Reported Speech Presentation Download

This book presents an account of the full range of techniques used to represent speech in the Iliad and Odyssey,1 including not only direct and indirect speech, but also free indirect speech and the summary form she calls speech mention, and aims to elucidate the factors which inform a choice from among these forms on particular occasions. It attempts to show that the various modes of speech representation form a coherent system, with each of the modes fulfilling a specific function in Homeric discourse. In this way, the book seeks to correct and supplement a number of widespread observations about represented speech in the epics made in narratological studies, which are perhaps best exemplified by Richardson in his influential work on the Homeric narrator: 1) direct speech is the default choice; 2) indirect speech is used to report orders; 3) indirect speech is used when characters quoted in direct speech report the words of other characters.2 To counter this picture, Beck mainly draws on recent work in general linguistics, which demonstrates the inherent creativity of speech representation and highlights the choices speakers face in selecting the mode that is most effective for achieving their present communicative purposes.

All sentences in the novel are either direct address to the reader or narration or the representation of character speech and/or character thought. This Guidesheet is devoted mainly to the presentation of character speech.

Download File 🔥 https://shurll.com/2y4ABW 🔥

Completely under the narrator's control, and with a perspective so 'distanced' from the speech presented that all we know about that speech is that it occurred (e.g. 'They conversed quietly with one another.'), perhaps with some general indication of the topic of the talk (e.g. 'He was saying something about his trip.').

"Speech Act" is the term used to designate ACTS performed by saying something e.g. complaining, instructing, questioning, pleading, arguing. cf. She insulted him. In the Narrator's Representation of a Speech Act (NRSA), we are told what act of speech was used. We may also get some indication of the subject matter talked about e.g. She told him about his bad breath. With NRSA, then, the report of the speech is minimal, and completely under the control of the narrator. NRSA usually contains:

NRSA is the speech presentation category which connects the scale of speech presentation with the straightforward narration of action. Narrators represent actions (NRA). NRSA is speech action, action performed by saying things (e.g. 'He ordered the prisoner's execution', 'He stated his demands'.

Thus indirect speech, like NRSA, is speech filtered through the narrator. This results in relative distancing of the reader from the character compared with Direct Speech (see below). IS contains:

DS contains the actual words and grammatical structures which the character used in the original utterance, not those of the narrator. Hence, apparently, only minimal filtering through the narrator occurs (though, of course, in the novel, unlike real-life speech reporting, there was no original speech which is being reported by a third party - the author makes it all up). In the extreme versions of DS even the inverted commas and/or the introductory reporting clause can be omitted, thus reducing the amount of narrator filtering to zero. DS contains:

In the simplest forms of IS and DS there are two clauses, the reporting clause, which belongs to the narrator, and the reported clause, which is a representation of the speech being reported. The two clauses belong to two different discourse situations -- the reporting clause relates to the situation where the narrator is talking to the reader, and the reported clause relates to a previous discourse situation where a character said something to another character.

Free Indirect Speech (FIS) is a mixture of DS and IS features. As a result it is often very ambiguous as to whether it represents faithfully the words of the character or whether it is the narrator's words which are being used. Very often there will be no reporting clause, and so the reported clause achieves main clause status as in DS. But usually the tense and pronouns, but not necessarily the other deictic markers, stay appropriate to the narrator, not the character. However, any mixture of DS and IS features counts as FIS.

The same categories of presentation are available to an author when representing the thoughts of his characters. These categories [Narrator's Representation of Thinking (NT), Narrator's Representation of Thought Acts (NRTA), Indirect Thought (IT), Free Indirect Thought (FIT) and Direct Thought (DT)] can be defined in exactly the same way linguistically as for the equivalent speech presentation categories. But the effects of one mode choice or another are different from those for speech. Typically we tend to feel in the course of reading that Direct Thought is the representation of conscious thought on the part of the character, whereas Free Indirect Thought feels more like the representation of subconscious thought. Note that with DT or FIT, you feel that you are getting the character's process of thought represented, because of the assumption, borrowed from speech presentation, that you are getting (completely with DT, and partially with FIT) the "original" words and structures that the character used to do the thinking. This will not be the case with IT or NRTA, and so you will feel much less close to the character, and that the narrator is interposed between you and the character. We will not examine thought presentation in any detail on this course as there is not enough time. If you are interested in this area see section 4 of Short (1996) Exploring the Language of Poems, Plays and Prose (pp311-20) and section 2 of chapter 10 of Leech and Short (1981) Style in Fiction (pp 336-50).

