This paper examines two variants of the pseudo-cleft construction which display a WHAT-NP-VP-be pattern with the VP realised with cognitive verbs and the proform do in the context of spoken British English dyadic and multi-party BBC podcasts. It is based on the premise that the construction’s referencing potentials are both cataphoric and projective, and that depending on its contexts, one of the two referencing functions is foregrounded while the other is backgrounded. The analysis focuses on those linguistic features and contextual configurations which either contribute to its cataphoric referencing function, or which go beyond the local cataphoric referencing function and indicate its projective, discourse-organising function. The research is corpus-based and uses quantitative and qualitative methodologies, filtering out the linguistic features and contextual configurations which contribute to assigning the two variants the status of a projective construction with a discourse-organising function. The features under investigation are (1) the semantics of the constitutive NPs and VPs marking for tense, aspect and modality and their uptake in the discourse, (2) degrees of continuity and discontinuity in the cohesive chains triggered by the constitutive parts of the construction. The paper shows that when semantic continuity between the what-clause and what follows is discontinued and thus deferred, the construction’s projective function is foregrounded.
{"title":"‘What we found is’","authors":"Florine Berthe, Anita Fetzer, Isabelle Gaudy-Campbell","doi":"10.1075/fol.23054.ber","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.23054.ber","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This paper examines two variants of the pseudo-cleft construction which display a WHAT-NP-VP-be pattern with the\u0000 VP realised with cognitive verbs and the proform do in the context of spoken British English dyadic and\u0000 multi-party BBC podcasts. It is based on the premise that the construction’s referencing potentials are both cataphoric and\u0000 projective, and that depending on its contexts, one of the two referencing functions is foregrounded while the other is\u0000 backgrounded. The analysis focuses on those linguistic features and contextual configurations which either contribute to its\u0000 cataphoric referencing function, or which go beyond the local cataphoric referencing function and indicate its projective,\u0000 discourse-organising function. The research is corpus-based and uses quantitative and qualitative methodologies, filtering out the\u0000 linguistic features and contextual configurations which contribute to assigning the two variants the status of a projective\u0000 construction with a discourse-organising function. The features under investigation are (1) the semantics of the constitutive NPs\u0000 and VPs marking for tense, aspect and modality and their uptake in the discourse, (2) degrees of continuity and discontinuity in\u0000 the cohesive chains triggered by the constitutive parts of the construction. The paper shows that when semantic continuity between\u0000 the what-clause and what follows is discontinued and thus deferred, the construction’s projective function is\u0000 foregrounded.","PeriodicalId":502755,"journal":{"name":"Functions of Language","volume":"16 13","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141648079","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article presents a development of evidential categories derived from a verb related to the auditory sense in the evidential system attested in rGyalthang Tibetan varieties. The language varieties under study possess a morphological distinction of at least five evidentials in the access-to-information category and two evidentials in the source-of-information category. The discussion focuses on one morpheme derived from the Literary Tibetan verb grag ‘resound, hear’ used for both categories, and examines its process of grammaticalisation and degrammaticalisation. Elicited data illustrate the following functions: (1) grag as a nonvisual sensory evidential suffix that was further degrammaticalised as a copulative nonvisual sensory verb stem; (2) grag as a hearsay marker in a separate syntactic slot, which extended from (1); and (3) grag as a lexical verb stem meaning ‘hear’ [the common origin to (1) and (2)], which underwent two grammaticalisation processes.
{"title":"Functional transition from hear\u0000 to nonvisual sensory and hearsay evidential categories","authors":"Hiroyuki Suzuki","doi":"10.1075/fol.22059.suz","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.22059.suz","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article presents a development of evidential categories derived from a verb related to the auditory sense in\u0000 the evidential system attested in rGyalthang Tibetan varieties. The language varieties under study possess a morphological\u0000 distinction of at least five evidentials in the access-to-information category and two evidentials in the source-of-information\u0000 category. The discussion focuses on one morpheme derived from the Literary Tibetan verb grag ‘resound, hear’ used\u0000 for both categories, and examines its process of grammaticalisation and degrammaticalisation. Elicited data illustrate the\u0000 following functions: (1) grag as a nonvisual sensory evidential suffix that was further degrammaticalised as a\u0000 copulative nonvisual sensory verb stem; (2) grag as a hearsay marker in a separate syntactic slot, which extended\u0000 from (1); and (3) grag as a lexical verb stem meaning ‘hear’ [the common origin to (1) and (2)], which underwent\u0000 two grammaticalisation processes.","PeriodicalId":502755,"journal":{"name":"Functions of Language","volume":"17 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141648577","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Seçkin Arslan, Elif Tutku Tunali, Yağmur Çetin, Özgür Aydın
Evidentiality encodes how a speaker has access to the information contained in his/her proposition. It has been shown that some ‘evidential language’ speakers make a deliberate choice of evidentials while telling lies (Aikhenvald 2004). In this study, we recruited 40 native speakers of Turkish, an ‘evidential language’, to judge statements with evidentials using an eye-movement-monitoring-during-reading study with an end-of-sentence deception detection task. The participants read sentences with four conditions, containing a direct or indirect evidential form either compatible or incompatible with the given information source. Our results show that the indirect evidential condition was detected as a lie more often than the direct evidential condition. Readers had the tendency to judge stimulus material with source-evidentiality mismatch to be untruthful. These findings were mirrored in the eye-movement data, as we found gaze duration to be longer at the critical verb region for indirect evidential and mismatch conditions.
