Pub Date : 2026-04-01Epub Date: 2026-02-04DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2026.01.007
Jesus David Guerra-Lyons , Valentina Concu , Johan Alberto De La Rosa Yacomelo
This study investigates the English extra-clausal appearance construction it seems as a discourse-sensitive resource for epistemic stance, integrating insights from Systemic Functional Linguistics and Interpersonal Pragmatics. Using corpus data from COCA, BAWE, and MICASE, the analysis explores how evidential, modal, and subjective meanings are shaped by discourse context—particularly mode and register—and by speakers’ relational strategies. Four semantic-pragmatic categories—perceptual, circumstantial, generic, and conjectural—are identified and situated along a continuum ranging from experiential to epistemically marked uses. Personalization through to me clusters overwhelmingly in conjectural contexts, highlighting its role as a stance-taking strategy that foregrounds subjectivity while mitigating face-threat. The study provides an empirically grounded account of it seems as a flexible interpersonal construction shaped by contextual, epistemic, and relational work. The findings contribute to our understanding of how grammatical constructions function within discourse to manage epistemic stance and interpersonal alignment.
{"title":"Not all it seems are the same: A systemic functional and pragmatic approach to evidentiality and mitigation","authors":"Jesus David Guerra-Lyons , Valentina Concu , Johan Alberto De La Rosa Yacomelo","doi":"10.1016/j.pragma.2026.01.007","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.pragma.2026.01.007","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study investigates the English extra-clausal appearance construction <em>it seems</em> as a discourse-sensitive resource for epistemic stance, integrating insights from Systemic Functional Linguistics and Interpersonal Pragmatics. Using corpus data from COCA, BAWE, and MICASE, the analysis explores how evidential, modal, and subjective meanings are shaped by discourse context—particularly mode and register—and by speakers’ relational strategies. Four semantic-pragmatic categories—perceptual, circumstantial, generic, and conjectural—are identified and situated along a continuum ranging from experiential to epistemically marked uses. Personalization through <em>to me</em> clusters overwhelmingly in conjectural contexts, highlighting its role as a stance-taking strategy that foregrounds subjectivity while mitigating face-threat. The study provides an empirically grounded account of <em>it seems</em> as a flexible interpersonal construction shaped by contextual, epistemic, and relational work. The findings contribute to our understanding of how grammatical constructions function within discourse to manage epistemic stance and interpersonal alignment.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16899,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pragmatics","volume":"255 ","pages":"Pages 1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2026-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146116575","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-03-01Epub Date: 2026-01-20DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2025.12.017
Yanli Fu , Phoenix W.Y. Lam
This study investigates the multifunctional role of the discourse marker “but” in English-language media interviews, moving from its traditional contrastive meaning to its broader use as a communicational practice shaped by institutional and cultural contexts. Drawing on a 120-interview corpus featuring Liu Xin (CGTN, China) and Stephen Sackur (BBC, the United Kingdom), the study combines quantitative and qualitative methods to examine both frequency and pragmatic distribution. The results show that Sackur uses “but” almost three times more frequently than Liu, with significant differences in functional range. While both interviewers employ “but” for contrast and topic management, Sackur frequently extends its use to concession, consequence, disagreement, and monitoring, whereas Liu emphasizes topic progression, hedging, and interpersonal alignment. Statistical tests confirm these differences across sequential, ideational, rhetorical, and interpersonal domains. These findings demonstrate that “but” is not limited to marking contrast but operates as a communicational resource that organizes interaction, negotiates stance, and encodes media ideologies. Sackur's frequent use of “but” reflects the adversarial traditions of British journalism, prioritizing argumentative progression and epistemic authority. By contrast, Liu's more selective and harmony-oriented uses reflect Chinese communicative norms that value continuity, relational balance, and mediated engagement. By focusing on interviewer talk, this study contributes to discourse pragmatics, media linguistics, and intercultural communication. It shows how multifunctional discourse markers can reveal broader cultural values and institutional strategies and calls for future research into other markers, multimodal cues, and diverse media contexts.
