1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Evolutionary Linguistic Theory
  4. Volume 5, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 5, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2589-1588
  • E-ISSN: 2589-1596
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This article explores the relationship between pragmatics and the other components of grammar. Specifically, it aims to determine whether pragmatics is a distinct module of grammar coming into play at some point in the derivation process to connect the sentence with the context. The conclusion is that, based on the phenomena considered in this work, pragmatics rather than being a separate module, is in the various components. It is shown in fact that the context immediately intervenes at the representative level to yield the correct syntax to be fed to the sensorimotor system on one side, and to the conceptual one on the other. The empirical focus of the article is on a specific type of questions in Italian, namely surprise and surprise-disapproval questions, because they are most sensitive to pragmatic factors. The syntactic, prosodic, and gestural components of these constructions will be examined, highlighting their most important characteristics.

© 2024 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/elt.00049.gio
2024-03-26
2024-12-05

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/elt.00049.gio
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alcázar, Asier and Saltarelli, Mario
    (2014) The Syntax of Imperatives, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK. 10.1017/CBO9780511794391
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511794391 [Google Scholar]
  2. Allott, Nichols and Wilson, Deirdre
    (2021) Chomsky and pragmatics. In: N. Allott, T. Lohndal & G. Rey (Eds.), A Companion to Chomsky, Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell, 433–447. 10.1002/9781119598732.ch27
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119598732.ch27 [Google Scholar]
  3. Angelo, Denise and Schultze-Berndt, Eva
    (2016) Beware bambai – lest it be apprehensive. In: Meakins, Felicity and Al. Loss and Renewal: Australian Languages Since Colonisation, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 255–296. 10.1515/9781614518792‑015
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614518792-015 [Google Scholar]
  4. Avesani, Cinzia
    (1995) ToBIt: un sistema di trascrizione per l’intonazione italiana, Atti delle Quinte Giornate di Studio del Gruuppo di Fonetica Sperimentale, A.I.A., Povo (TN) 1994, pp.85–98.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Bertinetto, Pier Marco and Denis Delfitto
    (2000) Aspect vs. Actionality: Why They Should Be Kept Apart. In: Östen Dahl (ed.), Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 189–225. 10.1515/9783110197099.1.189
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197099.1.189 [Google Scholar]
  6. Berwick, Robert
    (1989) Natural Language, Computational Complexity and Generative Capacity, Computers and Artificial Intelligence, 8, 5, 423–421.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Berwick, Robert and Weinberg, Amy
    (1982) Parsing Efficiency, Computational Complexity, and the Evaluation of Grammatical Theories, Linguistic Inquiry, Vol.13, 2, 165–191.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Chomsky, Noam
    (1959) On Certain Formal Properties of Grammar, Information and Control, 21, 137–167. 10.1016/S0019‑9958(59)90362‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(59)90362-6 [Google Scholar]
  9. (1975) Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, MIT Press, MA.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. (1981) Lectures on Government and Binding, Foris Pub., Dordrecht.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. (1995) The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
     [Google Scholar]
  12. (2000) Minimalist Inquiries. In: Martin Roger, (eds.), Step by step: Minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, 31, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 89–155.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. (2008) On Phases. In: Freidin, Robert (eds.), Foundational issues in linguistic theory. Essays in honor of Jean-RogerVergnaud, Cambridge MA: MIT Press. 291–321. 10.7551/mitpress/7713.003.0009
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/7713.003.0009 [Google Scholar]
  14. (2013) Problems of Projection. InLingua, 1301, Special Issue “Core Ideas and Results in Syntax”. 33–49. 10.1016/j.lingua.2012.12.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2012.12.003 [Google Scholar]
  15. Dal Farra, Chiara; Giorgi, Alessandra; Hinterhölzl, Roland
    (2018) Syntax, prosody and gestures in the expression of surprise in Italian and German. In: Book of Abstracts. 51st Annual Meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea, Tallinn University, Estonia, 631.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Domaneschi, Filippo and Bambini, Valentina
    (2020) Pragmatic Competence, in: Ellen Fridland and Carlotta Pavese (eds), Routledge Handbook of Skill and Expertise, Springer 2020, 419–430. 10.4324/9781315180809‑40
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315180809-40 [Google Scholar]
  17. Furlan, Erica
    (2019) Preguntas especiales en contextos de sorpresa: entonacióen n y gestualidad castellano. Análisis de datos experimentales procedentes de entrevistas a nativos, MA Thesis, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Giorgi, Alessandra
    (2010) About the Speaker: Towards a Syntax of Indexicality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. (2016) On the temporal interpretation of certain surprise questions. SpringerPlus, 51:139010.1186/s40064‑016‑2951‑5 (last accessedJuly 12, 2023).
     https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-2951-5 [Google Scholar]
  20. (2018) Ma non era rosso? (But wasn’t it red?): On counter-expectational questions in Italian. In: Lori Repetti, Francisco Ordóñez (eds.). Selected papers from the 46th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), New York, John Benjamins, 69–84. 10.1075/rllt.14.05gio
