Koodinvaihto Madventures-matkailuohjelmassa

Pro gradu tutkielman aiheena on kielensisäinen koodinvaihto suomalaisessa Madventures-matkailuohjelmassa. Tutkielman tavoitteena on selvittää, mitä funktioita koodinvaihdolla on kyseisessä ohjelmassa ja millä tavoin koodinvaihto siinä ilmenee. Aineistona on ohjelman ensimmäinen tuotantokausi, joka on kuvattu vuonna 2002. Tuotantokausi koostuu kymmenestä 45 50 minuuttia pitkästä jaksosta. Tarkasteltavana on ohjelman kahden juontajan, Riku Rantalan ja Tuomas Tunna Milonoffin kieli. Tutkielmassa hyödynnettävät tutkimussuuntaukset ovat sosiolingvistinen variaationtutkimus ja keskustelunanalyysi. Analyysiluvut rakentuvat koodinvaihdon funktioiden mukaan. Luvussa 3 tarkastellaan koodinvaihtoja, jotka viestivät siirtymästä roolista toiseen. Koodinvaihdon funktiona voi tällöin olla aikaisemman, todella tapahtuneen tai sellaisena esitetyn puhetilanteen referointi, kuvitteellisen puhetilanteen esittäminen tai ohjelman juontajan rooliin orientoituminen. Luvussa 4 käsitellään koodinvaihtoa merkkinä siirtymästä näkökulmasta toiseen. Vaihtelevina näkökulmina voivat tällöin olla persoonallinen ja objektiivinen, nykyinen ja mennyt aika tai puhujan ja katsojan näkökulma. Luku 5 on sekaluku, johon on koottu muita aineistossani esiintyviä koodinvaihdon funktioita. Niitä ovat moodinvaihto, vuoron vastaanottajan vaihtuminen, siirtyminen toiminnasta toiseen, edeltävän käskyn vahvistaminen tai sen ilmaiseminen, ettei sanottu asia pidä paikkaansa. Useilla koodinvaihdoilla on samaan aikaan monia eri funktioita. Esimerkiksi kuvitteellisen puhetilanteen referointiin liittyy aina myös moodinvaihto vakavasta humoristiseen. Enemmistö koodinvaihdoista tapahtuu pääkaupunkiseudun puhekielen ja yleiskielen välillä. Jonkin verran koodinvaihtoa tapahtuu myös murteelliseen koodiin tai toiseen kielelliseen tyyliin. Tavallisesti puhujat osoittavat orientoituvansa toiseen koodiin paralingvistisillä piirteillä mutta myös muilla ei-kielellisillä keinoilla kuten ilmeillä ja eleillä. Paralingvististen piirteiden esiintyminen vaihtelee jossain määrin koodinvaihdon funktioiden mukaan. Silloin kun koodinvaihdon funktiona on referointi tai siirtyminen katsojan näkökulmaan, koodinvaihdon yhteydessä esiintyy usein äänenlaadun muutoksia sekä muusta puheesta poikkeavaa prosodiaa. Muissa funktiossa niitä esiintyy harvemmin. Koodinvaihto ilmenee toisinaan myös lauserakenteessa, erityisesti viestiessään näkökulman muutoksesta. Erikoinen piirre tämän tutkielman koodinvaihdoissa on se, ettei koodinvaihto aina koske sanastoa. Vaikka äänne- ja muotopiirteet ovatkin yleiskielisiä, voi koodinvaihtojakson sanasto siitä huolimatta olla slangipitoista. Runsas slangisanasto onkin Madventuresin kielelle kaikkein ominaisin piirre. Koodinvaihdossa on useimmiten olennaisempaa kontrasti kahden eri kielimuodon välillä kuin se, mihin kielimuotoon koodi vaihtuu. Tällöin koodinvaihdon funktio on sama riippumatta siitä, vaihtuuko koodi pääkaupunkiseudun puhekielestä yleiskieleen vai esimerkiksi murteeseen. Tietyissä funktioissa koodinvaihtojakson kielimuodolla on kuitenkin merkitystä funktion kannalta. Esimerkiksi ohjelman juontajan rooliin siirryttäessä koodi vaihtuu poikkeuksetta pääkaupunkiseudun puhekielestä yleiskieleen. Sen sijaan esimerkiksi referoitaessa kielimuodolla ei ole juuri merkitystä funktion kannalta, vaan referaateissa esiintyy useita eri kielimuotoja. Ohjelman juontajat eivät vaihda koodia samalla tavalla, vaan heidän koodinvaihtotavoissaan on eroja. Riku vaihtaa aineistossa koodia selvästi useammin kuin Tunna. Lisäksi hän käyttää koodinvaihtoa useammissa funktioissa ja hyödyntää koodinvaihdossa useita eri kielimuotoja. Sen sijaan Tunnan koodinvaihdot rajoittuvat lähes yksinomaan pääkaupunkiseudun puhekielen ja yleiskielen välille.

