DOCSLIB.ORG

Demonstratives in Discourse

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Demonstratives in Discourse Demonstratives in discourse Edited by Åshild Næss Anna Margetts Yvonne Treis language Topics at the Grammar­Discourse science press Interface 6 Topics at the Grammar­Discourse Interface Editors: Philippa Cook (University of Göttingen), Anke Holler (University of Göttingen), Cathrine Fabricius­Hansen (University of Oslo) In this series: 1. Song, Sanghoun. Modeling information structure in a cross­linguistic perspective. 2. Müller, Sonja. Distribution und Interpretation von Modalpartikel­Kombinationen. 3. Bueno Holle, Juan José. Information structure in Isthmus Zapotec narrative and conversation. 4. Parikh, Prashant. Communication and content. 5. Balogh, Kata, Anja Latrouite & Robert D. Van Valin‚ Jr. (eds.) Nominal anchoring: Specificity, definiteness and article systems across languages. 6. Næss, Åshild, Anna Margetts & Yvonne Treis (eds.). Demonstratives in discourse. ISSN: 2567­3335 Demonstratives in discourse Edited by Åshild Næss Anna Margetts Yvonne Treis language science press Næss, Åshild, Anna Margetts & Yvonne Treis (eds.). 2020. Demonstratives in discourse (Topics at the Grammar-Discourse Interface 6). Berlin: Language Science Press. This title can be downloaded at: http://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/282 © 2020, the authors Published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Licence (CC BY 4.0): http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ISBN: 978-3-96110-286-0 (Digital) 978-3-96110-287-7 (Hardcover) ISSN: 2567-3335 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.4054814 Source code available from www.github.com/langsci/282 Collaborative reading: paperhive.org/documents/remote?type=langsci&id=282 Cover and concept of design: Ulrike Harbort Typesetting: Yvonne Treis, Sebastian Nordhoff, Ahmet Bilal Özdemir Proofreading: Alexia Fawcett, Amir Ghorbanpour, Andriana Koumbarou, Barend Beekhuizen, Bev Erasmus, Christian Döhler, Carmen Jany, Franny Vandervoort, Geoffrey Sampson, Jeroen van de Weijer, Joseph Lovestrand, Kalen Chang, Lachlan Mackenzie, Madeline Myers, Natsuko Nakagawa, Ryan Ka Yau Lai, Siva Kalyan, Sune Gregersen, Tom Bossuyt Fonts: Libertinus, Arimo, DejaVu Sans Mono Typesetting software:Ǝ X LATEX Language Science Press xHain Grünberger Str. 16 10243 Berlin, Germany langsci-press.org Storage and cataloguing done by FU Berlin Contents Preface iii 1 Introduction: Demonstratives in discourse Åshild Næss, Anna Margetts & Yvonne Treis 1 2 Beyond exophoric and endophoric uses: Additional discourse functions of demonstratives Ekkehard König 21 3 The use of manner demonstratives in discourse: A contrastive study of Wan (Mande) and Kambaata (Cushitic) Tatiana Nikitina & Yvonne Treis 43 4 Morphosyntactic and functional asymmetries in Vatlongos discourse demonstratives Eleanor Ridge 69 5 Tracking and recognitional use of Kalamang opa: Demonstrative of cognitive accessibility Eline Visser 103 6 Stsíkiistsi ki stsíkiistsi: The ubiquity of Blackfoot demonstratives in discourse Heather Bliss & Martina Wiltschko 123 7 Pilagá determiners and demonstratives: Discourse use and grammaticalisation Doris L. Payne & Alejandra Vidal 149 8 Referential shift potential of demonstrative pronouns – Evidence from text continuation Melanie Fuchs & Petra B. Schumacher 185 Contents 9 Psychologically distal demonstratives in Scandinavian are not “discourse new” Janne Bondi Johannessen 215 10 Space, contrast and joint attention: Demonstrative adverbs in Russian, Estonian and Finnish Tiina Nahkola, Maria Reile, Piia Taremaa & Renate Pajusalu 243 11 Manner deictics in quotative indexes of Finno-Ugric Denys Teptiuk 273 12 A typology of demonstrative clause linkers Holger Diessel & Merlijn Breunesse 305 Index 342 ii Preface This volume arises out of a workshop on “Discourse Functions of Demonstra- tives” held at the University of Oslo on 14–15 June 2018. The workshop call for papers asked for abstracts on “functions of demonstratives and related forms as discourse-structuring devices beyond their already well-described reference tracking and discourse-deictic uses” and elicited a range of responses from which an interesting and stimulating two-day workshop was put together. The editors would like to thank the Department of Linguistics and Scandina- vian Studies