Discussion article : discourse markers, modal particles, and contrastive analysis, synchronic and diachronic

I discuss three issues common to papers in the present issue of CatJL by Aijmer, Bazzanella et al., and Waltereit and Detges. One is modal uses of discourse markers and distinctions between discourse markers and modal particles. The second is evidence provided by the papers for diachronic changes that individual markers underwent; the distinction between grammaticalization and pragmaticalization is considered and challenged. Finally, I raise some issues regarding the methodology of data-selection in contrastive studies.En aquest article discutim tres elements comuns a les contribucions d'Aijmer, Bazzanella et al., i Waltereit i Detges a aquest volum de CatJL. Un és els usos modals dels marcadors del discurs i les distincions entre marcadors del discurs i partícules modals. El segon són les proves que els articles aporten per al canvi diacrònic que han patit els marcadors concrets que s'hi estudien, en relació amb la distinció entre gramaticalització i pragmaticalització. Finalment, plantegem algunes qüestions relatives a la metodologia de selecció de dades en estudis contrastius

Is "Back to my Point" a Pragmatic Marker? : an Inquiry into the Historical Development of some Metatextual Discourse Management Markers in English

Discourse management markers (DMMs) that "signal a meta-comment on the structure of the discourse" (Fraser 2009) are widely attested in historical data. Most discourse management markers (e.g. and, anyway, by the way, but, now, then) meet well-known criteria for pragmatic markers such as multifunctionality, opacity, optionality, (inter)subjectivity, relatively high frequency, and shortness. However, several cited in Fraser (2009), many of them topic-orientation markers, do not (e.g. back to my original point, to return to my previous topic, if I might continue). I propose that an account of the development of DMMs make a distinction between adverbial adjuncts, conjunct adverbials, and pragmatic markers (e.g. Hasselgård 2010). By hypothesis, change may occur along the cline: adverbial adjuncts > conjunct adverbials (> DMMs). This approach accounts for gradual form-meaning shifts and is consistent with a usage perspective on language as a dynamic system grounded in usage events (Kemmer & Barlow 1999; Langacker 2008).Els marcadors de gestió del discurs (DMM) que "assenyalen un metacomentari sobre l'estructura del discurs" (Fraser 2009) estan àmpliament provats per les dades històriques. La majoria de marcadors de gestió del discurs (per exemple, and, anyway, by the way, but, now, then) compleixen criteris ben coneguts per als marcadors pragmàtics com la multifuncionalitat, l'opacitat, l'opcionalitat, la (inter)subjectivitat, la freqüència relativament alta i la brevetat. Tanmateix, diversos casos citats a Fraser (2009), molts d'aquests marcadors d'orientació temàtica, no els compleixen (per exemple, back to my original point, to return to my previous topic, if I might continue). Proposo que un acostament al desenvolupament dels DMM faci una distinció entre adverbis adjunts, adverbis conjunts i marcadors pragmàtics (per exemple, Hasselgård 2010). Hipotèticament, el canvi pot seguir la tendència: adverbis adjunts > adverbis conjunts (> DMM). Aquest enfocament explica canvis graduals de forma i significat, i és coherent amb una perspectiva d'ús del llenguatge com a sistema dinàmic basat en esdeveniments d'ús (Kemmer & Barlow 1999; Langacker 2008)

Pragmatic Strengthening and Grammaticalization

Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (1988), pp. 406-41

The Sociostylistics of Minority Dialect in Literary Prose

Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (1981), pp. 308-31

From Polysemy to Internal Semantic Reconstruction

Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (1986), pp. 539-55

Divergence and Apparent Convergence in the Development of Yet and Still

Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (1982

Historische Pragmatik

›Historische Pragmatik‹ bezeichnet ein eigenständiges Teilgebiet der Pragmatik, das sich seit den 1990er Jahren stark entwickelt und ausdifferenziert hat. Es befasst sich im Wesentlichen mit pragmatischen Fragestellungen an historischem Sprachmaterial. Fragen der Sprachverwendung werden zusammengebracht mit Fragen der historischen Linguistik zu früheren Sprachformen, zur Entwicklung von Sprache und Sprachen und somit ganz generell zu den Fragen des Sprachwandels. Die historische Pragmatik setzt in den meisten Fällen ein Verständnis von Pragmatik voraus, bei dem es ganz wesentlich auch um den sozialen Kontext der Sprachverwendung geht. Dieses Verständnis von Pragmatik wird oft unter dem Begriff ›Soziopragmatik‹ subsumiert und orientiert sich nicht unwesentlich an Arbeiten in der Soziologie und Anthropologie

Uma perspectiva construtiva sobre a ascensão dos marcadores de discurso metatextual

Cognitive linguistics seeks to account for “a speaker’s knowledge of the full range of linguistic conventions” (LANGACKER, 1987; also GOLDBERG, 2006). It is surprising therefore that little attention has been paid in cognitive linguistics to the linguistic conventions called “discourse markers” (SCHIFFRIN, 1987) or “pragmatic markers” (FRASER, 2009, et passim). Pragmatic markers include signals of attention to social relationships (well, please), beliefs (I think, in fact), and discourse management (after all, anyway). Members of the third subtype are metatextual connectors of discourse segments (“discourse markers” in Fraser’s taxonomy). I argue that because pragmatic markers in general play a major role in negotiating meaning, they are an important part of speakers’ knowledge of language. Pragmatic markers are well-known not to have truth-conditional meaning, and not to be syntactically integrated with the host clause. However, they have conventional pragmatic meanings (HANSEN, 2012; FINKBEINER, 2019). I exemplify my recent research on the historical development in English of metatextual discourse markers with a diachronic construction grammar perspective on by the way (TRAUGOTT, 2020). Focus will be on the importance of routinized, replicated contexts in change (CROFT, 2001; BYBEE, 2010).A linguística cognitiva procura compreender “o conhecimento que um falante tem de toda a gama de convenções linguísticas” (LANGACKER, 1987; também GOLDBERG, 2006). É surpreendente, portanto, que pouca atenção tenha sido dada na linguística cognitiva às convenções conhecidas por “marcadores discursivos” (SCHIFFRIN, 1987) ou “marcadores pragmáticos” (FRASER, 2009, et passim). Marcadores pragmáticos incluem sinais de atenção às relações sociais (bom, por favor), de crenças (eu acho, na verdade) e de gerenciamento discursivo (afinal, pelo menos). Membros do terceiro subtipo são conectores metatextuais de segmentos de discurso ("marcadores de discurso" na taxonomia de Fraser). Eu argumento que, como os marcadores pragmáticos em geral desempenham um papel importante na negociação de significado, eles são uma parte central do conhecimento que os falantes têm da língua. Os marcadores pragmáticos são conhecidos por não terem significado condicional de verdade e por não serem integrados sintaticamente com a oração hospedeira. No entanto, eles têm significados pragmáticos convencionais (HANSEN, 2012; FINKBEINER, 2019). Eu ilustro minha pesquisa recente sobre o desenvolvimento histórico em inglês de marcadores de discurso metatextuais a partir de uma perspectiva gramatical de construção diacrônica sobre a propósito (TRAUGOTT, 2020). O foco aqui será sobre a importância de contextos rotineiros e replicados na mudança (CROFT, 2001; BYBEE, 2010)