     https://doi.org/10.1075/rllt.14.05gio [Google Scholar]
  21. (2021) Danger! Towards an integrated model of syntax, prosody and gesture for warning expressions, paper presented atPragmasophia Meeting, Noto, July 2021. https://pragmasophia2019.wordpress.com/abstract/
     [Google Scholar]
  22. (2023) Micro-discourses and context-enrichment: Interjections, vocatives and adversative particles, InTommaso Balsemin, Irene Caloi, Jacopo Garzonio, Nicolas Lamoure, Francesco Pinzin (Eds.), Quaderni di Lavoro ASIt251, Padova, 571–600.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. (forthcoming), Towards a Syntax of Adversative Constructions in Italian. Ms. Ca’ Foscari University of Venice.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Giorgi, Alessandra, Dal Farra, Chiara
    (2019) On the Syntax/Pragmatics Interface: Expressing Surprise and Disapproval. Intercultural Pragmatics, 161, 35–361. 10.1515/ip‑2019‑0017
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2019-0017 [Google Scholar]
  25. Giorgi, Alessandra and Petrocchi, Erika
    (forthcoming), A cross-linguistic perspective on surprise and surprise-disapproval questions.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Giorgi, Alessandra and Pianesi, Fabio
    (2001) Imperfect Dreams. The temporal dependencies of fictional predicates. Probus, 131, 31–68. 10.1515/prbs.13.1.31
     https://doi.org/10.1515/prbs.13.1.31 [Google Scholar]
  27. Grice, Martine, D’Imperio, Mariapaola, Savino, Michelina, Avesani, Cinzia
    (2005), “Strategies for intonation labeling across varieties of Italian”. In: Jun Sun-Ah (ed.), Prosodic typology: The phonology of intonation and phrasing, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp.362–389. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199249633.003.0013
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199249633.003.0013 [Google Scholar]
  28. Ippolito, Michela
    (2004) Imperfect Modality. In: Jacqueline Guéron and Jacqueline Lecarme (Eds.), The Syntax of Time. Cambridge, MA., MIT Press, pp.359–387. 10.7551/mitpress/6598.003.0016
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6598.003.0016 [Google Scholar]
  29. Kendon, Adam
    (2004) Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511807572
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807572 [Google Scholar]
  30. Marchetiello, Chiara
    (2022) UE, ma che staje facenno?! (‘Hey, but what are you doing?!’): Expressing Expectation and Surprise/Disapproval in Neapolitan Dialect, MA Thesis, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Munaro, Nicola & Cecilia Poletto
    (2003) Sentential particles and clausal typing in the Veneto dialects. University of Venice Working Papers in Linguistics. 131. 127–154.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Munaro, Nicola & Hans-Georg Obenauer
    (1999) On underspecified wh-elements in pseudo interrogatives. University of Venice Working Papers in Linguistics9(1–2). 181–253.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Obenauer, Hans-Georg
    (2004) Nonstandard wh-questions and alternative checkers in Pagotto. In: H. Lohnstein & S. Trissler (eds.), Syntax and Semantics of the Left Periphery, 343–384. The Hague, Netherlands: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110912111.343
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110912111.343 [Google Scholar]
  34. (2006) Special interrogatives, left-periphery, Wh-Doubling and (apparently) optional elements. In: Doetjes and González. Selected papers from Going Romance 2004. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 247–273.10.1075/cilt.278.12obe
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.278.12obe [Google Scholar]
  35. Obenauer, Hans-Georg & Cecilia Poletto
    (2000) Rhetorical wh-phrases in the left periphery of the sentence. University of Venice Working papers in Linguistics, 101: 121–151.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Petrocchi, Erika
    (2022) Multimodality in Grammar: The case of special questions expressing surprise in oral and sign language, PhD Thesis, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Popper, Karl
    (1959) the Logic of Scientific Discovery, New York, Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Rizzi, Luigi
    (1997) The fine structure of the left periphery, In: Haegeman, Liliane (ed) Elements of Grammar. International Handbooks of Linguistics. Dordrecht, Springer, 281–335. 10.1007/978‑94‑011‑5420‑8_7
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5420-8_7 [Google Scholar]
  39. Ross, John
    (1967) Constraints on Variables in Syntax, PhD Dissertation, MIT.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Searle, John
    (1975) Indirect Speech Acts, In: Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics, 3: Speech Acts, New York: Academic Press. 59–82. 10.1163/9789004368811_004
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368811_004 [Google Scholar]
  41. Vicente, Louis
    (2010) On the syntax of adversative coordination. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 28(2). 381–415. 10.1007/s11049‑010‑9094‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-010-9094-0 [Google Scholar]
  42. Wiltschko, Martina
    (2022) What is the Syntax-pragmatics interface?In: Bîlbîie, Gabriela (eds.), Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics141, ParisCSSP, 273–208.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Zanuttini, Raffaella
    (2008) Encoding the addressee in the syntax: Evidence from English imperative subjects. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory261:185–218. 10.1007/s11049‑007‑9029‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-007-9029-6 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/elt.00049.gio
Loading
Pragmatics in the Minimalist framework
Evolutionary Linguistic Theory 5, 103 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1075/elt.00049.gio
/content/journals/10.1075/elt.00049.gio
/content/journals/10.1075/elt.00049.gio
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): emotional language; interfaces; Minimalism; pragmatics; special questions; surprise; surprise-disapproval

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error