This text tries to explore the why? and how? of movie dialogues close to reality. It deals with a close transcript of an 8-minute scene of "Vicky Christina Barcelona" and corpus statistics based on transcripts of this movie and of "He's just not that into you." It offers interesting aspects on the function of backchannels and hesitators not only in movie discourse.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction:
2. The data:
3. Analysis of VCB:
3.1. Excerpt from the first scene
3.2. Excerpt from the second scene
4. Comparison between VCB and HNY
4.1. Hesitators
4.2. Multiplications of responses
5. Conclusion and outlook
Research Objectives and Topics
This paper examines how the incorporation of spontaneous oral speech markers—such as discourse markers, dysfluencies, and backchannels—in film scripts contributes to the creation of a "real-life effect" and mimetic experience in movie dialogues. The study investigates whether a higher frequency of these markers leads to a more realistic representation of human conversation compared to more polished or conventional dialogue.
- Analysis of spontaneous oral speech markers in movie scripts
- Evaluation of the Aristotelian principle of mimesis in film
- Comparative analysis of discourse markers between different film genres
- The impact of dysfluencies and hesitators on perceived realism
- The role of non-verbal cues and gestures in movie dialogues
Excerpt from the Book
3.1. Excerpt from the first scene
A full spectrum of linguistic devices to mark the spontaneous character of the conversations in VCB is already expressed within the first five turns of the first scene.
1. Judy Do you like ‘em?
2. Vicky I do. Thank you so much for taking us.
3. Judy Oh, you know, we buy from this gallery. Mark .. has commissioned this - this artist to do this series of pictures [ .. ]
4. Vicky [Mm-hm] nods during J’s talking
5. Judy For his office walls. [Yeah, I think #]
Sentence 1 makes use of a form of ellipsis, omitting the th in the word them, thus producing the reduced form ‘em. This is an expression only in spoken discourse (and written texts imitating this discourse, but they shall not be much of our concern in this paper), yet it is not a sign of unplanned speech, but of phonological blur between uttered words. In sentence 2 a second account of ellipsis comes up: I do^ is a direct response to the question Do you like ‘em? It elides the rest of the clause following the operator do, which would have to be ^like [th]’em. Biber calls this a final (post-operator) ellipsis and explains it purpose a “way of simplifying grammar through omission”.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: This chapter defines the central premise of using spontaneous speech markers to enhance the realism of film dialogues and outlines the comparative methodology.
2. The data: This section provides an overview of the two films selected for analysis, "Vicky Cristina Barcelona" and "He’s Just Not That Into You," highlighting their genre and structural characteristics.
3. Analysis of VCB: A detailed linguistic examination of selected scenes from Woody Allen's film, focusing on how specific markers create a mimetic experience.
4. Comparison between VCB and HNY: A quantitative comparison of hesitators and multiple responses in both films, exploring how their distribution affects the perceived naturalness of the dialogue.
5. Conclusion and outlook: This final chapter synthesizes the findings, confirming that the strategic use of spontaneous markers significantly impacts the audience's perception of dialogue realism, while noting limitations regarding genre constraints.
Keywords
mimesis, discourse markers, spontaneous speech, film dialogue, dysfluencies, hesitators, backchannels, linguistic realism, Woody Allen, Vicky Cristina Barcelona, speech analysis, conversation, verbalized signals, script writing, naturalistic acting
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this research?
The work explores how linguistic devices typical of spontaneous oral speech, such as discourse markers, dysfluencies, and backchannels, are used in film scripts to create a more authentic and realistic dialogue experience for the audience.
What are the central themes discussed?
The core themes include the Aristotelian principle of mimesis in film, the distinction between scripted and spontaneous speech, and the role of non-verbal cues and language production struggle in achieving verisimilitude.
What is the main objective or research question?
The main objective is to analyze whether the deliberate inclusion of speech-like markers and dysfluencies in movie dialogue makes films appear more truthful and realistic than those with more polished, purely constructed dialogue.
What scientific method is applied?
The author uses a comparative, corpus-based approach. Two specific films, "Vicky Cristina Barcelona" and "He’s Just Not That Into You," are transcribed and systematically analyzed for the frequency and function of 20 distinct markers of spontaneous speech.
What topics are covered in the main body of the text?
The main body contains a detailed analysis of two scenes from "Vicky Cristina Barcelona," followed by a quantitative comparison of hesitators (like "um" and "uh") and multiple responses (like "yes, yes") between the two primary film subjects.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include mimesis, discourse markers, spontaneous speech, film dialogue, dysfluencies, and naturalistic acting.
How does the author define the role of the non-native speaker in VCB?
The author highlights that the non-native speaker's struggle with language, including language switching (asides in Spanish) and hesitation, adds a unique layer of authenticity and realism to the dialogue.
Why is the frequency of "hesitators" significant in this study?
The study finds that hesitators serve as "pause fillers" that signify the speaker's mental search and planning process, which is a crucial differentiator between spontaneous speech and planned written text.
What is the conclusion regarding "multiple responses"?
The author concludes that the repetition of response forms (e.g., "no no no") acts as a form of filler that strengthens the perception of unscripted, natural conversation, thus supporting the mimetic goal.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Konstantin Herzog (Autor:in), 2011, The use of markers of spontaneous oral speech to create mimetic movie experiences, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/175154