at the University of Oslo for their generous financial support for organising the workshop, as well as the participants who contributed to an inter- esting discussion and convinced us that a volume of papers from the workshop would be a worthwhile endeavour. Many thanks to Jozina Vander Klok, who was a member of the workshop organising team in 2018. Special thanks to the anony- mous reviewers of the chapters for their constructive criticism, to Melanie Burns for proof-reading the chapters, to Sebastian Nordhoff for his valuable support in formatting the book, and to the copy-editors who volunteer at Language Science Press for spotting remaining inconsistencies and typos in the manuscript. During the final stages of preparation of this book, one of the contributors, Janne Bondi Johannessen, passed away after a cancer relapse. Janne was a col- league of Åshild Næss at the University of Oslo and shared with Yvonne Treis an interest in languages of Ethiopia. She was a dynamic and productive linguist with a keen interest in corpus research, who contributed greatly to linguistic research in a number of areas. She was director of the University of Oslo’s Text Laboratory from 1993 and coordinator of the NORHED-project “Linguistic capacity building in Ethiopia - Tools for the inclusive development of Ethiopia” (2014–2020). Janne was a great champion for accessibility and inclusiveness in academic work, and she supported many students in pursuing an academic career, both through her supervision and by involving them in projects at the Text Laboratory. She ini- tiated linguistic capacity building and corpus building projects in different lan- guages including Saami, Heritage Norwegian in the US and Ethiopian languages. Janne completed the revisions of the paper included in this volume five months before she died. We dedicate this volume to her memory. Chapter 1 Introduction: Demonstratives in discourse Åshild Næss University of Oslo Anna Margetts Monash University Yvonne Treis LLACAN (CNRS, INALCO) 1 Discourse markers and their functions Over the last decades, there has been extensive discussion in the typological lit- erature of the functions and uses of demonstratives. It is well established that demonstratives are not restricted to referring to items in situational use based on concrete spatial parameters, but that discourse deictic, anaphoric/tracking, and recognitional uses are also common, if not universal, functions of demonstra- tives (see Himmelmann 1996; 1997; and Diessel 1999 for systematic overviews). Studies have shown that many parameters beyond location and configuration of referents and speech-act participants play a role in demonstrative choice. In particular, directing the addressee’s attention towards a target entity and prior knowledge of a referent either through the previous discourse or from the real world have been identified as relevant (see e.g. Burenhult 2003; Dawuda 2009; Diessel 2006; Enfield 2003; Hanks 1990; 1992; 2005; 2009; Küntay & Özyürek 2006; Özyürek 1998). The diachronic development from demonstratives to other types of markers with grammatical and discourse functions has also been extensively discussed (see again Himmelmann 1996; 1997; Diessel 1999). Åshild Næss, Anna Margetts & Yvonne Treis. 2020. Introduction: Demonstratives in discourse. In Åshild Næss, Anna Margetts & Yvonne Treis (eds.), Demonstratives in discourse, 1–20. Berlin: Language Science Press. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.4055812 Åshild Næss, Anna Margetts & Yvonne Treis This volume investigates discourse functions of demonstratives, that is, the type of functions demonstratives perform when they develop into discourse markers.1 The notion of discourse marker is not very clearly defined, and the question thus arises which functions they comprise, how they can be described, and to what ex- tent demonstratives and their functions match this description. In a broad-brush approach, discourse markers can be described as morphemes which deliver a meta-commentary on the discourse and establish and negotiate intersubjectivity. That is to say, discourse markers perform functions like directing attention as a means of establishing and maintaining joint attention, enabling the addressee to track participants through the discourse, indicating which parts of the discourse the speaker seeks to foreground and which