Language Learning & Technologyhttp://llt.msu.edu/vol5num3/mollering/September 2001, Vol. 5, Num. 3pp. 130-151Copyright  2001, ISSN 1094-3501130TEACHING GERMAN MODAL PARTICLES:A CORPUS-BASED APPROACHMartina MölleringMacquarie University, SydneyABSTRACTThe comprehension and correct use of German modal particles poses manifold problemsfor learners of German as a foreign language since the meaning of these particles iscomplex and highly dependent on contextual features which can be linguistic as well assituational. Following the premise that German modal particles occur with greaterfrequency in the spoken language, the article presents an analysis which is based oncorpora representing spoken German. The concept "spoken language" is discussedcritically with regard to the corpora chosen for analysis and narrowed down in relation tothe use of modal particles. The analysis is based on the following corpora: FreiburgerKorpus, Dialogstrukturenkorpus, and Pfeffer-Korpus. In addition, a collection oftelephone conversations (Brons-Albert, 1984) was scanned into computer-readable filesand analysed using MicroConcord (Scott & Johns, 1993). A quantitative analysis wascarried out on all corpora. The qualitative analysis was limited to the telephoneconversations and looks at the constraints on and functions of the different occurrences ofthe form eben.INTRODUCTIONDiscourse particles occur in a variety of languages and have been analysed in great detail for the Englishlanguage by Schiffrin (1987). Particles of the modal particle type are prevalent in West-Germaniclanguages: Dutch, Frisian, and German (e.g., de Vriendt, Vandeweghe, & Van de Craen, 1991; Abraham,1991a for the link between German, Frisian, and Dutch; Aijmer, 1997, for Swedish). Research interest inGerman modal particles arose in the late 1960s with the advent of a more pragmatically oriented approachto linguistics. They started to shed their image as superfluous, stylistically dubious "fillers" that had to beavoided in "proper German" (Busse, 1992). Since Kriwonossow's (1963, first published in 1977) andWeydt's (1969) seminal studies on German modal particles, a large body of work on the subject hasemerged. In those publications, different terms are used for the words that are here described as "modalparticles." Thus, we find for example, "flavouring words" [Würzwörter] (Paneth, 1981), "intentionalparticles" [Intentionale Partikeln] (Rall, 1981), "pragmatic particles" (Held, 1983), "discourse particles"(Abraham, 1991b) and "toning particles" [Abtönungspartikeln] (Helbig, 1994), the term which togetherwith the German "Modalpartikel" (Thurmair, 1989) is the most commonly used. In a number ofpublications (Dalmas, 1990, 1992; Rudolph, 1991), however, the word particle is used without furtherspecification.The term particle stems from a structural approach to categorising the various parts of speech into wordclasses based on the inflexional properties of words. In accordance with this morphological criterion, theterm particle is often used to refer to "non-declinables," that is, in German, the large group of words thatcannot be considered as part of the word classes noun, adjective, verb, article, or pronoun. In this sense,particles may be adverbs, conjunctions, prepositions, interjections (Helbig, 1994), sentence adverbs(Thurmair, 1989), and particles in a narrower sense:Martina Mollering Teaching German Modal Particles...Language Learning & Technology 131Particles as Word ClassA word like aber, for example, which is a particle in the broader sense as it cannot be inflected, can becategorised as a member of the word class conjunction as well as of the class particles in a narrowersense, specifically, as modal particle (e.g., Bublitz, 1977) depending on the linguistic context in which itoccurs. Thus, in a word class definition, the words considered as modal particles all have at least onehomonym in another class or subclass, depending on the model of categorisation (for a critical discussionsee, e.g., Helbig, 1989). In the research literature the term particle is commonly used in its narrowersense, excluding the other groups of non-declinables. The word class particle in the narrower sense isthen seen to include subcategories, modal particles being one of them. The following subcategories havebeen described (Helbig, 1994, p.31):A plethora of publications within different theoretical frameworks have dealt with the pragmatic anddiscursive functions fulfilled by modal particles. These functions are described, for example, in terms ofthe management of interaction (Franck, 1979), as constituting consensus (Lütten, 1979), as a guidance forthe hearer (Rehbein, 1979) and as playing a part in establishing text coherence (Rudolph, 1989). There isagreement, though, on the fact that the function of German modal particles is illocutionary andinterpersonal rather than propositional. In very general terms, modal particles indicate the speaker'sattitude towards the utterance as well as the intended perception on the part of the hearer. Modal particlesmay point to the interlocutors' common knowledge, to the speaker's or listener's suppositions andexpectations, and they may create cohesion with previous utterances or mark the speaker's evaluation ofthe importance of an utterance (e.g., Abraham, 1991a, 1991b; Helbig, 1994; Thurmair, 1989). However,foreign language learners of German do not properly understand modal particles and rarely use them(Möllering & Nunan, 1995). This reflects a lack of sensitivity to an important feature of Germancommunication, which might lead to misunderstandings and/or misinterpretations.Modal Particles in Second Language AcquisitionResearch findings (Husso, 1981; Rall, 1981; Steinmüller, 1981; Weydt, 1981) provide an ambiguouspicture of the relationship between language acquisition in general and the acquisition of modal particles,Martina Mollering Teaching German Modal Particles...Language Learning & Technology 132but there is agreement on a much lower frequency of use by non-native speakers. Learners who receivedinstruction in German as a foreign language did not perceive the communicative value of particles as veryhigh (Harden & Rösler, 1981; Möllering & Nunan, 1995). Research findings on the acquisition of modalparticles in uninstructed contexts (Kutsch, 1985; Cheon-Kostrzewa & Kostrzewa, 1997a, 1997b) haveshown that the acquisition process is influenced by the fact that each particle is used in a variety