The relevant reading in Style in Fiction for speech presentation is pages 318-36. However, that chapter makes a distinction between direct speech (DS) and free direct speech (FDS), which we now think is unnecessary. Hence, we have not made such a distinction in these notes, and we suggest that you ignore it.

Reported speech powerpoint activity that I created for a class / group activity. It is based on a real life, true crime carried out by a very polite man who robs a petrol station. Each slide shows the conversation between the robber and the station owner. The class must through reported speech report what each person said, before the answer is shown. The actual CCTV footage is also uploaded on the internet. I use the video as a warmer / introduction to the lesson.

Historically, the first speech tests were spoken or whispered messages presented at measured distances between the talker and the listener. These tests provided a gross estimate of an individual's ability to hear speech. Clinical speech audiometry developed from a need to quantify this ability. The Western Electric 4A (later 4C) test, a phonographic recording of spoken digits, was the first widely used recorded auditory test for determining hearing losses for speech ( Fletcher & Steinberg, 1929). Later, Harvard's Psycho-Acoustic Laboratory (PAL) developed word lists that serve as a basic model for today's clinical measurement of speech threshold ( Hudgins, Hawkins, Karlin, & Stevens, 1947). Central Institute for the Deaf (CID) published Auditory Tests W-1 and W-2 (Spondaic Word Lists), which were modifications of the PAL lists ( Hirsh, Davis, Silverman, Reynolds, Eldert, & Benson, 1952).

Several concerns have been raised about the adequacy of the 1979 ASHA Guidelines for Determining the Threshold Level for Speech. These concerns have included the fact that the recommended speech threshold procedures were not based on experimental evidence ( Ventry, 1979), a clear-cut 50% speech threshold criteria could not be found using the procedures ( Olsen & Matkin, 1979), the procedures were too time-consuming ( Olsen & Matkin, 1979), and the guidelines did not specifically define procedures for speech awareness.

Therefore, a new set of Guidelines for Determining the Threshold Level for Speech has been developed. The guidelines define common terminology and recommend a speech threshold procedure which has been supported in terms of length, reliability, and validity by research ( Seattle, Forrester, & Ruby, 1977: Huff & Nerbonne, 1982; Martin & Stauffer, 1975; Robinson & Koenige, 1979; Tillman & Olsen, 1973; Wall, Davis, & Myers, 1984; Wilson, Morgan, & Dirks, 1973). The spirit of these guidelines, as in prior guidelines, is not to mandate a single way of accomplishing the clinical process. The intention is to suggest a standard procedure that will improve interclinician and interclinic comparison of data that, in the final analysis, will benefit the people we serve.

Speech threshold audiometry is the procedure used in the assessment of an individual's threshold of hearing for speech. There are differing opinions regarding the clinical utility of this measure. For a discussion of the utility of the test, the reader is referred to Wilson and Margolis ( 1983).

If one chooses to measure a speech threshold, then these guidelines present a standardized measurement method that has been statistically validated and should yield a speech recognition threshold that agrees closely with the pure tone average The purpose of these guidelines is to recommend a simple, rapid, statistically based descending procedure for determining the speech recognition threshold and to define common terminology associated with its use. In some cases, however, such as suspected pseudo-hypacusis, an ascending procedure may be more appropriate and can be used. The procedures described in these guidelines are usable in a variety of clinical circumstances; however, certain individuals such as young children and mentally disabled, uncooperative, or neurologically disabled individuals may require modification of the procedure. Modifications should be noted in recording and reporting the results. e24fc04721