{"title":"From contrast to communicational practice: The discourse marker “but” in Chinese and British media interviews","authors":"Yanli Fu , Phoenix W.Y. Lam","doi":"10.1016/j.pragma.2025.12.017","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.pragma.2025.12.017","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study investigates the multifunctional role of the discourse marker “but” in English-language media interviews, moving from its traditional contrastive meaning to its broader use as a communicational practice shaped by institutional and cultural contexts. Drawing on a 120-interview corpus featuring Liu Xin (CGTN, China) and Stephen Sackur (BBC, the United Kingdom), the study combines quantitative and qualitative methods to examine both frequency and pragmatic distribution. The results show that Sackur uses “but” almost three times more frequently than Liu, with significant differences in functional range. While both interviewers employ “but” for contrast and topic management, Sackur frequently extends its use to concession, consequence, disagreement, and monitoring, whereas Liu emphasizes topic progression, hedging, and interpersonal alignment. Statistical tests confirm these differences across sequential, ideational, rhetorical, and interpersonal domains. These findings demonstrate that “but” is not limited to marking contrast but operates as a communicational resource that organizes interaction, negotiates stance, and encodes media ideologies. Sackur's frequent use of “but” reflects the adversarial traditions of British journalism, prioritizing argumentative progression and epistemic authority. By contrast, Liu's more selective and harmony-oriented uses reflect Chinese communicative norms that value continuity, relational balance, and mediated engagement. By focusing on interviewer talk, this study contributes to discourse pragmatics, media linguistics, and intercultural communication. It shows how multifunctional discourse markers can reveal broader cultural values and institutional strategies and calls for future research into other markers, multimodal cues, and diverse media contexts.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16899,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pragmatics","volume":"254 ","pages":"Pages 81-90"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146024641","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-03-01Epub Date: 2026-01-16DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2025.12.014
Xinyu Wang, Lingling Chang
Disclaimers have become a common pragmatic strategy for managing potential offense in social media interaction, yet their use in digitally mediated communication (DMC) has remained largely underexplored. This study examines the Chinese disclaimer wúyì màofàn [‘no offense’] + (X), dànshì [‘but’] + (Y), focusing on how it is used to balance implicitness, accountability, and face concerns in context-collapsed, massively polylogal interaction. Drawing on a corpus of 885 Weibo posts, the analysis identifies the disclaimer as a dual marker that indexes both offense-mitigating and offense-intensifying tendencies, depending largely on the alignment between its polite framing and the subsequent act. Typically, it modifies low-to mid-level face-threatening acts such as teasing, criticizing, or complaining, while in fewer cases it frames overtly insulting or ironic remarks displaying features of mock politeness. The disclaimer also occasionally precedes rapport-maintaining acts such as complimenting, revealing posters' heightened metapragmatic awareness of offense risk when addressing imagined audiences. Overall, the study advances understanding of how disclaimers operate as reflexive stance-design resources in public, polylogal online communication.
