Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Cravin’ that straight talk: the latent affectivemeaning of demonstratives
Eric Acton and Christopher PottsStanford Linguistics
Workshop on Computational Social ScienceStanford, January 11, 2013
1 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Affective demonstratives for everyone
Sarah Palin is the star of this show,
“Americans are cravin’ that straight talk.”
but we all have a part to play:
• NPR: Make that phone call right now.
• Sinatra: . . . snatchin’ up all those forget-a-me-nots
• Experience Project: Damn, these Glee kids get it on alot!
2 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Affective demonstratives for everyone
Sarah Palin is the star of this show,
“Americans are cravin’ that straight talk.”
but we all have a part to play:
• NPR: Make that phone call right now.
• Sinatra: . . . snatchin’ up all those forget-a-me-nots
• Experience Project: Damn, these Glee kids get it on alot!
2 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Reactions to Palin and her speech
Palin’s speech is often regarded as emblematic of her broadersocial and political attitudes:
FoxNews.com comments after the 2008 debate• “We feel like she talks like we do.”
• “She talked like real people to real people.”
• “This middle class girl knows you were speaking for her.”
Huffington Post comments after the 2008 debate• “pseudo-folksiness and fundamental dishonesty”
• “illusion of straight-talking”
• “ ‘folksy’ with a wink”
3 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Linguists’ reactions to Palin’s speechUsual focus: coronal pronunciation of -ing (‘g’ droppin’),euphemisms (heck, darn), and dipthongization of [æ].
Purnell et al. (2009)“The register of Palin’s speech has been seen as strikinglyinformal, even during the vice presidential debate.”
Pinker (2008)“pronounced her ‘ens’ more conspicuously in the debate than inthe Couric interviews in part to emphasize that she was one withthe ‘everyday American people, Joe Six-Pack, hockey momsacross the nation.’ ”
Labov (2008)“it’s a political way of reaching out to people and being casual.”
4 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Our focus: Palin’s demonstratives
• And he also wants to erase thoseartificial lines between states
• the American workforce is the greatestin this world
• [Paul Revere] warned the British . . .by ringing those bells
• not having that proof for the Americanpeople
• that kind of anger and dissatisfactionat the fact that Washington far toomany times puts the special interestsahead of their interests
5 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
From the 2008 VP debate
“We should be helping them build schools to compete for thosehearts and minds of the people in the region.”
“. . . but John McCain thought the answer is that tried and trueRepublican response, deregulate, deregulate.”
6 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
From the 2008 VP debate
“We should be helping them build schools to compete for thosehearts and minds of the people in the region.”
“. . . but John McCain thought the answer is that tried and trueRepublican response, deregulate, deregulate.”
6 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
From the 2008 VP debate
“We should be helping them build schools to compete for thosehearts and minds of the people in the region.”
“. . . but John McCain thought the answer is that tried and trueRepublican response, deregulate, deregulate.”
6 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Everyone else
1 NPR: Make that phone call right now.
2 Flight attendant: get those bags under that seat in front of you
3 Yoga instructor: get that right arm up over that head
4 Experience Project: Damn, these Glee kids get it on alot!
5 Experience Project: This Army Wife thing is getting to me . . .
6 Experience Project: . . . to arrange that fateful meeting on thatNovember holiday Friday.
7 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Old Blue Eyes
1956, Capitol RecordsYou and I are just like a couple o’ totsRunnin’ along the meadowPickin’ up lots o’ forget-me-nots
1972, Live at Royal Festival HallYou and I, we are just like a couple o’ totsRunnin’ along the meadowSnatchin’ up all those forget-a-me-nots
8 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Old Blue Eyes
1956, Capitol RecordsYou and I are just like a couple o’ totsRunnin’ along the meadowPickin’ up lots o’ forget-me-nots
1972, Live at Royal Festival HallYou and I, we are just like a couple o’ totsRunnin’ along the meadowSnatchin’ up all those forget-a-me-nots
8 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Affective demonstratives
What is the nature and source of affectivity in demonstratives?
9 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
The basics of demonstratives in English
Spatio-temporal deixis[Pointing to an immediately present object]: “That (chair) is ahideous brown.”
