1887
Volume 26, Issue 3
  • ISSN 0929-998X
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9765
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper presents an analysis of the expression of evidentiality by the English adverbs and (MNP&V). I propose that the adverbs have a meaning of manner and an evidential meaning, and that both meanings often coexist, in which case evidentiality is shown to be a pragmatic implication of the meaning of manner. An account is provided of the factors of the linguistic context that trigger MNP&V’s evidential meaning, as a single meaning or as an implication: propositional scope, realis assertion, no premodification by degree adverbs mapping on to a construal of totality and no coordination with adverbs of manner. Position is also shown to strengthen or weaken the evidential implication when MNP&V have syntactic clausal scope. The evidentiality expressed by MNP&V is also characterised according to mode of access, domain, subjectivity and reliability. The adverbs have been submitted to a quantitative analysis of all their occurrences in the British National Corpus; the results show that MNP&V are evidential by implication in most cases, and also uncover individual differences in features such as position and domain of evidence and in the extent to which each adverb can be considered as an evidential expression.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/fol.00024.car
2019-11-25
2019-12-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. [Google Scholar]
  2. [Google Scholar]
  3. Oxford English Dictionary: www.oed.com/
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Anderson, Lloyd B.
    1986 Evidentials, paths of change, and mental maps: Typologically regular asymmetries. InWallace Chafe & Johanna Nichols (eds.), 273–312.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Boye, Kasper
    2012Epistemic meaning: A crosslinguistic and functional-cognitive study. (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 43). Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110219036
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219036 [Google Scholar]
  6. Boye, Kasper & Peter Harder
    2009 Evidentiality: Linguistic categories and grammaticalization. Functions of Language16(1). 9–43. 10.1075/fol.16.1.03boy
    https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.16.1.03boy [Google Scholar]
  7. Carretero, Marta
    2004 The role of evidentiality and epistemic modality in three English spoken texts from legal proceedings. InJuana I. Marín-Arrese (ed.), 25–62.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 2007 Subjectivity in epistemic modality: A two-resource based approach. BELL New Series5. 97–111.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Carretero, Marta & Juan Rafael Zamorano-Mansilla
    2013 Annotating English adverbials for the categories of epistemic modality and evidentiality. InJuana I. Marín-Arrese, Marta Carretero, Jorge Arús Hita & Johan van der Auwera (eds.), 317–355.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Celle, Agnès
    2009 Hearsay adverbs and modality. InRaphael Salkie, Pierre Bussutil & Johan van der Auwera (eds.), Modality in English: Theory and description, 268–293. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110213331.269
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110213331.269 [Google Scholar]
  11. Chafe, Wallace & Johanna Nichols
    (eds.) 1986Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Cornillie, Bert
    2009 Evidentiality and epistemic modality: On the close relationship between two different categories. Functions of Language16(1). 44–62. 10.1075/fol.16.1.04cor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.16.1.04cor [Google Scholar]
  13. Corum, Claudia
    1975 A pragmatic analysis of parenthetic adjuncts. CLS11. 133–141.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Cuartero Sánchez, Juan M.
    2011Notoriamente y otros adverbios modales de valoración epistémica. Español actual96. 41–61.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. De Haan, Ferdinand
    2005 Encoding speaker perspective: Evidentials. InZygmunt Frajzyngier, Adam Hodges and David S. Rood (eds.), Linguistic diversity and language theories, 379–397. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.72.18haa
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.72.18haa [Google Scholar]
  16. De Smet, Hendrik & Jean-Christophe Verstraete
    2006 Coming to terms with subjectivity. Cognitive Linguistics17. 365–392.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Dik, Simon C.