{"title":"Anticipating offense and managing risks: Understanding the disclaimer wúyì màofàn...dànshì... [‘no offense, but ...’] in Chinese social media","authors":"Xinyu Wang, Lingling Chang","doi":"10.1016/j.pragma.2025.12.014","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.pragma.2025.12.014","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Disclaimers have become a common pragmatic strategy for managing potential offense in social media interaction, yet their use in digitally mediated communication (DMC) has remained largely underexplored. This study examines the Chinese disclaimer <em>wúyì màofàn [‘no offense’] + (X), dànshì [‘but’] + (Y)</em>, focusing on how it is used to balance implicitness, accountability, and face concerns in context-collapsed, massively polylogal interaction. Drawing on a corpus of 885 Weibo posts, the analysis identifies the disclaimer as a dual marker that indexes both offense-mitigating and offense-intensifying tendencies, depending largely on the alignment between its polite framing and the subsequent act. Typically, it modifies low-to mid-level face-threatening acts such as teasing, criticizing, or complaining, while in fewer cases it frames overtly insulting or ironic remarks displaying features of mock politeness. The disclaimer also occasionally precedes rapport-maintaining acts such as complimenting, revealing posters' heightened metapragmatic awareness of offense risk when addressing imagined audiences. Overall, the study advances understanding of how disclaimers operate as reflexive stance-design resources in public, polylogal online communication.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16899,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pragmatics","volume":"254 ","pages":"Pages 34-44"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145981648","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-03-01Epub Date: 2026-01-16DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2025.12.016
Nima Mussavifard
Human communication possesses far more expressive power than any other communicative system in nature. In pragmatic theory, this flexibility is attributed to ostensive communication. Nonetheless, there is no consensus on the defining features of this system. Here, I offer an account of ostensive communication that avoids the cognitive demands associated with alternative approaches. These approaches (e.g., Griceanism) are committed to specific proximate, mechanistic formulations (e.g., metarepresentations), which render comparative and developmental research cumbersome. Instead, I propose that we define ostension using ultimate, functional terms that clearly specify the adaptive problem. In this definition, ostension involves the function of markingNN, i.e., flexibly marking entities (e.g., objects and actions) as communicative. This ability permits humans to produce novel communicative means open-endedly and to establish communication channels. Moreover, the markingNN function could be implemented through both purely inferential processes and simple code-based signals. Therefore, its presence in infancy is less controversial.
{"title":"Ostensive marking as a distinctive feature of human communication","authors":"Nima Mussavifard","doi":"10.1016/j.pragma.2025.12.016","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.pragma.2025.12.016","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Human communication possesses far more expressive power than any other communicative system in nature. In pragmatic theory, this flexibility is attributed to ostensive communication. Nonetheless, there is no consensus on the defining features of this system. Here, I offer an account of ostensive communication that avoids the cognitive demands associated with alternative approaches. These approaches (e.g., Griceanism) are committed to specific proximate, mechanistic formulations (e.g., metarepresentations), which render comparative and developmental research cumbersome. Instead, I propose that we define ostension using ultimate, functional terms that clearly specify the adaptive problem. In this definition, ostension involves the function of marking<sub>NN</sub>, i.e., flexibly marking entities (e.g., objects and actions) as communicative. This ability permits humans to produce novel communicative means open-endedly and to establish communication channels. Moreover, the marking<sub>NN</sub> function could be implemented through both purely inferential processes and simple code-based signals. Therefore, its presence in infancy is less controversial.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16899,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pragmatics","volume":"254 ","pages":"Pages 20-33"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145981650","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-03-01Epub Date: 2026-02-21DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2026.02.005
Sergei Sikorskii, María Luisa Carrió-Pastor
This study examines evaluative patterns in hostile replies to the Spanish politician Isabel Díaz Ayuso on X (formerly Twitter), combining Appraisal Theory with insights from digital-pragmatic and far-right discourse research. Through manual annotation of 498 Spanish-language replies collected between April and May 2025 – a period marked by renewed scandals surrounding Ayuso's administration – the analysis identifies how Judgment and Graduation resources construct gendered delegitimization. Five Judgment categories (Capacity, Tenacity, Normality, Veracity, Propriety) and multimodal intensification mechanisms (Force, Focus) were coded using diagnostic semantic criteria. Social Sanction judgments such as Propriety- (63.5 %) and Veracity- (20.4 %) vastly outweighed Social Esteem types, showing that moral blame and dishonesty dominate over competence critique. Intensification occurred in 70.1 % of replies—via typography, repetition, irony, and emoji-and 29.5 % contained explicitly gendered language, closely linked to Propriety- and Normality-evaluations (χ2 = 52.85, p < 0.000001).
From these patterns, eleven recurrent impoliteness strategies were inductively derived, including sexualized moral judgment, ridicule, and clustered delegitimization. The paper advances the concept of evaluative gatekeeping, showing how moralized and gender-indexed assessments operate as pragmatic exclusion in online political discourse. Findings highlight how far-right communicative norms and gendered morality intersect to shape digital hostility toward female leaders.