Anaphoric“We bought a chair online, and that chair turned out to be ahideous brown.”
Morphological categories
Singular Plural
Proximal this theseDistal that those
10 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Affective usesRobin Lakoff’s (1974) emotional deixis
Liberman (2008, 2010) calls demonstratives with an emotive flavoraffective demonstratives. He highlights the presumption of “sharedfamiliarity” associated with their use, and he claims that they “drawus in” since their referents are treated “as ‘assumed to be known’to the audience”.
11 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Factors amplifying the affectivityAll demonstratives call on, and hence evoke, rich common ground.
The following factors amplify these effects:
1 The determiner is clearly syntactically optional:
a. Some complex guy, this Dexter Morgan, eh?b. This Henry Kissinger is really something!
2 The determiner is competing with a much less marked form:
a. There was this traveling salesman, and he . . .b. . . . the American workforce is the greatest in this world
3 There is clearly no discourse antecedent in the usual sense:
a. [Revere] warned the British . . . by ringing those bellsb. We should be helping them build schools to compete for
those hearts and minds of the people in the region.
Optionally makes the demonstrative conspicuous, and a missingantecedent requires, and hence evokes, conceptual or emotionalcommon ground.
12 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Factors amplifying the affectivityAll demonstratives call on, and hence evoke, rich common ground.The following factors amplify these effects:
1 The determiner is clearly syntactically optional:
a. Some complex guy, this Dexter Morgan, eh?b. This Henry Kissinger is really something!
2 The determiner is competing with a much less marked form:
a. There was this traveling salesman, and he . . .b. . . . the American workforce is the greatest in this world
3 There is clearly no discourse antecedent in the usual sense:
a. [Revere] warned the British . . . by ringing those bellsb. We should be helping them build schools to compete for
those hearts and minds of the people in the region.
Optionally makes the demonstrative conspicuous, and a missingantecedent requires, and hence evokes, conceptual or emotionalcommon ground.
12 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Factors amplifying the affectivityAll demonstratives call on, and hence evoke, rich common ground.The following factors amplify these effects:
1 The determiner is clearly syntactically optional:
a. Some complex guy, this Dexter Morgan, eh?b. This Henry Kissinger is really something!
2 The determiner is competing with a much less marked form:
a. There was this traveling salesman, and he . . .b. . . . the American workforce is the greatest in this world
3 There is clearly no discourse antecedent in the usual sense:
a. [Revere] warned the British . . . by ringing those bellsb. We should be helping them build schools to compete for
those hearts and minds of the people in the region.
Optionally makes the demonstrative conspicuous, and a missingantecedent requires, and hence evokes, conceptual or emotionalcommon ground.
12 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Factors amplifying the affectivityAll demonstratives call on, and hence evoke, rich common ground.The following factors amplify these effects:
1 The determiner is clearly syntactically optional:
a. Some complex guy, this Dexter Morgan, eh?b. This Henry Kissinger is really something!
2 The determiner is competing with a much less marked form:
a. There was this traveling salesman, and he . . .b. . . . the American workforce is the greatest in this world
3 There is clearly no discourse antecedent in the usual sense:
a. [Revere] warned the British . . . by ringing those bellsb. We should be helping them build schools to compete for
those hearts and minds of the people in the region.
Optionally makes the demonstrative conspicuous, and a missingantecedent requires, and hence evokes, conceptual or emotionalcommon ground.
12 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Factors amplifying the affectivityAll demonstratives call on, and hence evoke, rich common ground.The following factors amplify these effects:
1 The determiner is clearly syntactically optional:
a. Some complex guy, this Dexter Morgan, eh?b. This Henry Kissinger is really something!
2 The determiner is competing with a much less marked form:
a. There was this traveling salesman, and he . . .b. . . . the American workforce is the greatest in this world
3 There is clearly no discourse antecedent in the usual sense:
a. [Revere] warned the British . . . by ringing those bellsb. We should be helping them build schools to compete for
those hearts and minds of the people in the region.
Optionally makes the demonstrative conspicuous, and a missingantecedent requires, and hence evokes, conceptual or emotionalcommon ground.
