{"title":"英语、西班牙语和葡萄牙语中的标准附加疑问句:语篇功能研究","authors":"María Angeles González","doi":"10.1075/LIC.14.1.06GOM","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper compares and contrasts the patterns of variation exhibited by canonical tag questions ((C)TQs) in English (e.g. ‘That’s enough, isn’t it?’) with those presented by their analogous constructions in Spanish (Es suficiente, ?no?/ ?verdad?) and Portuguese (E suficiente, nao e?/nao?) across a variety of spoken genres that represent the monologic-dialogic, formal-informal and private-public oppositions. The aim is to provide previously lacking comparative statistics that emerge from this trilingual comparison along four parameters: (i) frequencies, (ii) formal features, (iii) distribution across genres, and (iv) functional characteristics. It will be observed that English CTQs are less frequent than analogous constructions in Spanish and particularly in Portuguese. A tag/polarity-based scale will also be proposed in which Portuguese situates itself at one extreme in displaying the widest array of variant and invariant tag types; at the other extreme is Spanish allowing for invariant tags only, whereas English occupies a middle position as it admits both invariant and variant tags but the latter exhibit less variability in kind than their Portuguese counterparts. Lastly, it will be shown that English CTQs display less distributional and functional flexibility than the analogous constructions in the two Romance languages under analysis.","PeriodicalId":43502,"journal":{"name":"Languages in Contrast","volume":"22 1","pages":"93-126"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Canonical tag questions in English, Spanish and Portuguese: A discourse-functional study\",\"authors\":\"María Angeles González\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/LIC.14.1.06GOM\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper compares and contrasts the patterns of variation exhibited by canonical tag questions ((C)TQs) in English (e.g. ‘That’s enough, isn’t it?’) with those presented by their analogous constructions in Spanish (Es suficiente, ?no?/ ?verdad?) and Portuguese (E suficiente, nao e?/nao?) across a variety of spoken genres that represent the monologic-dialogic, formal-informal and private-public oppositions. The aim is to provide previously lacking comparative statistics that emerge from this trilingual comparison along four parameters: (i) frequencies, (ii) formal features, (iii) distribution across genres, and (iv) functional characteristics. It will be observed that English CTQs are less frequent than analogous constructions in Spanish and particularly in Portuguese. A tag/polarity-based scale will also be proposed in which Portuguese situates itself at one extreme in displaying the widest array of variant and invariant tag types; at the other extreme is Spanish allowing for invariant tags only, whereas English occupies a middle position as it admits both invariant and variant tags but the latter exhibit less variability in kind than their Portuguese counterparts. Lastly, it will be shown that English CTQs display less distributional and functional flexibility than the analogous constructions in the two Romance languages under analysis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43502,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Languages in Contrast\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"93-126\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-07-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"18\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Languages in Contrast\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/LIC.14.1.06GOM\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Languages in Contrast","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/LIC.14.1.06GOM","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18
摘要
本文比较和对比了英语中典型附加疑问句((C) tq)(如“That ' s enough, isn ' t it?”)与西班牙语中类似结构(Es sufficiiciente, ?no?)所呈现的变化模式。/ ?verdad?)和葡萄牙语(E sufficiiciente, nao E ?/nao?)跨越各种口语类型,代表独白-对话,正式-非正式和私人-公共对立。目的是提供以前缺乏的比较统计数据,这些统计数据来自于这种三语比较,涉及四个参数:(i)频率,(ii)形式特征,(iii)跨类型分布,以及(iv)功能特征。我们会发现,英语的ctq比西班牙语中的类似结构更少,尤其是在葡萄牙语中。还将提出一个基于标签/极性的量表,其中葡萄牙语在显示最广泛的可变和不变标签类型方面处于一个极端;另一个极端是西班牙语,只允许使用不变标签,而英语则处于中间位置,因为它既允许使用不变标签,也允许使用变标签,但后者在种类上的可变性比葡萄牙语要小。最后,我们将会发现英语的ctq在分布和功能上的灵活性要低于两种罗曼语的类似结构。
Canonical tag questions in English, Spanish and Portuguese: A discourse-functional study
This paper compares and contrasts the patterns of variation exhibited by canonical tag questions ((C)TQs) in English (e.g. ‘That’s enough, isn’t it?’) with those presented by their analogous constructions in Spanish (Es suficiente, ?no?/ ?verdad?) and Portuguese (E suficiente, nao e?/nao?) across a variety of spoken genres that represent the monologic-dialogic, formal-informal and private-public oppositions. The aim is to provide previously lacking comparative statistics that emerge from this trilingual comparison along four parameters: (i) frequencies, (ii) formal features, (iii) distribution across genres, and (iv) functional characteristics. It will be observed that English CTQs are less frequent than analogous constructions in Spanish and particularly in Portuguese. A tag/polarity-based scale will also be proposed in which Portuguese situates itself at one extreme in displaying the widest array of variant and invariant tag types; at the other extreme is Spanish allowing for invariant tags only, whereas English occupies a middle position as it admits both invariant and variant tags but the latter exhibit less variability in kind than their Portuguese counterparts. Lastly, it will be shown that English CTQs display less distributional and functional flexibility than the analogous constructions in the two Romance languages under analysis.
期刊介绍:
Languages in Contrast aims to publish contrastive studies of two or more languages. Any aspect of language may be covered, including vocabulary, phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, text and discourse, stylistics, sociolinguistics and psycholinguistics. Languages in Contrast welcomes interdisciplinary studies, particularly those that make links between contrastive linguistics and translation, lexicography, computational linguistics, language teaching, literary and linguistic computing, literary studies and cultural studies.