本研究将评价理论与来自数字语用学和极右翼话语研究的见解相结合，考察了X（以前的Twitter）上对西班牙政治家Isabel Díaz Ayuso的敌意回复中的评价模式。通过对2025年4月至5月期间收集的498份西班牙语回复的手工注释（这一时期围绕阿尤索政府的丑闻再次出现），分析确定了“判断”和“毕业”资源是如何构建性别非法化的。五个判断类别（能力、韧性、常态、真实性、适当）和多模态强化机制（力量、焦点）使用诊断语义标准进行编码。“得体”（63.5%）和“诚实”（20.4%）等社会制裁判断远远超过“社会尊重”类型，表明道德谴责和不诚实在能力批评中占主导地位。70.1%的回复出现了强化——通过排版、重复、讽刺和表情符号——29.5%的回复包含明确的性别语言，与得体性和常态性评估密切相关（χ2 = 52.85, p < 0.000001）。从这些模式中，归纳出了11种反复出现的不礼貌策略，包括性化的道德判断、嘲笑和聚集性的去合法化。本文提出了评估把关的概念，展示了道德和性别索引评估如何在在线政治话语中作为实用主义排斥运作。研究结果突显了极右翼的沟通规范和性别道德如何相互交织，形成了对女性领导人的数字敌意。
{"title":"Appraising impoliteness on X: A case study of Isabel Díaz Ayuso","authors":"Sergei Sikorskii, María Luisa Carrió-Pastor","doi":"10.1016/j.pragma.2026.02.005","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.pragma.2026.02.005","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study examines evaluative patterns in hostile replies to the Spanish politician Isabel Díaz Ayuso on X (formerly Twitter), combining Appraisal Theory with insights from digital-pragmatic and far-right discourse research. Through manual annotation of 498 Spanish-language replies collected between April and May 2025 – a period marked by renewed scandals surrounding Ayuso's administration – the analysis identifies how Judgment and Graduation resources construct gendered delegitimization. Five Judgment categories (Capacity, Tenacity, Normality, Veracity, Propriety) and multimodal intensification mechanisms (Force, Focus) were coded using diagnostic semantic criteria. Social Sanction judgments such as Propriety- (63.5 %) and Veracity- (20.4 %) vastly outweighed Social Esteem types, showing that moral blame and dishonesty dominate over competence critique. Intensification occurred in 70.1 % of replies—via typography, repetition, irony, and emoji-and 29.5 % contained explicitly gendered language, closely linked to Propriety- and Normality-evaluations (χ<sup>2</sup> = 52.85, p < 0.000001).</div><div>From these patterns, eleven recurrent impoliteness strategies were inductively derived, including sexualized moral judgment, ridicule, and clustered delegitimization. The paper advances the concept of evaluative gatekeeping, showing how moralized and gender-indexed assessments operate as pragmatic exclusion in online political discourse. Findings highlight how far-right communicative norms and gendered morality intersect to shape digital hostility toward female leaders.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16899,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pragmatics","volume":"254 ","pages":"Pages 149-166"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147398256","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-03-01Epub Date: 2026-01-30DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2026.01.004
Shuyan Wang , Shaohua Fang
This study investigates how Mandarin-speaking learners of English (L2) generate scalar implicatures (SIs) involving the quantifier some and the disjunctive or, compared to native English speakers (L1). It further explores the influence of linguistic (L2 proficiency) and cognitive (working memory, inhibitory control) factors on interpreting SIs in L2. Using the covered-box paradigm—a modified picture selection task with reduced meta-linguistic demands—we tested Chinese-speaking L2 learners and native English speakers on their interpretations of sentences containing some and or. Results showed no significant differences between L1 and L2 participants in the overall rate of rejecting under-informative statements for either scalar expression, although both groups rejected significantly more under-informative statements containing or than those containing some. Importantly, the L2 learners displayed less tolerance to the violation of ignorance inference with the disjunctive or. Cognitive and linguistic factors showed limited effects on SI performance: neither working memory nor L2 proficiency predicted SI performance, and inhibitory control only showed marginal effect in certain conditions. These findings support the view that SIs can be achieved in a native-like manner by L2 learners. They further underscore the importance of considering both scale type and individual cognitive capacities in models of pragmatic acquisition in L2.