12 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Factors amplifying the affectivityAll demonstratives call on, and hence evoke, rich common ground.The following factors amplify these effects:
1 The determiner is clearly syntactically optional:
a. Some complex guy, this Dexter Morgan, eh?b. This Henry Kissinger is really something!
2 The determiner is competing with a much less marked form:
a. There was this traveling salesman, and he . . .b. . . . the American workforce is the greatest in this world
3 There is clearly no discourse antecedent in the usual sense:
a. [Revere] warned the British . . . by ringing those bellsb. We should be helping them build schools to compete for
those hearts and minds of the people in the region.
Optionally makes the demonstrative conspicuous, and a missingantecedent requires, and hence evokes, conceptual or emotionalcommon ground.
12 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Social and emotional contribution
• Lakoff (1974): “Establish emotional closeness between thespeaker and and addressee.”
• Bowdle and Ward (1995): “mark the kind being referred to asa relatively subordinate or homogeneous kind located amongthe speaker’s and hearer’s private shared knowledge”
• In sum: not just shared sentiment, but presumed sharedsentiment, fostering solidarity.
13 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Affective demonstratives in other languages
Our account says that affectivity is emergent from the more basic‘pointing’ meanings of demonstratives. We thus expect the effect tobe cross-linguistically robust.
• Ono (1994:133) on Japanese: “the anaphoric a-series canensure a sense of solidarity and mutual reference betweenspeaker and hearer”.
• Potts and Schwarz (2010) and Davis and Potts (2010) furthersupport the Japanese claims and extend them to German.
The situations in which affectivity arises will influence the placeswhere affectivity is strongest.
14 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Corpus evidence
The above claims are impressionistic. Can we quantify them?
15 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Experience Project confessions
[. . . ]
16 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Experience Project confessions
Confession: I bought a case of beer, now I’m watching a South Parkmarathon while getting drunk :P
Reactions: Sorry, hugs: 2; You rock: 3; Teehee: 2, I understand: 3;Wow, just wow: 0
Confession: subconsciously, I constantly narrate my own life in my head. inthird person. in a british accent. Insane? Probably
Reactions: Sorry, hugs: 0; You rock: 7; Teehee: 8; I understand: 0;Wow, just wow: 1
Confession: I really hate being shy . . . I just want to be able to talk to some-one about anything and everything and be myself. . . That’s allI’ve ever wanted.
Reactions: Sorry, hugs: 1; You rock: 1; Teehee: 2; I understand: 10;Wow, just wow: 0;
Table: Sample Experience Project confessions with associated reactions.16 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Experience Project confessions
Figure: EP reaction icons.
16 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Experience Project confessions
Figure: EP reaction icons.
Sorry, hugs sympathyYou rock cheering, supportiveTeehee amused
I understand solitaryWow, just wow shock
Table: Interpreting the icons.
16 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Experience Project confessions
Texts 140,467Words 21,518,718Vocab 143,712
Mean words/text 153.19
(a) The overall size of the corpus.
Category Reactions
Sorry, hugs 91,222 (22%)You rock 80,798 (19%)Teehee 59,597 (14%)
I understand 125,026 (30%)Wow, just wow 60,952 (15%)
Total 417,595
(b) All reactions.
Table: In general, reader reactions are sympathetic and supportive.
16 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Counting and visualizingCat. Count Total PrEP(w |r) PrEP(r |w)
Sorry, hugs 1167 18038374 0.00006 0.26You rock 520 14066087 0.00004 0.15Teehee 300 8167037 0.00004 0.15
I understand 1488 20466744 0.00007 0.29Wow, just wow 473 12550603 0.00004 0.15
disappointed - 1,070 tokens
P(c|w)
H R T U W
0.130.160.17
0.24
0.29
17 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Examples
●
●
●● ●
great 15,268 tokens
P(c
|w)
H R T U W
0.180.19
0.2
0.23
●
●
●
● ●
wonderful 4,700 tokens
P(c
|w)
H R T U W
0.17
0.2
0.27
●
●●
●
●
awesome 2,617 tokens
P(c
|w)
H R T U W
0.110.14
0.18
0.29
●
●
●
●
●
amazed 6,380 tokens
P(c
|w)
H R T U W
0.140.170.190.2
0.29
Figure: Words eliciting predominantly ‘you rock’ reactions.
