DOCSLIB.ORG

Evidentiality and Its Interaction with Tense: Evidence from Korean

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Evidentiality and its Interaction with Tense: Evidence from Korean DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Jungmee Lee, M.A. Department of Linguistics The Ohio State University 2011 Dissertation Committee: Prof. Judith Tonhauser, Adviser Prof. Craige Roberts Prof. Carl Pollard c Copyright by Jungmee Lee 2011 ABSTRACT Evidentiality is a linguistic category that specifies the source of information conveyed, such as direct observation, inference, or hearsay (Aikhenvald 2004). Through a detailed study of three distinct evidential readings that arise from the Korean evidentials –te and –ney, this dissertation studies the close interaction between evidentiality and other semantic cat- egories, particularly temporality and modality. The goal of the dissertation is to develop a formal analysis which adequately captures the following empirical patterns of the meaning of Korean evidential utterances. First, three distinct evidential readings, i.e. direct vs. inferential vs. reportative, arise from the evidentials –te and –ney, by means of their interactions with tense and mood. Second, Korean evidential sentences behave like epistemically modalized sentences with respect to anchoring patterns, constraints with their subjects, and modal subordination. Third, the meaning contribution of Korean evidentials in discourse has a different status from that of the expressions occurring in the scope of the evidentials: unlike the latter, the former cannot be the main point of utterances. But the two different types of implications exhibit a bi-directional interaction in the course of interpreting a single evidential utterance. I formally analyze the first two empirical findings in Kratzer’s (1977, 1981, 1991) modal theory. In particular, I capture the evidential meaning of Korean evidentials in terms of the two central components in Kratzer’s modal theory, i.e. the modal base and the or- dering source. For the not-at-issue meaning contribution of Korean evidentials, and its ii interaction with at-issue meanings, I discuss why Faller’s (2002) and Potts’ (2005) theories cannot be applied to the meaning of Korean evidentials, and a dynamic semantic analysis is sketched out in terms of Murray’s (2010) formal system that models discourse anaphora. The empirical findings presented in this dissertation points to a close connection between evidentiality and temporality and modality, and suggest that a theory of evidentiality should allow for interactions between at-issue and not-at-issue content, as Amaral et al.(2007) has argued for at-issue and not-at-issue content in general. iii For my parents and husband iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Writing a dissertation was an enjoyable adventure. Many people have accompanied me on this adventure. Without their constant encouragement and wonderful support, I would not have been able to complete this dissertation. My first thanks goes to my advisor Judith Tonhauser for her unwavering commitment to my project. She joined the OSU linguistics faculty in my second year. Since taking her first semantics seminar, I have had the privilege of being her first Ph.D student, and have benefited enormously from working closely with her. Her willingness to spend time in discussion has always impressed me, and her sharp insight has tremendously improved my work. Regular meetings with her have always been engaging and motivational, with con- structive and inspiring comments on every topic that I have worked on. In particular, I have had great opportunities to give conference talks and write several proceedings and journal papers with her. Such invaluable experiences contributed enormously to my development as a semanticist. This dissertation project also started from her excitement about my data, and encouragement to explore more aspects of the meaning of Korean evidentials. Without her commitment to this dissertation project, I might not have been able to enjoy every step of it. Judith, thank you so much! You have my eternal thanks, for being such a wonderful advisor, and for sharing my excitements and anxieties over the past few years! I am extremely grateful to my other two committee members, Craige Roberts and Carl Pollard, too. Craige Roberts greatly influenced my decision to become a semanticist ever v since I began my Ph.D program in OSU. I benefited a lot from interacting with her, not only in her semantics/pragmatics seminars and individual meetings, but also in the modality study group that she organized. She was the first to suggest that I put serious thought into the relationship between evidentiality and modality, thereby putting this dissertation on the path it has ultimately taken. Her linguistic expertise and keen insight have drawn my attention to novel aspects of the data, and its theoretical