are to be taken for granted, but also indicating the interlocutors’ epistemic stance towards or evaluation of a partic- ular portion of discourse (Englebretson 2007). Discourse markers communicate information like hey, I’m starting something new here, or you know this already, or this is the important bit, and here is what I think about this. They aid interlocutors in managing and navigating the discourse and in positioning themselves with regards to what is being said. 2 Origins of discourse markers: Lexicon vs. grammar Discourse markers can originate from both lexical and grammatical elements, and as such they inhabit the interfaces between lexicon and discourse, but also between grammar and discourse. On the one hand, studies of discourse markers describe lexical items or phrases which are recruited into discourse functions, such as focus particles like only, even, also (König 1991), markers of discourse cohesion like yeah-no (Burridge & Florey 2002), or connectives like and (Schiffrin 2006) or toujours (Hansen 2006) to name
Load more

Recommended publications
  • I Just Think. . . : the Meaning and Discourse Role of Just 1 Just As A
    I just think. : The meaning and discourse role of just Stephen Emet March 1, 2017 The following are some examples from the Switchboard corpus (Godfrey and Holliman, 1993), which give a sense of just's frequency and flexibility in conversation: (1) we enjoyed watching the country and the Grammies and stuff but i just i just don't care for him i just never have (2) i just i just i thought that it might be convenient for me sometime to just like i said just pull over and fish for a while (3) oh ye[ah]- yeah well i- you know i don't i don't know all that much myself i just i just know when i hear it that i like it" (4) well it's i just i just think the more you you know you just each person has to consciously think about doing something little or something big whatever you can do 1 Just as a hedge? Just can be used to attenuate the force of a directive. (5) (a) Just sit down in that chair. (b) Just close your eyes. (c) If you'd just sign there for us. (Lee, 1987) The just seems to make the directive more polite than the bare imperative. Just can also reduce the force of an assertion, by indicating uncertainty. (6) um-hum that's true i i like i say i don't have any problem with people using firearms you know for sporting purposes or hunting purposes i just think it's just maybe a little too easy you know to acquire one I just think acts as a \plausibility shield" (Prince et al., 1982), indicating the speaker's level of commitment.
    [Show full text]
  • PAPERS in NEW GUINEA LINGUISTICS No. 18
    PACIFIC LINGUISTICS S e.ft-<- e..6 A - No. 4 0 PAPERS IN NEW GUINEA LINGUISTICS No. 18 by R. Conrad and W. Dye N.P. Thomson L.P. Bruce, Jr. Department of Linguistics Research School of Pacific Studies THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY Conrad, R., Dye, W., Thomson, N. and Bruce Jr., L. editors. Papers in New Guinea Linguistics No. 18. A-40, iv + 106 pages. Pacific Linguistics, The Australian National University, 1975. DOI:10.15144/PL-A40.cover ©1975 Pacific Linguistics and/or the author(s). Online edition licensed 2015 CC BY-SA 4.0, with permission of PL. A sealang.net/CRCL initiative. PACIFIC LINGUISTICS is published by the Ling ui��ic Ci�cl e 06 Canbe��a and consists of four series: SERIES A - OCCAS IONAL PAPERS SERIES B - MONOGRAPHS SERIES C - BOOKS SERIES V - SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS . EDITOR: S.A. Wurm . ASSOCIATE EDITORS: D.C. Laycock , C.L. Voorhoeve . ALL CORRESPONDENCE concerning PACIFIC LINGUISTICS, including orders and subscriptions, should be addressed to: The Secretary, PACIFIC LINGUISTICS, Department of Linguistics, School of Pacific Studies, The Australian National University, Canberra , A.C.T. 2600. Australia . Copyright � The Authors. First published 1975 . The editors are indebted to the Australian National University for help in the production of this series. This publication was made possible by an initial grant from the Hunter Douglas Fund. National Library of Australia Card Number and ISBN 0 85883 118 X TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SOME LANGUAGE RELATIONSHIPS IN THE UPPER SEPIK REGION OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA, by Robert Conrad and Wayne Dye 1 O. INTRODUCTION 1 1 .