●
●
●
●
●
bad 29,068 tokens
P(c
|w)
H R T U W
0.160.18
0.230.25 ●
●●
●
●
angry 6,828 tokens
P(c
|w)
H R T U W
0.130.14
0.18
0.260.29 ●
● ●
●
●
depressed 4,001 tokens
P(c
|w)
H R T U W
0.090.1
0.340.36
●
●
●
●
●
survive 988 tokens
P(c
|w)
H R T U W
0.120.15
0.2
0.260.28
Figure: Words eliciting sympathetic reactions.18 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Demonstratives
●
● ●
●
●
Dem NP 164,303 tokens
P(c
|w)
H R T U W
0.19
0.22
Figure: All determiner demonstratives in the EP data.
19 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Demonstrativesthis NP - 106,204 tokens
P(c|w)
H R T U W
0.180.190.22
that NP - 41,250 tokens
P(c|w)
H R T U W
0.190.21
these NP - 16,849 tokens
P(c|w)
H R T U W
0.170.2
0.25
those NP - 12,651 tokens
P(c|w)
H R T U W
0.180.190.22
Figure: All demonstratives with complements in the EP data, by type.
19 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Comparisons across the lexicon
Pr
Frequency
0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24
0500
1000
1500
2000
97.5th per. = 0.222
Dem
onst
rativ
es: 0
.225
no: 0
.233
any:
0.2
32
ever
y: 0
.224
eith
er: 0
.221
all:
0.21
2
anot
her:
0.20
5
a: 0
.198
an: 0
.197
som
e: 0
.197
each
: 0.1
97ne
ither
: 0.1
94
the:
0.1
87
both
: 0.1
69
Figure: The mean I understand value of demonstratives (red) comparedwith the norm for all other determiners.
20 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Comparisons across the lexicon
Pr
Frequency
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
0500
1000
1500
97.5th per. = 0.244
Dem
onst
rativ
es: 0
.225
mot
ivat
ion:
0.3
69co
nnec
t: 0.
368
anxi
ety:
0.3
59fri
ends
hips
: 0.3
58tir
ed: 0
.35
lone
ly: 0
.349
scar
es: 0
.349
depr
esse
d: 0
.342
Figure: The mean I understand value of demonstratives (red) comparedwith the norm for the entire vocabulary.
20 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
How unusual are Palin’s demonstratives?
We’ve shown that affective demonstratives are widely used andwidely recognized effects. Is Palin truly unusual in her usage?
21 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Data
• Four talk shows on FoxNews that often have Palin as a guest:I Bill O’Reilly’s The O’Reilly FactorI Sean Hannity’s HannityI Greta Van Susteren’s On the RecordI Chris Wallace’s FoxNews Sunday
• 16 Palin interviews
• For each Palin interview, the interview immediately before andafter it.
• For a total of 48 interviews.
22 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Quantitative analysis
●
●
Others Palin
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
this
prop
ortio
n
Others Palin
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
that
prop
ortio
n
●
●
●
Others Palin
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
these
prop
ortio
n
●
●
Others Palin
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
those
prop
ortio
n
Others Palin
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
All Demonstratives
prop
ortio
n
Figure: Non-pronominal dems. as a proportion of all determiners.23 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Qualitative analysis
• Palin’s demonstratives are longer — more richly descriptive.
• We find far more evaluative and potentially controversiallanguage in Palin’s tokens than in the others.
1 that goofy game that has been played now for too manyyears with the leftist lamestream media trying to twist thecandidates’ words and intent and content of theirstatements.
2 these good, hard-working, average, everyday, patrioticAmericans who want to see the positive change in ourcountry that they deserve.
24 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech
Palin is a polarizing figure, and reactions to her often center on herspeech. Why?
25 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Folksy or pseudo-folksy?
FoxNews.com comments after the 2008 debate• “We feel like she talks like we do.”
• “She talked like real people to real people.”
• “This middle class girl knows you were speaking for her.”
Huffington Post comments after the 2008 debate• “pseudo-folksiness and fundamental dishonesty”
• “illusion of straight-talking”
• “ ‘folksy’ with a wink”
26 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
The presuppositions of informality
In general• We are informal only with people we know well, and
vice-versa. Rich common ground.