{"title":"Some and or in second language acquisition: Exploring linguistic and cognitive factors","authors":"Shuyan Wang , Shaohua Fang","doi":"10.1016/j.pragma.2026.01.004","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.pragma.2026.01.004","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study investigates how Mandarin-speaking learners of English (L2) generate scalar implicatures (SIs) involving the quantifier <em>some</em> and the disjunctive <em>or</em>, compared to native English speakers (L1). It further explores the influence of linguistic (L2 proficiency) and cognitive (working memory, inhibitory control) factors on interpreting SIs in L2. Using the covered-box paradigm—a modified picture selection task with reduced meta-linguistic demands—we tested Chinese-speaking L2 learners and native English speakers on their interpretations of sentences containing <em>some</em> and <em>or</em>. Results showed no significant differences between L1 and L2 participants in the overall rate of rejecting under-informative statements for either scalar expression, although both groups rejected significantly more under-informative statements containing <em>or</em> than those containing <em>some</em>. Importantly, the L2 learners displayed less tolerance to the violation of ignorance inference with the disjunctive <em>or</em>. Cognitive and linguistic factors showed limited effects on SI performance: neither working memory nor L2 proficiency predicted SI performance, and inhibitory control only showed marginal effect in certain conditions. These findings support the view that SIs can be achieved in a native-like manner by L2 learners. They further underscore the importance of considering both scale type and individual cognitive capacities in models of pragmatic acquisition in L2.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16899,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pragmatics","volume":"254 ","pages":"Pages 105-121"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146079140","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-03-01Epub Date: 2026-01-19DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2025.11.006
Sonja Gipper
This paper investigates the role of repeat format in contextualizing degrees of informativity in Yurakaré (isolate, Bolivia) request for reconfirmation sequences. Requests for reconfirmation constitute a subtype of newsmarks, inviting at least a reconfirming response by the interlocutor. Across languages, there are two main competing formats for formulating requests for reconfirmation and other responsive actions in conversation: repeats and conventionalized formats such as response particles. Given that repeats restate (part of) a proposition while at the same time being informationally redundant, they have the capacity of explicitly spreading information across various turns. With these properties, repeats may potentially be employed in conversation to reduce peaks in information rate. This hypothesis is explored in this paper for Yurakaré request for reconfirmation sequences. The results, however, suggest that repeat format in the request for reconfirmation and the reconfirming response does not participate in the contextualization of degrees of informativity in Yurakaré request for reconfirmation sequences.
{"title":"Trajectories of request for reconfirmation sequences in Yurakaré: Do repeats reduce information rate in conversation?","authors":"Sonja Gipper","doi":"10.1016/j.pragma.2025.11.006","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.pragma.2025.11.006","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper investigates the role of repeat format in contextualizing degrees of informativity in Yurakaré (isolate, Bolivia) request for reconfirmation sequences. Requests for reconfirmation constitute a subtype of newsmarks, inviting at least a reconfirming response by the interlocutor. Across languages, there are two main competing formats for formulating requests for reconfirmation and other responsive actions in conversation: repeats and conventionalized formats such as response particles. Given that repeats restate (part of) a proposition while at the same time being informationally redundant, they have the capacity of explicitly spreading information across various turns. With these properties, repeats may potentially be employed in conversation to reduce peaks in information rate. This hypothesis is explored in this paper for Yurakaré request for reconfirmation sequences. The results, however, suggest that repeat format in the request for reconfirmation and the reconfirming response does not participate in the contextualization of degrees of informativity in Yurakaré request for reconfirmation sequences.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16899,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pragmatics","volume":"254 ","pages":"Pages 64-80"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146024638","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-03-01Epub Date: 2026-01-19DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2025.12.015
Chenxiao Ma, Yong Jiang