    [Show full text]
  • Discourse Marker Sequencing and Grammaticalization*
    Berkeley Linguistics Society. 2013. 108-122. http://dx.doi.org/10.3765/bls.v39i1.3873 39 Published by the Linguistic Society of America Discourse Marker Sequencing and Grammaticalization* CHRISTIAN KOOPS AND ARNE LOHMANN University of New Mexico and University of Vienna 1 Introduction This paper deals with the grammatical properties of discourse markers (DMs), specifically their ordering preferences relative to one another. While the data presented here are synchronic, we approach the topic of DM sequencing from the perspective of grammaticalization. From this perspective, DMs can be understood as the result of a process in which elements serving other functions, for example grammatical functions at the level of sentential syntax, come to be conventionally used as markers of discourse-level relations, or what Schiffrin (1987: 31) operationally defined as “sequentially dependent elements which bracket units of talk.” Here we are concerned with the final outcome of this process. We ask: to what degree do fully formed DMs retain or lose the grammatical properties associated with their previous role, specifically their syntactic co-occurrence constraints? In other words, what degree of syntactic decategorialization (in the sense of Hopper 1991) do DMs display? This raises the question of how DMs grammaticalize. As they constitute a broad and diverse class of elements with different developmental trajectories, we draw on Auer’s (1996) taxonomy of relevant grammaticalization processes, which covers a wide range of diverse types. Auer’s analysis deals specifically with grammaticalization in the syntactic position known as the “pre-front field” (Vor- Vorfeld) of spoken German. In drawing on his model, we assume that this * We thank the audiences at BLS 39 in Berkeley and HLDS 10 in Albuquerque for their comments and suggestions on our analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • Signaling Coherence Relations in Text Generation: a Case Study of German Temporal Discourse Markers
    . Signaling coherence relations in text generation: A case study of German temporal discourse markers Dissertation zur Erlangung der Doktorw¨urde durch den Promotionsausschuss Dr. phil der Universit¨at Bremen vorgelegt von Brigitte Grote Berlin, den 29. Januar 2003 Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Motivation.................................... 1 1.1.1 Discoursemarkersinwrittentext . .. 2 1.1.2 Discourse marker choice in text generation . ..... 6 1.2 Scopeofthestudy ............................... 8 1.3 Goalsofthisresearch............................. 9 1.4 Organizationofthethesis . .. 11 I State of the art and methodology 15 2 Earlier research on discourse markers 17 2.1 Definitionsinresearchliterature . ...... 17 2.1.1 Terminologyanddefinitions . 18 2.1.2 Identifying discourse markers in text . .... 21 2.2 Discourse markers in multilingual generation . ......... 23 2.2.1 Marker occurrence and placement . 25 2.2.2 Markerselection ............................ 26 2.2.3 Discourse marker choice in the overall generation process ...... 33 2.3 Discourse markers in descriptive linguistics . .......... 36 2.3.1 In-depth studies of small sets of discourse markers . ........ 37 2.3.2 Accounts covering a large range of discourse markers . ....... 38 2.4 Conclusions ................................... 41 i ii CONTENTS 3 Discourse representation in TG 43 3.1 Introduction: Coherence relations in text generation . ............ 43 3.2 RhetoricalStructureTheory . ... 46 3.2.1 RSTintextanalysis .......................... 46 3.2.2 RSTinautomatictextgeneration . 49 3.3 EnhancingRST................................. 53 3.3.1 Setofrelations ............................. 53 3.3.2 Minimalunits.............................. 56 3.3.3 Language specificity and relation to the linguistic surface ...... 57 3.3.4 Types of relations and levels of discourse representation....... 59 3.3.5 Decomposing coherence relations . .. 63 3.4 Conclusions ................................... 66 4 Framework and methodology 69 4.1 Framework...................................