implications. I thank her for all that she has taught me, and for our stimulating interactions. It was a great pleasure to have Carl Pollard on my dissertation committee, as well. His comments on the formal analyses were invaluable in the development of this dissertation. He has been very patient in guiding me through details of formal analyses that I overlooked. His deep knowledge and enthusiasm about linguistics and languages have always been an inspiration to me. In addition to my committee, my dissertation project owes a great deal to many other people. I’d to like to thank Sarah Murray for her generosity with her time and wonderful suggestions for the dissertation. Her talk about Cheyenne evidentials at the 19th Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) conference has been an inspiration for my exploration of the meaning of Korean evidentials. I am also deeply grateful to Lisa Matthewson. It was a great honor for me to have an opportunity to interact with her. I truly thank her for our fruitful discussions, for constructive comments on my work, and wonderful new ideas for the future. Special thanks goes to my former teachers at Seoul National University. I have never doubted my enthusiam about linguistics and language, but when I decided to apply for Ph.D programs in the US, I was going through a difficult time due to some personal issues. Without their constant encouragement, I would not have been able to make the decision to study abroad. vi I would like to thank in particular Prof. Eun-Jung Yoo, my former advisor in my MA program. It was after her syntax class one day when I first expressed my interest in studying more about syntax, and requested her to be my advisor. Since then, she has been my mentor, wherever I am. Particularly, when I was overwhelmed with demanding course requirements in my first year in OSU, I was so fortunate to have her on campus as a visiting scholar. Her excellent advice as a former OSU linguistics student immeasurably helped me with academic and non-academic issues. I am also grateful to Prof. Ki-Sun Hong. The first semantics course that I have ever taken was from her in 2003, which extended my research interest to semantics and its interface with syntax. Ever since that semantics course, she has been my role model as a female semanticist in Korea. So it was a great happiness to please her with my academic achievements in OSU. I am so thankful to her for giving me an opportunity to present my research at the workshop organized by her in the summer of 2010. I also greatly enjoyed discussions with her about my research. I’d also like to thank Prof. Chungmin Lee for his wonderful support for this dissertation project. Although I had no chance to take his semantics/pragmatics courses in my BA and MA programs, I already knew well about his enthusiasm for linguistics. He first contacted me after reading my co-authored paper around 2008, and since then he has been an inspi- ration in my research. It was a pleasure to participate in SALT 2010 and the Evidentials Fest in 2011 with him. I am grateful to him for sending me numerous papers related to my research, and kindly sharing his own papers. My thanks goes to my other teachers at Seoul National University, too: Prof. Chang- Yong Sohn, Prof. Mi-Jeong Song, Prof. Jae-Young Lee, Prof. Yong-Yae Park. They all contributed in innumerous ways to the very beginning stage of my training as a linguist. vii I would also like to thank those who have commented on this research at some point in the course of developing it: Peter Culicover, Robert Levine, Chris Barker, Anna Szabolsci, Paul Portner, Dong-sik Lim, Yusuke Kubota, Anastasia Smirnova, and Gregory Kierstead. Some parts of this dissertation have been presented at several places. I am thankful for the feedback from respective audiences at the 2009 Colloque de Syntaxe et Semantique´ a` Paris, the 2010 LSA Annual Meeting, the 2nd workshop on Projection, Entailment, Presup- position and Assertion (PEPA 2), the 41st English Linguistics Workshop at Seoul National University, and in Judith Tonhauser’s semantics course. My life in Columbus would have been very depressing without my friends. Specifi- cally, I am thankful to Jeff Holliday, who has been my closest friend since we took Peter Culicover’s syntax course and Carl Pollard’s formal foundations course together in my first year. It was him who first introduced Chung’s work on Korean evidentials to me, which contributed to the early stages of this research. He has not been hesitant to help me whenever I need his help, from giving me a ride somewhere to proofreading this entire dissertation. It has been a great pleasure to see his development as a phonetician over the past few years. Thank you, Jeff! I also learned a lot from working with Yusuke Kubota. I owe a lot to his willingness to help me with anything related to linguistics.
Recommended publications
  • Change Sentences Direct Into Indirect Speech

