Unconditionally conditional

Pub Date : 2024-02-05 DOI:10.1163/18773109-01601003
Patrick Duffley, P. Larrivée
{"title":"Unconditionally conditional","authors":"Patrick Duffley, P. Larrivée","doi":"10.1163/18773109-01601003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The purpose of this study is to assess from a corpus-based discourse-pragmatic perspective certain claims made in the literature concerning English wh- concessive conditional constructions (e.g. Whoever/No matter who comes to the party, it will be fun), namely that these utterance-types correlate with interrogative semantics, scalarity and potential modality. By means of an extensive investigation of corpus data these claims are shown to be largely unsupported by attested usage. Based on Dancygier and Sweetser’s classification of conditional constructions, it is found that potential modality is paradigmatic only of content-level concessive conditionals, and not of the epistemic, speech-act or metalinguistic varieties. Contrary to claims in the literature, scalarity is demonstrated to not be typical of wh- concessive conditionals. The lack of scalarity in most wh- concessive conditionals is argued to cast into doubt the category label “concessive conditional” applied to these constructions in a substantial part of the literature and to favour an alternative designation such as “irrelevance conditional.” The empirical data further reveals that wh- concessive conditionals practically never involve pure ignorance, and this is argued to be problematic on the discourse-pragmatic level for the claim that they have interrogative semantics.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18773109-01601003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to assess from a corpus-based discourse-pragmatic perspective certain claims made in the literature concerning English wh- concessive conditional constructions (e.g. Whoever/No matter who comes to the party, it will be fun), namely that these utterance-types correlate with interrogative semantics, scalarity and potential modality. By means of an extensive investigation of corpus data these claims are shown to be largely unsupported by attested usage. Based on Dancygier and Sweetser’s classification of conditional constructions, it is found that potential modality is paradigmatic only of content-level concessive conditionals, and not of the epistemic, speech-act or metalinguistic varieties. Contrary to claims in the literature, scalarity is demonstrated to not be typical of wh- concessive conditionals. The lack of scalarity in most wh- concessive conditionals is argued to cast into doubt the category label “concessive conditional” applied to these constructions in a substantial part of the literature and to favour an alternative designation such as “irrelevance conditional.” The empirical data further reveals that wh- concessive conditionals practically never involve pure ignorance, and this is argued to be problematic on the discourse-pragmatic level for the claim that they have interrogative semantics.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
无条件有条件
本研究的目的是从基于语料库的话语语用角度来评估文献中关于英语wh-让步条件结构(如Whoever/No matter who comes to the party, it will be fun)的某些说法,即这些语篇类型与疑问语义、标度和潜在模态相关。通过对语料库数据的广泛调查,我们发现这些说法在很大程度上并没有得到有据可查的用法的支持。根据 Dancygier 和 Sweetser 对条件结构的分类,我们发现潜在模态仅是内容层面让步条件句的范式,而不是认识论、言语行为或金属语言学的范式。与文献中的说法相反,标度性并不是wh-让步条件句的典型特征。大多数wh-让步条件式都缺乏标度性,这就使相当一部分文献对这些结构所使用的 "让步条件式 "类别标签产生了怀疑,并倾向于使用 "无关性条件式 "这样的替代名称。实证数据进一步揭示了wh-让步条件句实际上从不涉及纯粹的无知,并认为这在话语语用层面上对它们具有询问语义的说法是有问题的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1