    [Show full text]
  • Demonstratives in Discourse Åshild Næss University of Oslo Anna Margetts Monash University Yvonne Treis LLACAN (CNRS, INALCO)
    Chapter 1 Introduction: Demonstratives in discourse Åshild Næss University of Oslo Anna Margetts Monash University Yvonne Treis LLACAN (CNRS, INALCO) 1 Discourse markers and their functions Over the last decades, there has been extensive discussion in the typological lit- erature of the functions and uses of demonstratives. It is well established that demonstratives are not restricted to referring to items in situational use based on concrete spatial parameters, but that discourse deictic, anaphoric/tracking, and recognitional uses are also common, if not universal, functions of demonstra- tives (see Himmelmann 1996; 1997; and Diessel 1999 for systematic overviews). Studies have shown that many parameters beyond location and configuration of referents and speech-act participants play a role in demonstrative choice. In particular, directing the addressee’s attention towards a target entity and prior knowledge of a referent either through the previous discourse or from the real world have been identified as relevant (see e.g. Burenhult 2003; Dawuda 2009; Diessel 2006; Enfield 2003; Hanks 1990; 1992; 2005; 2009; Küntay & Özyürek 2006; Özyürek 1998). The diachronic development from demonstratives to other types of markers with grammatical and discourse functions has also been extensively discussed (see again Himmelmann 1996; 1997; Diessel 1999). Åshild Næss, Anna Margetts & Yvonne Treis. 2020. Introduction: Demonstratives in discourse. In Åshild Næss, Anna Margetts & Yvonne Treis (eds.), Demonstratives in discourse, 1–20. Berlin: Language Science Press. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.4055812 Åshild Næss, Anna Margetts & Yvonne Treis This volume investigates discourse functions of demonstratives, that is, the type of functions demonstratives perform when they develop into discourse markers.1 The notion of discourse marker is not very clearly defined, and the question thus arises which functions they comprise, how they can be described, and to what ex- tent demonstratives and their functions match this description.
    [Show full text]
  • In-Text References
    UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) The expression of modifiers and arguments in the noun phrase and beyond A typological study van Rijn, M.A. Publication date 2017 Document Version Other version License Other Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): van Rijn, M. A. (2017). The expression of modifiers and arguments in the noun phrase and beyond: A typological study. LOT. General rights It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (https://dare.uva.nl) Download date:29 Sep 2021 177 In-text references Abbott, Miriam. 1991. Macushi. In Desmond C. Derbyshire & Geoffrey K. Pullum (eds.), Handbook of Amazonian languages, vol. 3, 23–160. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 1995. Person marking and discourse in North Arawak languages. Studia Linguistica 49(2).
    [Show full text]
  • The Languages of Melanesia: Quantifying the Level of Coverage
    Language Documentation & Conservation Special Publication No. 5 (December 2012) Melanesian Languages on the Edge of Asia: Challenges for the 21st Century, ed. by Nicholas Evans and Marian Klamer, pp. 13–33 http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/ldc/sp05/ 2 http://hdl.handle.net/10125/4559 The languages of Melanesia: Quantifying the level of coverage Harald Hammarström Max Plank Institute for Evolutionary Anthopology Sebastian Nordhoff Max Plank Institute for Evolutionary Anthopology The present paper assesses the state of grammatical description of the languages of the Melanesian region based on database of semi- automatically annotated aggregated bibliographical references. 150 years of language description in Melanesia has produced at least some grammatical information for almost half of the languages of Melanesia, almost evenly spread among coastal/non-coastal, Austronesian/non- Austronesian and isolates/large families. Nevertheless, only 15.4% of these languages have a grammar and another 18.7% have a grammar sketch. Compared to Eurasia, Africa and the Americas, the Papua- Austronesian region is the region with the largest number of poorly documented languages and the largest proportion of poorly documented languages. We conclude with some dicussion and remarks on the documentational challenge and its future prospects. 1. INTRODUCTION. We will take Melanesia to be the sub-region of Oceania extending from the Arafura Sea and Western Pacific in the west to Fiji in the east – see the map in figure 1.1 This region is home to no fewer than 1347 (1315 living + 32 recently extinct) attested indigenous languages as per the language/dialect divisions of Lewis (2009), with small adjustments and adding attested extinct languages given in table 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography
    BIBLIOGRAPHY Aaron, Uche. 1996/1997. ‘Grammaticalization of the verb “say” to future tense in Obolo’, Journal of West African Languages 26: 87–93. Abbott, Miriam. 1991. ‘Macushi’, pp. 23–160 of Derbyshire and Pullum 1991. Abdul-Fetouh, H. M. 1969. A morphological study of Egyptian Colloquial Arabic. The Hague: Mouton. Ackerman, Farrell and John Moore. 1999. ‘Syntagmatic and paradigmatic dimensions of causee encoding’, Linguistics and Philosophy 22: 1–44. —— and—2001. Proto-properties and grammatical encoding. Stanford: CSLI. Adams de Liclan, Patsy and Stephen Marlett. 1991. ‘Antipasivo en Madija (Culina)’, Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Etnolingüísticos 6: 36–48. Adams, Karen L. 1989. Systems of numeral classification in the Mon-Khmer, Nicobarese and Aslian subfamilies of Austroasiatic. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics. Adams, Karen and Alexis Manaster-Ramer. 1988. ‘Some questions of topic/focus choice in Tagalog’, Oceanic Linguistics 27: 79–101. Adelaar, Willem F. H. 2004. The languages of the Andes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 1987. Strukturno-tipologicheskaja klassificacija berberskih jazykov. Sintaksis. Kratkaja istoria klassifikacij berberskih jazykov. Resuljtaty strukturno-tipologicheskoj klassifikacii berberskih jazykov. (A Structural and Typo- logical Classification of Berber Languages. Syntax. A short history of classifications of Berber languages. The results of a structural and typological classification of Berber languages.) Publication 9 of the Department of Languages of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Moscow: Nauka. —— 1994a. ‘Classifiers in Tariana’, Anthropological Linguistics 34: 407–65. —— 1994b. ‘Grammatical relations in Tariana’, Nordic Journal of Linguistics 7: 201–18. —— 1995. Bare. Munich: Lincom Europa. —— 1996. ‘Areal diffusion in North-West Amazonia: the case of Tariana’, Anthropo- logical Linguistics 38: 73–116.
    [Show full text]
  • A Discourse-Pragmatic Functional Study of the Discourse Markers Japanese Ano and Chinese Nage
    Intercultural Communication Studies XX: 2 (2011) WANG A Discourse-Pragmatic Functional Study of the Discourse Markers Japanese Ano and Chinese Nage Yan WANG Carthage College, USA Abstract An expanding body of research in linguistics deals with discourse markers (DMs), the expressions that have emotive rather than referential functions (Holker, 1991). Taking a discourse-pragmatic approach, this study examines the usages of the Japanese DM ano and the Mandarin Chinese DM nage in conversational discourse, both of which are derived from demonstrative adjectives, equivalent to “that” in English. Through investigating 302 cases of ano and 252 cases of nage in natural conversations, this study argues, neither ano nor nage merely serves as a verbal “filler” in utterances; rather, each carries similar multiple discourse-pragmatic functions in various social contexts, which include 1) to introduce a new referent/topic in a highlighted while less imposing way; 2) to mitigate various Face Threatening Acts; and, 3) to indicate the speaker’s hesitancy in sharing certain personal information. This study claims that the DMs ano and nage are politeness markers (Brown & Levinson, 1987) as well as modality markers (Maynard, 1992), and such usages are derived from their original forms as demonstrative adjectives, which reflect a close relationship between physical and psychological distance. Keywords: Discourse-pragmatic, discourse marker, filler, politeness, face, hesitancy, modality Introduction An expanding body of research in linguistics deals with discourse markers (DMs), the expressions that have emotive rather than referential functions (Holker, 1991). Taking a discourse-pragmatic approach, this study examines, from a cross-linguistic perspective, the usages of the Japanese DM ano and the Mandarin Chinese DM nage both of which are derived from demonstrative adjectives, equivalent to “that” in English.
    [Show full text]
  • (University College London) the Subjunctive Conundrum Plenary II, Thursday, 9:00 – 10:00, Room 1010
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by University of Huddersfield Repository ABSTRACTS OF TALKS AND WORKSHOP PAPERS Bas Aarts (University College London) The subjunctive conundrum Plenary II, Thursday, 9:00 – 10:00, Room 1010 The view espoused in Palmer (1987: 46) that “the notion of a subjunctive mood is a simple transfer from Latin and has no place in English grammar” is generally accepted in most modern descriptive frameworks. But the consequences of accepting such a view have not been sufficiently appreciated in the literature. In this paper I will discuss a number of approaches to the English subjunctive, and I will argue that none of them deals adequately with the fallout of denying the existence of an inflectional subjunctive in English. I will propose that English subjunctive clauses can be described by making reference to the notion of Subsective Gradience (Aarts 2007), and that the grammar of English should recognise a ‘subjunctive clause type’, along with declaratives, interrogatives, imperatives and exclamatives. Palmer, Frank (1987) The English verb. London: Longman. Elsbieta Adamczyk (University of Poznan) On morphological restructuring in the early English nominal system: the fate of Old English consonantal inflection Wednesday, 12:00 – 12:30, Room 1016 The paper investigates the morphological shape of the early English nominal inflection, focusing on the developments which contributed to its later restructuring. A prominent feature of the early English inflection was an evident tendency, revealed by nouns considered minor (unproductive) to adopt the inflectional endings of the productive types. This marked inclination of some nouns can be particularly well seen in consonantal stems, such as r-stems (deriving from PIE *-es/-os stems).