This study investigates the informational function and game-theoretic optimization of the Chinese hypothetical conjunction wanyi (“what if/in case”) in conditionals. As a conditional marker, wanyi raises low-probability but cognitively reasonable scenarios, expanding the conditional space, modulating probabilistic reasoning and informational entropy, and then increasing epistemic uncertainty. Drawing on Shannon's entropy (1948) and models of signaling games (Lewis, 1969; Van Rooy, 2004), the analysis demonstrates that wanyi acts as an optimal signaler, expanding uncertainty to reveal marginal risks, thus creating vigilance and enabling adaptive decision-making in asymmetric or high-stakes interactions. By softening illocutionary force and avoiding outspoken commitment, it prompts cooperation and reduces face-threatening potential. Pragmatically, wanyi diverges from markers like ruguo (“if”), functioning not only to signal hypotheses but also to express speakers' anxiety, probe hearers indirectly, lower threats, and minimize reputational risk. However, it shows inadequacy in high-probability, positive-oriented, time-critical, or precision-driven contexts, highlighting its context-sensitive pragmatics. By integrating information theory, game-theoretic pragmatics, and fine-grained discourse analysis, this paper provides a formal account of wanyi as a context-sensitive risk management strategy. It contributes to research on Chinese conditionality, strategic communication, and modal modulation, offering broader implications for cross-linguistic pragmatics and the study of epistemic stance.
本研究考察了汉语条件句中假设连词“如果/万一”的信息功能及其博弈论优化。万义作为条件标记，提出了低概率但认知上合理的情景，扩大了条件空间，调节了概率推理和信息熵，从而增加了认知不确定性。利用香农熵（1948）和信号博弈模型（Lewis, 1969; Van Rooy, 2004），分析表明，万一作为最优信号传递者，扩大不确定性以揭示边际风险，从而在不对称或高风险互动中产生警惕性并实现适应性决策。通过软化言外之力和避免直言不讳的承诺，它促进了合作，减少了威胁面子的可能性。在语用上，“万一”不同于“如果”等标记语，它的功能不仅是暗示假设，还能表达说话者的焦虑，间接试探听者，降低威胁，并将声誉风险降至最低。然而，它在高概率、积极导向、时间关键或精确驱动的语境中表现出不足，突出了其上下文敏感的语用性。本文结合信息论、博弈论语用学和细粒度语篇分析，对万意作为一种情境敏感的风险管理策略进行了形式化解释。这对汉语条件、策略交际和情态调节性的研究具有重要意义，对跨语言语用学和认知立场研究具有重要意义。
{"title":"Wanyi as a strategic risk marker in Chinese conditionals: An information game-theoretic analysis","authors":"Chenxiao Ma, Yong Jiang","doi":"10.1016/j.pragma.2025.12.015","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.pragma.2025.12.015","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study investigates the informational function and game-theoretic optimization of the Chinese hypothetical conjunction <em>wanyi</em> (“what if/in case”) in conditionals. As a conditional marker, <em>wanyi</em> raises low-probability but cognitively reasonable scenarios, expanding the conditional space, modulating probabilistic reasoning and informational entropy, and then increasing epistemic uncertainty. Drawing on Shannon's entropy (1948) and models of signaling games (Lewis, 1969; Van Rooy, 2004), the analysis demonstrates that <em>wanyi</em> acts as an optimal signaler, expanding uncertainty to reveal marginal risks, thus creating vigilance and enabling adaptive decision-making in asymmetric or high-stakes interactions. By softening illocutionary force and avoiding outspoken commitment, it prompts cooperation and reduces face-threatening potential. Pragmatically, <em>wanyi</em> diverges from markers like <em>ruguo</em> (“if”), functioning not only to signal hypotheses but also to express speakers' anxiety, probe hearers indirectly, lower threats, and minimize reputational risk. However, it shows inadequacy in high-probability, positive-oriented, time-critical, or precision-driven contexts, highlighting its context-sensitive pragmatics. By integrating information theory, game-theoretic pragmatics, and fine-grained discourse analysis, this paper provides a formal account of <em>wanyi</em> as a context-sensitive risk management strategy. It contributes to research on Chinese conditionality, strategic communication, and modal modulation, offering broader implications for cross-linguistic pragmatics and the study of epistemic stance.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16899,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pragmatics","volume":"254 ","pages":"Pages 45-63"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146024640","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-03-01Epub Date: 2026-01-12DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2025.12.010
Sergei Sikorskii, María Luisa Carrió-Pastor
This study applies Appraisal Theory to analyze evaluative patterns in digital political impoliteness, examining how systematic deployment of Judgment and Graduation resources functions as a form of pragmatic exclusion in hostile replies to Spanish politician Isabel Diaz Ayuso on X (formerly Twitter). Through manual annotation of 498 Spanish-language hostile replies collected between April and May 2025, we coded for five Judgment categories (Capacity, Tenacity, Normality, Veracity, Propriety) and intensification mechanisms (Force, Focus). Results reveal that Social Sanction judgments, such as Propriety- (63.5 %) and Veracity- (20.4 %), sharply outweigh Social Esteem evaluations, indicating a focus on moral delegitimization over competence critique.