    1997The theory of Functional Grammar. Part I: The structure of the clause, 2nd edn.Kees Hengeveld (ed.). Dordrecht: Foris.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Faller, Martina
    2002 Semantics and pragmatics of evidentials in Cuzco Quechua. Stanford, CA: Stanford University PhD thesis.
  19. Givón, Talmy
    1984Syntax: A functional-typological introduction. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/z.17
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.17 [Google Scholar]
  20. Greenbaum, Sidney
    1969Studies in English adverbial usage. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Guimier, Claude
    1986Syntaxe de l’adverbe anglais. Lille: Presses Universitaires de Lille.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Halliday, M. A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen
    2014Halliday’s introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203783771
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203783771 [Google Scholar]
  23. Haβler, Gerda
    2008 Recursos evidenciales en las lenguas romances: Un estudio funcional y comparativo. InFrancisco M. Carriscondo Esquivel & Carsten Sinner (eds.), Lingüística española contemporánea: Enfoques y soluciones, 225–243. München: Anja Gärtig Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Hidalgo-Downing, Laura
    2004 Non-verbal markers of modality and evidentiality and the expression of writer stance in a comparable corpus of English and Spanish editorials and news articles. InJuana I. Marín-Arrese (ed.), 205–228.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Huddleston, Rodney & Geoffrey K. Pullum
    2002The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/9781316423530
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316423530 [Google Scholar]
  26. Lampert, Guenther
    2014 (Dis-)embodiment, palpability, and cognitive state. International Journal of Cognitive Linguistics4(2). 1–25.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Marín-Arrese, Juana I.
    2007 Stance and subjectivity / intersubjectivity in political discourse: A contrastive case study. BELL New Series5. 113–132.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 2013 Stancetaking and inter-subjectivity in the Iraq Inquiry: Blair vs. Brown. InJuana I. Marín-Arrese, Marta Carretero, Jorge Arús Hita & Johan van der Auwera (eds.), 411–445.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. (ed.) 2004Perspectives on evidentiality and modality. Madrid: Editorial Complutense.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Marín-Arrese, Juana I., Marta Carretero, Jorge Arús Hita & Johan van der Auwera
    (eds.) 2013English modality: Core, periphery and evidentiality. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110286328
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110286328 [Google Scholar]
  31. Nuyts, Jan
    2001Epistemic modality, language and conceptualization: A cognitive-pragmatic perspective. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.5
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.5 [Google Scholar]
  32. 2009 The “one-commitment-per-clause” principle and the cognitive status of qualificational categories. Linguistics47. 141–171. 10.1515/LING.2009.005
    https://doi.org/10.1515/LING.2009.005 [Google Scholar]
  33. Nuyts, Jan & Wietske Vonk
    1999 Epistemic modality and focus in Dutch. Linguistics37. 699–737. 10.1515/ling.37.4.699
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.37.4.699 [Google Scholar]
  34. Paradis, Carita
    1997Degree modifiers of adjectives in spoken British English. Lund: Lund UP.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 2000 It’s well weird. Degree modifiers of adjectives revisited. InJohn M. Kirk (ed.), Corpora galore: Analyses and techniques in describing English, 147–160. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie
    2008Almost certainly and most definitely: Degree modifiers and epistemic stance. Journal of Pragmatics40. 1521–1542. 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.04.015
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.04.015 [Google Scholar]
  37. Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie & Karin Aijmer
    2007The semantic field of modal certainty: A corpus-based study of English adverbs. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110198928
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110198928 [Google Scholar]
  38. Stillar, Glenn
    1998Analyzing everyday texts: Discourse, rhetoric and social perspectives. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Swan, Toril
    1988Sentence adverbials in English: A synchronic and diachronic investigation. Oslo: Novus.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Talmy, Leonard
    2000Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol. 1: Concept structuring systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Richard B. Dasher
    2002Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: CUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Wiemer, Björn & Katerina Stathi
    2010 The database of evidential markers in European languages: A bird’s eye view of the conception of the database (the template and the problems hidden beneath it). STUF63(4). 275–289.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/fol.00024.car
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/fol.00024.car
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
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