    Change Sentences Direct Into Indirect Speech

    Change Sentences Direct Into Indirect Speech WhichcarburiseFlickering Trevor soEdie binaurally. misrepresent mutiny punitively Main so and quarterly while huffing Abbey that Traver Lazaro always unswearing finalize cutinises her his his Rawlplugs?harpsichordists chronometers oppugnsginger distractingly, disserving all.he Lost his bike Indirect speech They show we simply going to running Direct speech They declare that. Reported Speech in English Grammar. What such a Jussive subjunctive Latin? Reported Speech Indirect Speech in English Summary. Ulysses asked the field is important to us consent, into direct speech change sentences indirect quote the benefits of speech rules in. Grammar Basics Direct and Indirect Speech Hitbullseye. Do not enclosed inside for change into past perfect as they do not track your team sports he was and what are transformed into the. 1 The Latin subjunctive is another mood of hypothetical verbal activity including ideas of uncertainty potential will shadow and refuse like. Direct to indirect speech General rules English Grammar. The subjunctive mainly expresses doubt or potential and what could have been whatever the indicative declares this happened or that happened the infantry is called 'jussive' which revenue from 'iubere' to command bid. Direct and Indirect Speech Verb Tense Changes with Rules. In the direct sentence the actual words of the speaker are quoted This is called Direct. Objective by the end leave the lesson the students should have able detect change where direct speech sentence into reported speech correctly Prerequisite match each. In direct speech the original words of stay are narrated no friend is made. Reported Speech English Grammar English Grammar Online.
  • Logophoricity in Finnish

    Logophoricity in Finnish

    Open Linguistics 2018; 4: 630–656 Research Article Elsi Kaiser* Effects of perspective-taking on pronominal reference to humans and animals: Logophoricity in Finnish https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2018-0031 Received December 19, 2017; accepted August 28, 2018 Abstract: This paper investigates the logophoric pronoun system of Finnish, with a focus on reference to animals, to further our understanding of the linguistic representation of non-human animals, how perspective-taking is signaled linguistically, and how this relates to features such as [+/-HUMAN]. In contexts where animals are grammatically [-HUMAN] but conceptualized as the perspectival center (whose thoughts, speech or mental state is being reported), can they be referred to with logophoric pronouns? Colloquial Finnish is claimed to have a logophoric pronoun which has the same form as the human-referring pronoun of standard Finnish, hän (she/he). This allows us to test whether a pronoun that may at first blush seem featurally specified to seek [+HUMAN] referents can be used for [-HUMAN] referents when they are logophoric. I used corpus data to compare the claim that hän is logophoric in both standard and colloquial Finnish vs. the claim that the two registers have different logophoric systems. I argue for a unified system where hän is logophoric in both registers, and moreover can be used for logophoric [-HUMAN] referents in both colloquial and standard Finnish. Thus, on its logophoric use, hän does not require its referent to be [+HUMAN]. Keywords: Finnish, logophoric pronouns, logophoricity, anti-logophoricity, animacy, non-human animals, perspective-taking, corpus 1 Introduction A key aspect of being human is our ability to think and reason about our own mental states as well as those of others, and to recognize that others’ perspectives, knowledge or mental states are distinct from our own, an ability known as Theory of Mind (term due to Premack & Woodruff 1978).
  • Veridicality and Utterance Meaning

