1887
image of On the co-optation of according to
as an evidential in English
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

The use of + NP has rarely been the topic of any specialized research in relation to English evidentiality, although it would probably figure among the most frequent types of reportative evidentials found in written texts. One of the problems often associated with reportatives has related to the existence of the Reportative Exception (see, e.g. AnderBois 2014), referring to the fact that the speaker may not always subjectively endorse the proposition conveyed with the support of the evidential phrase. The present study reviews the history of + NP from Middle English onwards, after which it began to develop evidential functions, and shows how the tendency to reject the truth of the content of the proposition marked by + NP arose in specific contexts containing alternative information sources, comparison, or adversative clauses. It was shortly after the diachronic appearance of + NP in such contexts that the more periphrastic form, + NP, began to renovate/renew the earlier, non-evidential meanings of + NP. The present study also attributes the development of + NP to a process of co-optation (e.g. Heine 2013) rather than grammaticalization.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/fol.22055.zie
2024-06-03
2024-06-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AntConc: Anthony, Laurence
    2020AntConc (Version 3.5.9) [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. https://www.laurenceanthony.net/software
    [Google Scholar]
  2. CEMET: The Corpus of Early Modern English Texts
    CEMET: The Corpus of Early Modern English Texts. Compiled byHendrik De Smet, University of Leuven.
  3. CLMET(EV): The Corpus of Late Modern English Texts (Extended Version)
    CLMET(EV): The Corpus of Late Modern English Texts (Extended Version). Compiled byHendrik de Smet, University of Leuven. https://perswww.kuleuven.be/~u0044428/clmet
  4. Helsinki Corpus: The Helsinki Corpus of English Texts
    Helsinki Corpus: The Helsinki Corpus of English Texts 1991 Compiled byMatti Rissanen (Project leader), Merja Kytö (Project secretary); Leena Kahlas-Tarkka, Matti Kilpiö (Old English); Saara Nevanlinna, Irma Taavitsainen (Middle English); Terttu Nevalainen, Helena Raumolin-Brunberg (Early Modern English). Helsinki: Department of Modern Languages, University of Helsinki.
  5. OED: Oxford English Dictionary
    OED: Oxford English Dictionary. 3rd edn., online version. athens.oed.com. Accessed between30/09/2019 and 22/02/2021.
  6. Aikhenvald, Alexandra
    2004Evidentiality. Oxford: OUP. 10.1093/oso/9780199263882.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199263882.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  7. AnderBois, Scott
    2014 On the exceptional status of reportative evidentials. Proceedings of SALT. –. 10.3765/salt.v24i0.2424
    https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v24i0.2424 [Google Scholar]
  8. Blakemore, Diane
    2006 Divisions of labour: The analysis of parentheticals. Lingua. –. 10.1016/j.lingua.2005.04.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2005.04.007 [Google Scholar]
  9. Bolinger, Dwight
    1990 According to. Journal of English Linguistics(). –. 10.1177/0075424290023001‑218
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424290023001-218 [Google Scholar]
  10. Boye, Kasper
    2010 Evidence for what? Evidentiality and scope. STUF(). –. 10.1524/stuf.2010.0023
    https://doi.org/10.1524/stuf.2010.0023 [Google Scholar]
  11. Chafe, Wallace
    1986 Evidentiality in English conversation and academic writing. InWallace Chafe & Johanna Nichols (eds.), Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology, –. Norwood, NJ.: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Grice, H. Paul
    1975 Logic and conversation. InPeter Cole & Jerry Morgan (eds.), Speech acts, –. New York: Academic Press. 10.1163/9789004368811_003
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368811_003 [Google Scholar]
  13. Guardamagna, Caterina
    2017 Reportative evidentiality, attribution and epistemic modality: A corpus-based diachronic study of Latin secundum NP (‘according to NP’). Language Sciences. –. 10.1016/j.langsci.2016.09.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2016.09.001 [Google Scholar]
  14. Heine, Bernd
    2002 On the role of context in grammaticalization. InIlse Wischer & Gabriele Diewald (eds.), New reflections on grammaticalization, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.49.08hei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.49.08hei [Google Scholar]
  15. 2013 On discourse markers: Grammaticalization, pragmaticalization, or something else?Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/ling‑2013‑0048
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2013-0048 [Google Scholar]
  16. Heine, Bernd, Gunther Kaltenböck & Tania Kuteva
    2017 Cooptation as a discourse strategy. Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/ling‑2017‑0012
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2017-0012 [Google Scholar]
  17. Heine, Bernd, Gunther Kaltenböck, Tania Kuteva & Haiping Long
    2021The rise of discourse markers. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/9781108982856
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108982856 [Google Scholar]
  18. Kaltenböck, Gunter, Bernd Heine & Tania Kuteva
    2011 On thetical grammar. Studies in Language(). –. 10.1075/sl.35.4.03kal
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.35.4.03kal [Google Scholar]
  19. Kaltenböck, Gunther, María José López-Couso & Belén Méndez-Naya
    2020 The dynamics of stance constructions. Language Sciences. –. 10.1016/j.langsci.2020.101330
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2020.101330 [Google Scholar]
  20. Lazard, Gilbert
    2001 On the grammaticalization of evidentiality. Journal of Pragmatics. –. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(00)00008‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00008-4 [Google Scholar]
  21. Lewis, Diana
    2021 Pragmatic markers at the periphery and discourse prominence. The case of English of course. InDaniël van Olmen & Jolanta Sinkuniene (eds.), Pragmatic markers and peripheries, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.325.13lew
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.325.13lew [Google Scholar]
  22. Martin, James R.
    2000 Beyond exchange: Appraisal systems in English. InSusan Hunston & Geoff Thompson (eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse, –. Oxford: OUP. 10.1093/oso/9780198238546.003.0008
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198238546.003.0008 [Google Scholar]
  23. Mélac, Eric
    2014L’evidentialité en anglais. Approche contrastive à partir d’un corpus anglais- tibetain. Paris: Université Sorbonne Nouvelle Paris 3 PhD thesis.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 2022 The grammaticalization of evidentiality in English. English Language and Linguistics(). –. 10.1017/S1360674321000101
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674321000101 [Google Scholar]
  25. Rissanen, Matti
    2000 Paths of loan-word grammaticalisation: the case of according to. InChristine Dalton-Puffer & Nicholas Ritt (eds), Words: Structure, meaning, function. A festschrift for Dieter Kastovsky, –. Berlin: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110809169.249
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110809169.249 [Google Scholar]
  26. Whitt, Richard J.
    2011 (Inter)subjectivity and evidential perception verbs in English and German. Journal of Pragmatics. –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.07.015
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.07.015 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/fol.22055.zie
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/fol.22055.zie
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: renovation/renewal ; reportative evidentials ; pragmatic polarity shift ; co-optation
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