Puheen suuntia luokkahuoneessa : Oppilaat osallistujina yläkoulun suomi toisena kielenä -tunnilla

This study describes how students influence their possibilities of participating in whole-class conversation. The main objective is to investigate the verbal and non-verbal resources used by students to modify the participant roles of the ongoing conversation. The resources studied are attention-getting devices such as hand-raising and address terms, recycling and other forms of collaborative talk, means of reference to persons, such as pronouns, as well as gaze and other embodied resources. The theoretical and methodological framework adopted in this study is that of conversation analysis. The data consist of ten videotaped lessons of Finnish as a second language in three secondary schools (grades 7 9) in southern Finland; the number of students per group varies from five to ten. Finnish has a triple role in the data as the medium of teaching, the target language, and the lingua franca used by the participants. The findings show that the multi-party context of the classroom conversation is both a disadvantage and an affordance for student participation. The students possess multiple tools to overcome and deal with the encumbrances posed by the large number of participants. They combine various techniques in order to actively compete for public turns, and they monitor the ongoing conversation carefully to adjust their participation to the activities of other participants. Sometimes the whole-class conversation splits into two separate conversations, but participants usually orient to the overlapping nature of the talk and tend to bring the conversations together rapidly. On the other hand, students skilfully make use of other participants and their talk to increase and diversify their own possibilities to participate. For example, they recycle elements of each other s turns or refer to the currently speaking student in order to gain access to the conversation. Students interact with each other even during the public whole-class conversation. Students orient to one another often even when talking to the teacher, but they also address talk directly to one another, as part of the public conversation. In this way students increase each other s possibilities of participation. The interaction is constantly multi-layered: in addition to the pedagogic agenda, the students orient to social goals, for example, by teasing each other and putting on humorous performances for their peer audience. The student student participation arises spontaneously from a genuine need to communicate and thus represents authentic language use: by talking to each other, often playfully, the students appropriate Finnish vocabulary, grammar, and expressions. In this way the structure of the interaction reflects the particular nature of Finnish as a second language lessons: all talk serves the pedagogic goal of enabling students to communicate in the target language.