    Veridicality and Utterance Meaning

    2011 Fifth IEEE International Conference on Semantic Computing Veridicality and utterance understanding Marie-Catherine de Marneffe, Christopher D. Manning and Christopher Potts Linguistics Department Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305 {mcdm,manning,cgpotts}@stanford.edu Abstract—Natural language understanding depends heavily on making the requisite inferences. The inherent uncertainty of assessing veridicality – whether the speaker intends to convey that pragmatic inference suggests to us that veridicality judgments events mentioned are actual, non-actual, or uncertain. However, are not always categorical, and thus are better modeled as this property is little used in relation and event extraction systems, and the work that has been done has generally assumed distributions. We therefore treat veridicality as a distribution- that it can be captured by lexical semantic properties. Here, prediction task. We trained a maximum entropy classifier on we show that context and world knowledge play a significant our annotations to assign event veridicality distributions. Our role in shaping veridicality. We extend the FactBank corpus, features include not only lexical items like hedges, modals, which contains semantically driven veridicality annotations, with and negations, but also structural features and approximations pragmatically informed ones. Our annotations are more complex than the lexical assumption predicts but systematic enough to of world knowledge. The resulting model yields insights into be included in computational work on textual understanding. the complex pragmatic factors that shape readers’ veridicality They also indicate that veridicality judgments are not always judgments. categorical, and should therefore be modeled as distributions. We build a classifier to automatically assign event veridicality II. CORPUS ANNOTATION distributions based on our new annotations.
  • CHAPTER 3: the Role of Tense-Aspect in Discourse Management

    CHAPTER 3: the Role of Tense-Aspect in Discourse Management

    CHAPTER 3: The Role of Tense-Aspect in Discourse Management 3.0 Introduction Tense-aspect plays an important discourse management role in the construction and organization of mental spaces (and meaning) built in the ongoing process of discourse interpretation. The purpose of this chapter is to lay out in a systematic way the components of the model of tense-aspect proposed here and to give an overview of how tense-aspect functions, in conjunction with a set of Discourse Organization Principles, to constrain the mental space configurations built during the interpretation of ongoing discourse. This chapter lays the theoretical foundation for the detailed analysis of language specific tense markers, of tense in embedded clauses, and of tense in discourse- narrative, treated in subsequent chapters. In this chapter, I will propose a model which is an extension of the approach and ideas of Fauconnier (1985, 1986a, 1986b, 1990, 1991, to appear) and Dinsmore (1991). The model, which is the basis for the account of tense presented in this dissertation, consists of: • the mental space format (space partitioning, cognitive links between elements in different spaces, etc...) and the general mental space principles of access, optimization, spreading, and matching, as proposed in Fauconnier (1985) and updated in more recent work. 67 68 •a set of conceptual, discourse primitives: {BASE, FOCUS, EVENT, and V- POINT}, which are distributed over the hierarchical configuration of spaces built as the discourse interpretation process unfolds. •a set of Discourse Organization Principles which operate on these conceptual primitives, determining the types of space configurations which are possible. •a distinction between the FACT and PREDICTION status assigned to spaces.
  • (2012) Perspectival Discourse Referents for Indexicals* Maria

    (2012) Perspectival Discourse Referents for Indexicals* Maria

    To appear in Proceedings of SULA 7 (2012) Perspectival discourse referents for indexicals* Maria Bittner Rutgers University 0. Introduction By definition, the reference of an indexical depends on the context of utterance. For ex- ample, what proposition is expressed by saying I am hungry depends on who says this and when. Since Kaplan (1978), context dependence has been analyzed in terms of two parameters: an utterance context, which determines the reference of indexicals, and a formally unrelated assignment function, which determines the reference of anaphors (rep- resented as variables). This STATIC VIEW of indexicals, as pure context dependence, is still widely accepted. With varying details, it is implemented by current theories of indexicali- ty not only in static frameworks, which ignore context change (e.g. Schlenker 2003, Anand and Nevins 2004), but also in the otherwise dynamic framework of DRT. In DRT, context change is only relevant for anaphors, which refer to current values of variables. In contrast, indexicals refer to static contextual anchors (see Kamp 1985, Zeevat 1999). This SEMI-STATIC VIEW reconstructs the traditional indexical-anaphor dichotomy in DRT. An alternative DYNAMIC VIEW of indexicality is implicit in the ‘commonplace ef- fect’ of Stalnaker (1978) and is formally explicated in Bittner (2007, 2011). The basic idea is that indexical reference is a species of discourse reference, just like anaphora. In particular, both varieties of discourse reference involve not only context dependence, but also context change. The act of speaking up focuses attention and thereby makes this very speech event available for discourse reference by indexicals. Mentioning something likewise focuses attention, making the mentioned entity available for subsequent dis- course reference by anaphors.
  • Minimal Pronouns, Logophoricity and Long-Distance Reflexivisation in Avar

