{"title":"Pragmatic uses of ‘I say’ in Latin","authors":"J. Mikulová","doi":"10.1075/JHP.18002.MIK","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This paper examines the pragmatic uses and functions of the Latin verb inquam (‘I say’) and\n compares it with three synonyms – dico (‘I say, I speak, I declare’), loquor (‘I speak, I say, I\n utter’) and aio (‘I say yes, I say, I affirm’). Verbs of speech and thought in the first person are\n (cross-linguistically) a source of pragmatic markers, because the first person of these verbs is necessarily speaker-orientated\n and is also apt for expressing the speaker’s attitude. This can be seen in English pragmatic markers developed from verbs, such as\n I mean, I think and I say, and Romance ones, such as the Italian credo (‘I\n think’). Latin verbs with the meaning ‘I say’ (henceforth used as a hypernym for all of the verbs examined herein) also show\n pragmatic uses, as is clear from Latin dictionaries. The issue addressed in this paper is the extent to which they are\n interchangeable and how advanced they are in their development towards becoming pragmatic markers. For this goal, the paper will\n focus on a variety of pragmatic uses of ‘I say’, the contexts in which they appear, and the influence of genre on their\n distribution. Drawing on Bazzanella (2006) and Ghezzi (2014), the pragmatic uses will be divided into three main categories: textual, cognitive and interactional. It\n will be shown that the border between different pragmatic functions or readings is not neat and one instance can have various\n pragmatic uses at the same time.","PeriodicalId":54081,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Historical Pragmatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Historical Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/JHP.18002.MIK","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This paper examines the pragmatic uses and functions of the Latin verb inquam (‘I say’) and
compares it with three synonyms – dico (‘I say, I speak, I declare’), loquor (‘I speak, I say, I
utter’) and aio (‘I say yes, I say, I affirm’). Verbs of speech and thought in the first person are
(cross-linguistically) a source of pragmatic markers, because the first person of these verbs is necessarily speaker-orientated
and is also apt for expressing the speaker’s attitude. This can be seen in English pragmatic markers developed from verbs, such as
I mean, I think and I say, and Romance ones, such as the Italian credo (‘I
think’). Latin verbs with the meaning ‘I say’ (henceforth used as a hypernym for all of the verbs examined herein) also show
pragmatic uses, as is clear from Latin dictionaries. The issue addressed in this paper is the extent to which they are
interchangeable and how advanced they are in their development towards becoming pragmatic markers. For this goal, the paper will
focus on a variety of pragmatic uses of ‘I say’, the contexts in which they appear, and the influence of genre on their
distribution. Drawing on Bazzanella (2006) and Ghezzi (2014), the pragmatic uses will be divided into three main categories: textual, cognitive and interactional. It
will be shown that the border between different pragmatic functions or readings is not neat and one instance can have various
pragmatic uses at the same time.
本文考察了拉丁语动词inqam(“I say”)的语用用法和功能,并将其与三个同义词——dico(“I说,我说,我声明”)、logor(“I说话,我说我说”)和aio(“我说是的,我说肯定”)进行了比较。第一人称的言语和思维动词是(跨语言的)语用标记的来源,因为这些动词的第一人称必然以说话人为导向,也适合表达说话人的态度。这可以在由动词发展而来的英语语用标记中看到,比如I mean,I think and I say,以及Romance标记,比如意大利信条(“I think”)。含义为“I say”的拉丁语动词(此后用作本文中所有动词的超名)也显示出语用用途,这从拉丁语词典中可以清楚地看出。本文所讨论的问题是它们在多大程度上是可互换的,以及它们在成为实用标记方面的发展程度。为此,本文将重点研究“我说”的各种语用用法,它们出现的语境,以及体裁对其分布的影响。根据Bazzanella(2006)和Ghezzi(2014),语用用法将分为三大类:语篇、认知和互动。结果表明,不同语用功能或阅读之间的边界并不整齐,一个实例可以同时具有不同的语用用途。
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Historical Pragmatics provides an interdisciplinary forum for theoretical, empirical and methodological work at the intersection of pragmatics and historical linguistics. The editorial focus is on socio-historical and pragmatic aspects of historical texts in their sociocultural context of communication (e.g. conversational principles, politeness strategies, or speech acts) and on diachronic pragmatics as seen in linguistic processes such as grammaticalization or discoursization. Contributions draw on data from literary or non-literary sources and from any language. In addition to contributions with a strictly pragmatic or discourse analytical perspective, it also includes contributions with a more sociolinguistic or semantic approach.