Finlandismer och språkvård från 1800-talet till i dag

The aim of the study is to investigate the use of finlandisms in an historical perspective, how they have been viewed from the mid-19th century to this day, and the effect of language planning on their use. A finlandism is a word, a phrase, or a structure that is used only in the Swedish varieties used in Finland (i.e. in Finland Swedish), or used in these varieties in a different meaning than in the Swedish used in Sweden. Various aspects of Finland-Swedish language planning are discussed in relation to language planning generally; in addition, the relation of Finland Swedish to Standard Swedish and standard regional varieties is discussed, and various types of finlandisms are analysed in detail. A comprehensive picture is provided of the emergence and evolution of the ideology of language planning from the mid-19th century up until today. A theoretical model of corpus planning is presented and its effect on linguistic praxis described. One result of the study is that the belief among Finland-Swedish language planners that the Swedish language in Finland must not be allowed to become distanced from Standard Swedish, has been widely adopted by the average Finland Swede, particularly during the interwar period, following the publication of Hugo Bergroth s work Finlandssvenska in 1917. Criticism of this language-planning ideology started to appear in the 1950s, and intensified in the 1970s. However, language planning and the basis for this conception of language continue to enjoy strong support among Swedish-speaking Finns. I show that the editing of Finnish literary texts written in Swedish has often been somewhat amateurish and the results not always linguistically appropriate, and that Swedish publishers have in fact adopted a rather liberal attitude towards finlandisms. My conclusion is that language planning has achieved rather modest results in its resistance to finlandisms. Most of the finlandisms used in 1915 were still in use in 2005. Finlandisms occur among speakers of all ages, and even among academically educated people despite their more elevated style. The most common finlandisms were used by informants of all ages. The ones that are firmly rooted are the most established, in other words those that are stylistically neutral, seemingly genuinely Swedish, but which are nevertheless strongly supported by Finnish, and display a shift in meaning as compared with Standard Swedish.

Annales Societatis zoologicae-botanicae Fennicae Vanamo tom. 6

Tiivistelmien kieli suomi.

Annales Societatis zoologicae-botanicae Fennicae Vanamo tom. 8

Tiivistelmien kieli suomi.

Annales Societatis zoologicae-botanicae Fennicae Vanamo tom. 10

Tiivistelmien kieli suomi.

Annales societatis zoologicae-botanicae Fennicae Vanamo tom. 11

Tiivistelmien kieli suomi.

Annales Societatis zoologicae-botanicae Fennicae Vanamo tom. 13

Tiivistelmien kieli saksa.

Annales Societatis zoologicae-botanicae Fennicae Vanamo tom. 15 Beiheft

Tiivistelmän kieli suomi.

Dokumentation och beskrivning som språkplanering : perspektiv från arbete med tre tecknade minoritetsspråk

Language Documentation and Description as Language Planning Working with Three Signed Minority Languages Sign languages are minority languages that typically have a low status in society. Language planning has traditionally been controlled from outside the sign-language community. Even though signed languages lack a written form, dictionaries have played an important role in language description and as tools in foreign language learning. The background to the present study on sign language documentation and description as language planning is empirical research in three dictionary projects in Finland-Swedish Sign Language, Albanian Sign Language, and Kosovar Sign Language. The study consists of an introductory article and five detailed studies which address language planning from different perspectives. The theoretical basis of the study is sociocultural linguistics. The research methods used were participant observation, interviews, focus group discussions, and document analysis. The primary research questions are the following: (1) What is the role of dictionary and lexicographic work in language planning, in research on undocumented signed language, and in relation to the language community as such? (2) What factors are particular challenges in the documentation of a sign language and should therefore be given special attention during lexicographic work? (3) Is a conventional dictionary a valid tool for describing an undocumented sign language? The results indicate that lexicographic work has a central part to play in language documentation, both as part of basic research on undocumented sign languages and for status planning. Existing dictionary work has contributed new knowledge about the languages and the language communities. The lexicographic work adds to the linguistic advocacy work done by the community itself with the aim of vitalizing the language, empowering the community, receiving governmental recognition for the language, and improving the linguistic (human) rights of the language users. The history of signed languages as low status languages has consequences for language planning and lexicography. One challenge that the study discusses is the relationship between the sign-language community and the hearing sign linguist. In order to make it possible for the community itself to take the lead in a language planning process, raising linguistic awareness within the community is crucial. The results give rise to questions of whether lexicographic work is of more importance for status planning than for corpus planning. A conventional dictionary as a tool for describing an undocumented sign language is criticised. The study discusses differences between signed and spoken/written languages that are challenging for lexicographic presentations. Alternative electronic lexicographic approaches including both lexicon and grammar are also discussed. Keywords: sign language, Finland-Swedish Sign Language, Albanian Sign Language, Kosovar Sign Language, language documentation and description, language planning, lexicography