Intensification was present in 70.1 % of replies, realized through typography, repetition, irony, and emoji. Notably, 29.5 % of replies contained gendered language, disproportionately associated with Propriety- and Normality-judgments (χ2 = 52.85, p < 0.000001), suggesting gendered language disproportionately co-occurs with moral and behavioral judgments. Eleven recurrent impoliteness strategies were identified, often combining multiple negative evaluations with multimodal amplification. This case study introduces the concept of evaluative gatekeeping to describe how hostile replies may use neutral-seeming assessment to challenge political legitimacy in gendered terms. These findings suggest that digital hostility toward female political figures may center on moral judgment rather than policy critique, raising implications for pragmatic exclusion and gendered participation in online political discourse.
{"title":"Appraising impoliteness on X: A case study of Isabel Díaz Ayuso","authors":"Sergei Sikorskii, María Luisa Carrió-Pastor","doi":"10.1016/j.pragma.2025.12.010","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.pragma.2025.12.010","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study applies Appraisal Theory to analyze evaluative patterns in digital political impoliteness, examining how systematic deployment of Judgment and Graduation resources functions as a form of pragmatic exclusion in hostile replies to Spanish politician Isabel Diaz Ayuso on X (formerly Twitter). Through manual annotation of 498 Spanish-language hostile replies collected between April and May 2025, we coded for five Judgment categories (Capacity, Tenacity, Normality, Veracity, Propriety) and intensification mechanisms (Force, Focus). Results reveal that Social Sanction judgments, such as Propriety- (63.5 %) and Veracity- (20.4 %), sharply outweigh Social Esteem evaluations, indicating a focus on moral delegitimization over competence critique.</div><div>Intensification was present in 70.1 % of replies, realized through typography, repetition, irony, and emoji. Notably, 29.5 % of replies contained gendered language, disproportionately associated with Propriety- and Normality-judgments (<em>χ</em><sup><em>2</em></sup> = 52.85, p < 0.000001), suggesting gendered language disproportionately co-occurs with moral and behavioral judgments. Eleven recurrent impoliteness strategies were identified, often combining multiple negative evaluations with multimodal amplification. This case study introduces the concept of <em>evaluative gatekeeping</em> to describe how hostile replies may use neutral-seeming assessment to challenge political legitimacy in gendered terms. These findings suggest that digital hostility toward female political figures may center on moral judgment rather than policy critique, raising implications for pragmatic exclusion and gendered participation in online political discourse.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16899,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pragmatics","volume":"254 ","pages":"Pages 1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145948069","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-03-01Epub Date: 2026-01-30DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2026.01.006
Michal Marmorstein, Beatrice Szczepek-Reed
{"title":"Newsmarks from a crosslinguistic perspective: Introduction","authors":"Michal Marmorstein, Beatrice Szczepek-Reed","doi":"10.1016/j.pragma.2026.01.006","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.pragma.2026.01.006","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":16899,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pragmatics","volume":"254 ","pages":"Pages 122-126"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146079141","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号