementary, proposed, more recently, by Petre Botezatu, which results in a new series of specific statements: "single alternative questions, complete list questions, non-exclusive questions", as well as two types considered "special ": the suggestive question and the rhetorical question. From other logicians, "four doublets of possible answers are taken: direct/indirect; complete/partial; immediate/mediated; exhaustive/non-exhaustive".
In the same chapter, the author capitalizes on the older acquisitions about erotic semiotics, which include "erotic syntax, erotic semantics and erotic pragmatics", very useful for the analysis of interrogative statements.
By combining this information with the sources that focus on the strictly linguistic aspects of the interrogations, from the next chapter, we arrive at new classifications. It is about "syntactically incorrect questions", i.e. about "statements with an interrogative syntactic structure, but which are not questions or statements without an interrogative syntactic structure, but which, however, function as questions". When he gets to stripping the corpus of work, the author will find out how frequent these are in the texts with an official formative character, unfortunately. The second subtype in this large category is not too rare either. It is about "semantically correct or incorrect questions" or "semantically (un)determined questions". Practically, it is shown in the paper, we are talking about questions that provide the answer directly or, conversely, about questions that can only be answered with "Yes" or "No", or, even worse, about questions that cannot be answered a logical answer. Only after this theoretical "infrastructure" is completed, do the actual analyses.
The corpus of texts on which these analytical approaches are carried out is very rich, the author selecting questions formulated by the authors of Romanian language and literature textbooks from various levels of the high school cycle, published by four publishing houses. There are a total of about twenty large texts, representative of the written didactic discourse, from which more than 700 interrogative structures are extracted. Of course, only some of these are cited, since the exploitation of all the examples that would illustrate a certain (sub)type of question would needlessly occupy a very large space in the economy of the paper. Those retained for their potential as "samples" of adequacy or inadequacy to the rigors of the didactic discourse offer a telling picture of the level at which didactic auxiliaries for the formal system of cultivation of the Romanian language and literature are located.
The principles, methods and work tools that are used are related to these logical-semantic and morpho-syntactic peculiarities of the studied examples. First of all, the method of descriptive grammar is required, with elements of structuralism and "grammar of meaning", because the questions represent a certain act of thinking reflected in specific speech acts.
Taking the analysis models proposed by Andra Serbanescu, an authority in the field, the author brings into discussion the "three typologies of pragmatic definitions of interrogation", proposed in the monograph of the linguist from Bucharest: "the question as a behavioral pattern - the "information search" type; the question as a speech act - an utterance that occupies a key position in the dialogue discourse; the question as an enunciative modality - a non-declarative statement constructed by formally modifying a declarative statement".
Pragmalinguistics is often called upon, because "both the question and the answer are subject to some constraints, called by the same Andra Serbanescu "pragmatic conditions of interrogatives: the existence of the need for information, the existence of information, the desire to make this information known" .
Finally, the utterances selected for this research are subject to evaluations carried out from the perspective of discourse analysis and from the perspective of speech acts. For the quantitative analysis, the principles of linguistic statistics are applied.
The central chapter, entitled "Linguistic perspective in the analysis of interrogation", continues the detailing of the fundamental types, resulting from the combination of the above-mentioned classification criteria. Practically, three of the respective sub-chapters are dedicated to these analyses, operated according to the fundamental criterion of the main types of questions - total, partial and alternative.
The author observes that the texts that are the object of his investigations are interwoven with questions from the category of "partial interrogative statements", marked by the use of "words with interrogative value" (pronouns and interrogative adjectives, adverbs and interrogative adverbial phrases) as well as a descending intonational contour , in principle. Their percentage is 70.33% of the total examples extracted, of which 37.67% are introduced by the pronoun or adjective "ce?", 29.67% - by "which?", with their casual or locutionary forms, the rest being completed by "who?" or by the adverbs "when?", "where?", "how?", "how much?" And so on
On the following places are the total questions (with an emphatic emphasis on the syntactic predication, in the majority) and those called "alternatives", because they require a choice answer of the "A or B" type.
In all these three major divisions, special situations are analyzed: questions that contain in their structure a presumption of truth, variants in the sentence or in the phrase, multiple disjunctions, various forms of transfers and mixes of statements, false interrogations, interrogations with non-interrogative syntax, transfers in indirect speech s.a.
A final chapter of the work aims at the didactic perspective of the interrogation problem, as a logical and linguistic structure. After a somewhat superfluous presentation of the concepts of "communication", "discourse (didactic)", the results obtained through two case studies, based on the principles of B.S. Bloom's taxonomy, are presented.
The conclusions of this close analytical approach pivot around the idea of the biunivocal relationship "language/thinking", with an emphasis on the possibilities of formative action targeting each of its components.
Approaching a type of speech not very well accepted in the philological environment, although it has its particularities and its importance in verbal communication, comparable to any other type of speech, the author puts in a new light the theoretical acquisitions regarding the nature of interrogative utterances.
The bibliographical sources, quite recent and varied, are processed carefully and honestly, and the personal analyses, even if some grammatical solutions can still be discussed, are made with the best intentions and with the visible involvement of a young philologist, despite didacticism parade. The writing is neat, correct, the demonstrations are convincing and based on a very rich sample material.
All this gives an indisputable applied value to the book signed by Constantin Georgel Stoica.
Univ. Prof. dr. emeritus Petre Gheorghe Barlea
If you want to express your opinion about this product you can add a review.
write a review
Similar products
Ancient Greek. Syntax Cases. New Theorizing
Correspondence Commercial - commercial correspondence in English
French without a teacher + 2 audio CDs - Gaelle Graham
English without a teacher - Dan Dutescu
Business at work: Company Communication Patterns through a linguistic Lens
Italian. Intensive course, 3rd edition - Otilia Doroteea Borcia
Latin Course for Students of Theology Faculties - Florentina Nicolae
Chemistry English in Context. Course Book - Alina Buzarna-Tihenea(Galbeaza)
Customer Support Monday - Friday, between 8.00 - 16.00
0745 200 718 0745 200 357 comenzi@editurauniversitara.ro