Affiliation:
1. Universität Hamburg Institut für Germanistik Überseering 35 Hamburg Deutschland
2. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University Institut für Linguistik und Interkulturelle Kommunikation ul. Trubetskaja 8, Geb. 2 Moskau Russland
Abstract
Abstract
This paper examines the strategies doctors use to disambiguate the referential scope of the personal pronoun we. In clinical practice, doctors have to manage the different roles in which they can interact with the patients, – as individuals, as representatives of their clinic or their clinical department or as members of the scientific community of medical experts. These different roles also combine with different degrees of agentivity and responsibility. Patients therefore have to decode whether they are included into the we or not. Based on a corpus of more than 90 therapy planning talks recorded at German and Russian oncological clinical departments, our empirical study analyzes which strategies doctors employ to locally clarify the range of we, e. g., by adding a numeral (we two) or a locative phrase (we in this clinic) in order to ensure mutual understanding.
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Developmental and Educational Psychology,Language and Linguistics
Reference47 articles.
1. Ahrenholz, Bernt (2007): Verweise mit Demonstrativa im gesprochenen Deutsch. Grammatik, Zweitspracherwerb und Deutsch als Fremdsprache (Linguistik – Impulse & Tendenzen Bd. 17). Berlin, New York: De Gruyter.
2. Akaeva, Eleonora Vyacheslavovna (2007): Kommunikativnye strategii professional’nogo meditsinskogo diskursa. Unveröff. Diss., Universität Omsk.
3. Apresyan, Yuriy Derenikovich (1995): Izbrannye trudy. Tom II. Integral’noe opisanie yazyka i sistemnaya leksikografiya. Moskva: Shkola „Yazyki russkoy kul’tury“.
4. Arminen, Ilkka (2005): Institutional Interaction. Studies of Talk at Work. Aldershot: Ashgate.
5. Auer, Peter/Stukenbrock, Anja (2018): When ‚you‘ means ‚I‘: The German 2nd Ps. Sg. pronoun du between genericity and subjectivity. In: Open Linguistics 4, 280–309.