    [Show full text]
  • Particles and Connectives in Baltic
    Electronic offprint from Nɪcoʟᴇ Nᴀᴜ, Noʀʙᴇʀᴛ Osᴛʀowsᴋɪ, eds., Particles and Connectives in Baltic Vilniaus universitetas & Asociacija "Academia Salensis" Vilnius, 2010 (= Acta Salensia, 2) ISBN 978-609-95126-1-7 ISSN 2029-2880 Nɪcoʟᴇ Nᴀᴜ & Noʀʙᴇʀᴛ Osᴛʀowsᴋɪ Background and perspectives for the study of particles and connectives in Baltic languages 0. Introduction The present volume contains contributions to a field of study that has become the subject of increasing interest in various branches of linguistics during the last two decades. However, most of the research devoted to various kinds of particles and connectives that is discussed on an international level considers only a small part of European languages: Germanic languages, especially English, German, and Dutch, followed by Romance and, more sporadically, Slavic languages. If data from Baltic lan- guages are lacking in this discussion, it is certainly not that these languages have nothing to offer. On the contrary ― Lithuanian, Latvian, and Latgalian are comparatively rich in “small words” with pragmatic or linking functions, and their synchronic and diachronic investigation reveals many interesting facts that are relevant also outside of Baltic philology. One of the purposes of this volume is to make Baltic data more easily accessible to lin- guists from other fields. In addition, scholars of Baltic languages may profit from the general discussion and from research carried out on other languages, as these will open new perspectives for both diachronic and synchronic studies. We will begin this introduction with a short overview of existing studies on conjunctions and particles in Lithuanian and Latvian. In section 2 we will describe some (but surely not all) of the approaches to particles and connectives that are re- flected in recent contributions by scholars of other languages 1 Nicole Nau & Norbert Ostrowski or written with a general perspective.
    [Show full text]
  • CECL Papers 1
    CECL Papers 1 Book of Abstracts Using Corpora in Contrastive and Translation Studies Conference (5th edition) Sylviane Granger, Marie-Aude Lefer and Laura Aguiar de Souza Penha Marion (eds) Louvain-la-Neuve, 12-14 September, 2018 Book of Abstracts Using Corpora in Contrastive and Translation Studies Conference (5th edition) Louvain-la-Neuve, 12-14 September, 2018 Sylviane Granger, Marie-Aude Lefer and Laura Aguiar de Souza Penha Marion (eds) CECL Papers 1. Louvain-la-Neuve: Université catholique de Louvain 2018 Organizing committee Conference Chairs Sylviane Granger (Université catholique de Louvain) Marie-Aude Lefer (Université catholique de Louvain) Laura Aguiar de Souza Penha Marion (Université catholique de Louvain) Maïté Dupont (Université catholique de Louvain) Gaëtanelle Gilquin (Université catholique de Louvain) Christine Michaux (Université de Mons) Magali Paquot (Université catholique de Louvain) Scientific committee Silvia Bernardini (University of Bologna) Łucja Biel (University of Warsaw) Bert Cappelle (Université de Lille 3) Andrew Chesterman (University of Helsinki) Lucie Chlumská (Charles University) Hélène Chuquet (Université de Poitiers) Jean-Pierre Colson (Université catholique de Louvain) Gloria Corpas Pastor (University of Malaga) Barbara De Cock (Université catholique de Louvain) Sabine De Knop (Université Saint-Louis – Bruxelles) María de los Ángeles Gómez González (Universidad de Santiago de Compostela) Gert De Sutter (Ghent University) Bart Defrancq (Ghent University) Liesbeth Degand (Université catholique de
    [Show full text]