{"title":"Eyes do not lie but words do","authors":"Seçkin Arslan, Elif Tutku Tunali, Yağmur Çetin, Özgür Aydın","doi":"10.1075/fol.22061.ars","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.22061.ars","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Evidentiality encodes how a speaker has access to the information contained in his/her proposition. It has been\u0000 shown that some ‘evidential language’ speakers make a deliberate choice of evidentials while telling lies (Aikhenvald 2004). In this study, we recruited 40 native speakers of Turkish, an ‘evidential language’, to\u0000 judge statements with evidentials using an eye-movement-monitoring-during-reading study with an end-of-sentence deception\u0000 detection task. The participants read sentences with four conditions, containing a direct or indirect evidential form either\u0000 compatible or incompatible with the given information source. Our results show that the indirect evidential condition was detected\u0000 as a lie more often than the direct evidential condition. Readers had the tendency to judge stimulus material with\u0000 source-evidentiality mismatch to be untruthful. These findings were mirrored in the eye-movement data, as we found gaze duration\u0000 to be longer at the critical verb region for indirect evidential and mismatch conditions.","PeriodicalId":502755,"journal":{"name":"Functions of Language","volume":"103 35","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141666148","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The marking on copular verbs in Tibetic languages is regarded as an exemplar of egophoricity, although the extent to which it has been grammaticalized varies between languages. Dzongkha, a southern Tibetic language, is somewhat atypical of the egophoric pattern in the sense that the basic opposition in copulas exhibits a mirative pattern, wherein the non-mirative (egophoric) copula occurs with all grammatical persons in declaratives and interrogatives, and the mirative (non-egophoric) occurs with the 3rd person and rarely with 1st and 2nd persons. The conversational data studied for this paper also show that the speaker need not take knowledge stances that bifurcate the world between objectively ‘old’ and ‘new’ knowledge and the attendant associations of knowledge with a particular grammatical person. Rather, the speaker’s representation of events is subjective, and dependent, in part, on the knowledge stances between speaker and respondent. What is in view in conversational interaction are the social goals of the conversation — assertions, face-saving strategies, and arriving at mutually shared knowledge — and the Dzongkha copulas are a manipulable linguistic resource in achieving these.
{"title":"The discourse functions of simple copulas in Dzongkha","authors":"Stephen Watters","doi":"10.1075/fol.22056.wat","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.22056.wat","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The marking on copular verbs in Tibetic languages is regarded as an exemplar of egophoricity, although the extent\u0000 to which it has been grammaticalized varies between languages. Dzongkha, a southern Tibetic language, is somewhat atypical of the\u0000 egophoric pattern in the sense that the basic opposition in copulas exhibits a mirative pattern, wherein the non-mirative\u0000 (egophoric) copula occurs with all grammatical persons in declaratives and interrogatives, and the mirative (non-egophoric) occurs\u0000 with the 3rd person and rarely with 1st and 2nd persons. The conversational data studied for this paper also show that the speaker\u0000 need not take knowledge stances that bifurcate the world between objectively ‘old’ and ‘new’ knowledge and the attendant\u0000 associations of knowledge with a particular grammatical person. Rather, the speaker’s representation of events is subjective, and\u0000 dependent, in part, on the knowledge stances between speaker and respondent. What is in view in conversational interaction are the\u0000 social goals of the conversation — assertions, face-saving strategies, and arriving at mutually shared knowledge — and the\u0000 Dzongkha copulas are a manipulable linguistic resource in achieving these.","PeriodicalId":502755,"journal":{"name":"Functions of Language","volume":"123 25","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141665405","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：