    Minimal Pronouns, Logophoricity and Long-Distance Reflexivisation in Avar

    Minimal pronouns, logophoricity and long-distance reflexivisation in Avar* Pavel Rudnev Revised version; 28th January 2015 Abstract This paper discusses two morphologically related anaphoric pronouns inAvar (Avar-Andic, Nakh-Daghestanian) and proposes that one of them should be treated as a minimal pronoun that receives its interpretation from a λ-operator situated on a phasal head whereas the other is a logophoric pro- noun denoting the author of the reported event. Keywords: reflexivity, logophoricity, binding, syntax, semantics, Avar 1 Introduction This paper has two aims. One is to make a descriptive contribution to the crosslin- guistic study of long-distance anaphoric dependencies by presenting an overview of the properties of two kinds of reflexive pronoun in Avar, a Nakh-Daghestanian language spoken natively by about 700,000 people mostly living in the North East Caucasian republic of Daghestan in the Russian Federation. The other goal is to highlight the relevance of the newly introduced data from an understudied lan- guage to the theoretical debate on the nature of reflexivity, long-distance anaphora and logophoricity. The issue at the heart of this paper is the unusual character of theanaphoric system in Avar, which is tripartite. (1) is intended as just a preview with more *The present material was presented at the Utrecht workshop The World of Reflexives in August 2011. I am grateful to the workshop’s audience and participants for their questions and comments. I am indebted to Eric Reuland and an anonymous reviewer for providing valuable feedback on the first draft, as well as to Yakov Testelets for numerous discussions of anaphora-related issues inAvar spanning several years.
  • Prosodic Focus∗

    Prosodic Focus∗

    Prosodic Focus∗ Michael Wagner March 10, 2020 Abstract This chapter provides an introduction to the phenomenon of prosodic focus, as well as to the theory of Alternative Semantics. Alternative Semantics provides an insightful account of what prosodic focus means, and gives us a notation that can help with better characterizing focus-related phenomena and the terminology used to describe them. We can also translate theoretical ideas about focus and givenness into this notation to facilitate a comparison between frameworks. The discussion will partly be structured by an evaluation of the theories of Givenness, the theory of Relative Givenness, and Unalternative Semantics, but we will cover a range of other ideas and proposals in the process. The chapter concludes with a discussion of phonological issues, and of association with focus. Keywords: focus, givenness, topic, contrast, prominence, intonation, givenness, context, discourse Cite as: Wagner, Michael (2020). Prosodic Focus. In: Gutzmann, D., Matthewson, L., Meier, C., Rullmann, H., and Zimmermann, T. E., editors. The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Semantics. Wiley{Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9781118788516.sem133 ∗Thanks to the audiences at the semantics colloquium in 2014 in Frankfurt, as well as the participants in classes taught at the DGFS Summer School in T¨ubingen2016, at McGill in the fall of 2016, at the Creteling Summer School in Rethymnos in the summer of 2018, and at the Summer School on Intonation and Word Order in Graz in the fall of 2018 (lectures published on OSF: Wagner, 2018). Thanks also for in-depth comments on an earlier version of this chapter by Dan Goodhue and Lisa Matthewson, and two reviewers; I am also indebted to several discussions of focus issues with Aron Hirsch, Bernhard Schwarz, and Ede Zimmermann (who frequently wanted coffee) over the years.
  • Against Logical Form