• Thus, informal forms presuppose familiarity and sharedsentiment, and evoke those social connections.
• Where the connections exist, they are strengthened.
• Where they don’t exist, the effect is jarring.
For demonstratives• Demonstrative meanings inherently presuppose common
ground, in order to establish reference.
• Where the referents are not physically present, but ratherattitudinal, the presupposition of shared perspective is itselfattitudinal.
27 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
The presuppositions of informality
In general• We are informal only with people we know well, and
vice-versa. Rich common ground.
• Thus, informal forms presuppose familiarity and sharedsentiment, and evoke those social connections.
• Where the connections exist, they are strengthened.
• Where they don’t exist, the effect is jarring.
For demonstratives• Demonstrative meanings inherently presuppose common
ground, in order to establish reference.
• Where the referents are not physically present, but ratherattitudinal, the presupposition of shared perspective is itselfattitudinal.
27 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Doonesbury
Figure: A recent Doonesbury cartoon that features Palin’s affectivedemonstratives.
Panel 1: those good solutions for AmericaPanel 2: there’s that that wantin’ to progress the nation forwardPanel 3: if God were to, you know, open that doorPanel 4: he’s got that mightiness there
28 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Saturday Night LiveIn SNL’s parody of the 2008 debate, Fey-as-Palin usesdemonstratives at a much higher rate than Sudekis-as-Biden.
1 You know, John McCain and I, we’re a couple of mavericks.And, gosh darnit, we’re gonna take that maverick energy rightto Washington.
2 Gwen, we don’t know if this climate change hoozie-what’s-it isman-made or if it’s just a natural part of the ‘End of Days.’
3 I liked being here tonight answering these tough questionswithout the filter of the mainstream gotcha media with their‘follow-up questions,’ ‘fact-checking’ or ‘incessant need tofigure out what your words mean and why ya put them in thatorder’.
4 Oh, and for those Joe Six-Packs out there playing a drinkinggame at home — Maverick.
29 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
Conclusion
• Affective demonstratives are widely used and widelyrecognized.
• Palin uses them to an unusually high degree, as part ofgeneral strategy of being familiar to generate solidarity.
• For supporters, this reenforces perceived ties.
• For detractors, the effect is presumptuous.
• Other subtle aspects of Palin’s linguistic choices show similarpatterns — especially her pronouns . . .
30 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
References I
Bowdle, Brian F. and Gregory Ward. 1995. Generic demonstratives. InProceedings of the Twenty-First Annual Meeting of the Berkeley LinguisticsSociety, 32–43. Berkeley Linguistics Society.
Davis, Christopher and Christopher Potts. 2010. Affective demonstratives and thedivision of pragmatic labor. In Maria Aloni; Harald Bastiaanse; Tikitu de Jager;and Katrin Schulz, eds., Logic, Language, and Meaning: 17th AmsterdamColloquium Revised Selected Papers, 42–52. Berlin: Springer.
Labov, William. 2008. Palin’s accent examined. All Things Considered, NationalPublic Radio.
Lakoff, Robin. 1974. Remarks on ‘this’ and ‘that’. In Proceedings of the ChicagoLinguistics Society 10, 345–356. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.
Liberman, Mark. 2008. Affective demonstratives. URLhttp://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=674.
Liberman, Mark. 2010. Sarah Palin’s distal demonstratives. URLhttp://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=2240.
Ono, Kiyoharu. 1994. Territories of information and Japanese demonstratives.The Journal of the Association of Teachers of Japanese 28(2):131–155.
Pinker, Steven. 2008. Everything you heard is wrong. The New York Times .
31 / 32
Overview Affective demonstratives Corpus evidence Palin’s usage Understanding the reactions to Palin’s speech Conclusion
References II
Potts, Christopher and Florian Schwarz. 2010. Affective ‘this’. Linguistic Issues inLanguage Technology 3(5):1–30.
Purnell, Thomas; Eric Raimy; and Joseph Salmons. 2009. Defining dialect,perceiving dialect, and new dialect formation: Sarah Palin’s speech. Journal ofEnglish Linguistics 37(4):331–355.
32 / 32