Pauses and Hesitations in Drama Texts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pauses and hesitations are phenomena that can be found in speech. They can help both the speaker and the hearer, due to the functions they have in a dialogue. Their occurrence in speech has a value that they make it more understandable. In this regard, the researchers intend to critically examine the pauses and hesitations used in the two texts as well as their functions. The present paper aims to identify the types of pauses and hesitations used by Pinter’s The Homecoming and Baker’s Circle Mirror Transformation as well as the functions they serve and to compare both playwrights in this regard. To do so, the sequential production approach of turn taking, in combination with the contributions of some scholars who state the multifunctional use of pauses and hesitations, has been used. The findings of the present study show that pauses and hesitations do not exist arbitrarily in speech but they are found to serve certain functions depending on the context in which they occur. Regarding the two selected extracts, it is noticed from the comparison that the two writers do not use pauses and hesitations equally. Baker uses them more frequently than Pinter due to the context in which they are used which requires using pauses to aid comprehension.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".