    Against Logical Form

    Against logical form Zolta´n Gendler Szabo´ Conceptions of logical form are stranded between extremes. On one side are those who think the logical form of a sentence has little to do with logic; on the other, those who think it has little to do with the sentence. Most of us would prefer a conception that strikes a balance: logical form that is an objective feature of a sentence and captures its logical character. I will argue that we cannot get what we want. What are these extreme conceptions? In linguistics, logical form is typically con- ceived of as a level of representation where ambiguities have been resolved. According to one highly developed view—Chomsky’s minimalism—logical form is one of the outputs of the derivation of a sentence. The derivation begins with a set of lexical items and after initial mergers it splits into two: on one branch phonological operations are applied without semantic effect; on the other are semantic operations without phono- logical realization. At the end of the first branch is phonological form, the input to the articulatory–perceptual system; and at the end of the second is logical form, the input to the conceptual–intentional system.1 Thus conceived, logical form encompasses all and only information required for interpretation. But semantic and logical information do not fully overlap. The connectives “and” and “but” are surely not synonyms, but the difference in meaning probably does not concern logic. On the other hand, it is of utmost logical importance whether “finitely many” or “equinumerous” are logical constants even though it is hard to see how this information could be essential for their interpretation.
  • Nominal and Verbal Parameters in the Diachrony of Differential Object Marking in Spanish Marco García García University of Cologne

    Nominal and Verbal Parameters in the Diachrony of Differential Object Marking in Spanish Marco García García University of Cologne

    Chapter 8 Nominal and verbal parameters in the diachrony of differential object marking in Spanish Marco García García University of Cologne This paper deals with the influence that nominal and verbal parameters have on DOMinthe diachrony of Spanish. Comparing selected corpus studies, I will focus first on the different nominal parameters that build up the animacy and referentiality scales, in particular on an- imacy and definiteness. In order to clarify how far DOM has diachronically evolved, special attention will be paid to inanimate objects, which can be viewed as the alleged endpointin the development of DOM in Spanish. Secondly, I will provide a systematic overview of the relevant verbal parameters, which include aspect, affectedness and agentivity. The study will show a complex interaction of nominal and verbal parameters, revealing some unex- pected correlations: Obligatory object marking is not only found with human and strongly affected objects involved in a telic event, but also with inanimate, non-affected andagen- tive objects embedded in a stative event. In other words, in Spanish DOM patterns with both extremely high and extremely low transitivity. These findings sharply contrast with traditional accounts concerning the development as well as the explanation of DOM. 1 Introduction Differential object marking (DOM) is a well-attested phenomenon within Romance lan- guages (for an overview see Bossong 1998: 218–230). While in some Romance languages, such as Catalan or Modern Portuguese, DOM is confined to a reduced number of con- texts, in others, such as Sardinian or Spanish, it is found in many more contexts. This paper will focus on Spanish, where DOM seems to have reached a greater stage of de- velopment than in any other Romance language.
  • PARASITIC MIRATIVITY of ENGLISH USE in COLIN TREVORROWS MOVIE “JURASSIC WORLD” Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of Th

    PARASITIC MIRATIVITY of ENGLISH USE in COLIN TREVORROWS MOVIE “JURASSIC WORLD” Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of Th

    PARASITIC MIRATIVITY OF ENGLISH USE IN COLIN TREVORROWS MOVIE “JURASSIC WORLD” Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Sarjana Humaniora in English and Literature Department of Faculty of Adab and Humanities of UIN Alauddin Makassar By MUJI RETNO Reg. No. 40300111080 ENGLISH AND LITERATURE DEPARTMENT ADAB AND HUMANITIES FACULTY ALAUDDIN STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MAKASSAR 2016 PARASITIC MIRATIVITY OF ENGLISH USE IN COLIN TREVORROW’S MOVIE “JURASSIC WORLD” Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Sarjana Humaniora in English and Literature Department of Faculty of Adab and Humanities of UIN Alauddin Makassar By MUJI RETNO Reg. No. 40300111080 ENGLISH AND LITERATURE DEPARTMENT ADAB AND HUMANITIES FACULTY ALAUDDIN STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MAKASSAR 2016 i MOTTO “EDUCATION IS WHAT REMAINS AFTER ONE HAS FORGOTTEN WHAT ONE HAS LEARNED IN SCHOOL.” (Albert Eistein) “EDUCATION IS A PROGRESSIVE DISCOVERY OF OUR OWN IGNORENCE.” (Charlie Chaplin) “EVERY THE LAST STEP INEVITABLY HAS THE FIRST STEP” (Muji Retno) ii ACKNOWLEDGE All praises to Allah who has blessed, guided and given the health to the researcherduring writing this thesis. Then, the researcherr would like to send invocation and peace to Prophet Muhammad SAW peace be upon him, who has guided the people from the bad condition to the better life. The researcher realizes that in writing and finishing this thesis, there are many people that have provided their suggestion, advice, help and motivation. Therefore, the researcher would like to express thanks and highest appreciation to all of them. For the first, the researcher gives special gratitude to her parents, Masir Hadis and Jumariah Yaha who have given their loves, cares, supports and prayers in every single time.
  • An Ultra-Condensed Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Two-Hour Tutorial at NICTA (National Information and Communication Technologies Australia)

    An Ultra-Condensed Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Two-Hour Tutorial at NICTA (National Information and Communication Technologies Australia)

    An ultra-condensed introduction to Discourse Analysis: two-hour tutorial at NICTA (National Information and Communication Technologies Australia) Rogelio Nazar Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso [email protected] 23 October 2015 Abstract: Linguistics has historically been devoted to the study of language as a system rather than its manifestation in particular texts. In spite of this, Discourse Analysis (DA) has been established for more than 60 years as a place of convergence of many disciplines interested in discourse. This tutorial is aimed at people with little or no knowledge of linguistic terminology and its purpose is to offer a shallow introduction to DA. This tutorial will not specifically address computational procedures for text analysis. On the contrary, the analytical methods explained here are to be conducted manually, but with systematic and almost mechanical methods. This is mainly a practical tutorial and the focus will be on analysing a real text in English. The first part presents the theoretical principles and analytical tools, while the rest is devoted to practical exercises implementing the proposed method. Given the limitations of time, this tutorial only comments upon a short number concepts. 1. Introduction It is a real pleasure for me to be here today in this not very sunny day in Canberra and I am delighted to have all of you here. As you probably know, I have been entrusted with the impossible task of summarizing 60 years of research in discourse analysis (DA) in a couple of hours. Facing such challenge, what I am going to do is not really to offer a real introduction, because we would need a semester course just to cover the essential readings.
  • 30. Tense Aspect Mood 615

    30. Tense Aspect Mood 615

    30. Tense Aspect Mood 615 Richards, Ivor Armstrong 1936 The Philosophy of Rhetoric. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rockwell, Patricia 2007 Vocal features of conversational sarcasm: A comparison of methods. Journal of Psycho- linguistic Research 36: 361−369. Rosenblum, Doron 5. March 2004 Smart he is not. http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/smart-he-is-not- 1.115908. Searle, John 1979 Expression and Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Seddiq, Mirriam N. A. Why I don’t want to talk to you. http://notguiltynoway.com/2004/09/why-i-dont-want- to-talk-to-you.html. Singh, Onkar 17. December 2002 Parliament attack convicts fight in court. http://www.rediff.com/news/ 2002/dec/17parl2.htm [Accessed 24 July 2013]. Sperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson 1986/1995 Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell. Voegele, Jason N. A. http://www.jvoegele.com/literarysf/cyberpunk.html Voyer, Daniel and Cheryl Techentin 2010 Subjective acoustic features of sarcasm: Lower, slower, and more. Metaphor and Symbol 25: 1−16. Ward, Gregory 1983 A pragmatic analysis of epitomization. Papers in Linguistics 17: 145−161. Ward, Gregory and Betty J. Birner 2006 Information structure. In: B. Aarts and A. McMahon (eds.), Handbook of English Lin- guistics, 291−317. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Rachel Giora, Tel Aviv, (Israel) 30. Tense Aspect Mood 1. Introduction 2. Metaphor: EVENTS ARE (PHYSICAL) OBJECTS 3. Polysemy, construal, profiling, and coercion 4. Interactions of tense, aspect, and mood 5. Conclusion 6. References 1. Introduction In the framework of cognitive linguistics we approach the grammatical categories of tense, aspect, and mood from the perspective of general cognitive strategies.