1887
Volume 21, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1566-5852
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9854
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper explores novel ways to consider semantic–pragmatic cycles using a dual strategy: an inwards strategy, whereby the distinctive traits of a pragmatic cycle are established, and an outwards strategy, whereby the categories that delimit semantic–pragmatic cycles are described. The result of this exploration is the distinction between “pragmatic cycle”, “replication”, “concomitance” and “paradigmatic increase” as four different yet related processes. In addition, this study integrates Construction Grammar into the description of each process and shows that the study of semantic–pragmatic cycles can benefit from a constructional approach, adopting Traugott and Trousdale’s (2013) and Traugott’s (2018) models, and including concepts from European structuralism, particularly the notions of “paradigm”, “diasystem” and “functional language” (“lengua funcional”).

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jhp.00046.pon
2021-03-03
2021-05-09
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Briz, Antonio and Grupo Val.Es.Co.
    2002Corpus de conversaciones coloquiales. Madrid: Arco Libros.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Cabedo, Adrián and Salvador Pons . Corpus Val.Es.Co. 2.0
    . AccessedMay 2018at: www.valesco.es
  3. Marcos Marín, Francisco
    dir. Corpus Oral de Referencia de la Lengua Española Contemporánea (corlec). Available online at: www.lllf.uam.es/ESP/Corlec.html
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Real Academia Española: Banco de datos (corde)
    Real Academia Española: Banco de datos (corde). Corpus diacrónico del español. AccessedDecember and January 2018at: www.rae.es
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Real Academia Española: Banco de datos (crea)
    Real Academia Española: Banco de datos (crea). Corpus de referencia del español actual. AccessedFebruary and March 2018at: www.rae.es
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Beinhauer, Werner
    1991 [1964]El español coloquial. Madrid: Gredos.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Briz, Antonio
    1998El español coloquial en la conversación. Esbozo de pragmagramática. Barcelona: Ariel.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Briz, Antonio and Val.Es.Co. Research Group
    2003 “Un sistema de unidades para el estudio del lenguaje coloquial”. Oralia6: 7–61.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Coseriu, Eugenio
    1952Sistema, norma y habla. Montevideo: Universidad de la República.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. 1973Lecciones de lingüística general. Madrid: Gredos.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 1977Principios de semántica estructural. Madrid: Gredos.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Cuenca, Maria Josep
    1992–93 “Sobre l’evolució dels nexes conjuntius en català”. Llengua and Literatura5: 173–213.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Cuello, Carlos
    2015 Historia de la partícula discursiva hombre: condicionamientos sincrónicos y evolución diacrónica. Unpublished MA Thesis. Valencia.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. De Latte, Fien and Renata Enghels
    2018 “La variación (socio)lingüística del vocativo en el español madrileño actual”. In Martin Glessgen , Johannes Kabatek and Harald Völker (eds), Repenser la variation linguistique, 233–248. Strasbourg: EliPhi.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Garachana, Mar
    2008 “En los límites de la gramaticalizacion. La evolución de encima (de que) como marcador del discurso”. Revista de Filologia Espanola88 (1): 7–36. 10.3989/rfe.2008.v88.i1.43
    https://doi.org/10.3989/rfe.2008.v88.i1.43 [Google Scholar]
  16. Ghezzi, Chiara and Piera Molinelli
    2014 “Deverbal pragmatic markers from Latin to Italian (Lat. quaeso and It. prego): the cyclic nature of functional developments”. In Chiara Ghezzi and Piera Molinelli (eds), Discourse and Pragmatic Markers from Latin to the Romance Languages, 61–85. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199681600.003.0005
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199681600.003.0005 [Google Scholar]
  17. Glare, Peter G. W.
    1996Oxford Latin Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Glessgen, Martin , Johannes Kabatek and Harald Völker
    2018Repenser la variation linguistique. Strasbourg: EliPhi.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Gregory, Michael and Suzanne Carroll
    1978Language and Situation: Language Varieties and Their Social Contexts. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Halliday, Michael A. K. and Ruqaiya Hasan
    1976Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Hansen, Maj-Britt Mosegaard
    2014 “Cyclicity in semantic/pragmatic change: the Medieval particle ja between Latin IAM and Modern French déjà’ ”. In Chiara Ghezzi and Piera Molinelli (eds), Discourse and Pragmatic Markers from Latin to the Romance Languages, 139–165. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199681600.003.0008
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199681600.003.0008 [Google Scholar]
  22. 2018 “Cyclic phenomena in the evolution of pragmatic markers. Examples from Romance”. In Salvador Pons and Oscar Loureda (eds), Beyond Grammaticalization and Discourse Markers: New Issues in the Study of Language Change, 51–77. Amsterdam: Brill. 10.1163/9789004375420_004
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004375420_004 [Google Scholar]
  23. Herrero Ingelmo, Jose Luis
    2006 “¿Cómo surgen los conectores: los reformuladores del discurso id est, esto es, es decir?Revista de Lexicografia13: 45–54. 10.17979/rlex.2007.13.0.4784
    https://doi.org/10.17979/rlex.2007.13.0.4784 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hoyos Gonzalez, Margarita de
    1981 “Una variedad en el habla coloquial: la jerga ‘cheli’”. Cauce: Revista de filologia y su diddctica4: 31–42.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Jespersen, Otto
    1917Negation in English and Other Languages. Copenhagen: Host og Son.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Jørgensen, Annette Myre
    2008 “ Tío y tía como marcadores en el lenguaje de Madrid”. In Inés Olza Moreno , Manuel Casado Velarde and Ramón González Ruiz (eds), Actas del XXXVII Simposio Internacional e la Sociedad Español de Lingüística (SEL), 387–396. Pamplona: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Navarra.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Kleinknecht, Friederike
    2013 “Mexican güey -from vocative to discourse marker: a case of grammaticalisation?” In Barbara Sonnenhauser and Patrizia Noel Aziz Hanna (eds), Vocative! Addressing between System and Performance, 141–174. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110304176.235
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110304176.235 [Google Scholar]
  28. Koch, Peter and Wulf Oesterreicher
    1985 “Sprache der Nähe -Sprache der Distanz. Mündlichkeit un Schriftkichkeit im Spannungsfeld von Sprachtheorie und Sprachheschichte”. Romanistisches Jahbuch36: 15–43.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Lázaro Carreter, Fernando
    1979 “Una jerga juvenil: ‘el cheli’”. ABC, 14/10/1979: 118.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Llopis Cardona, Ana
    2018 “Sobre la pragmaticalización de lo mismo e igual como marcadores epistémicos”. In Ester Brenes , Marina González and Francisco Javier Grande (eds), Enunciado y discurso: estructura y relaciones, 153–179. Universidad de Sevilla: Sevilla.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. . Forthcoming. “La gramaticalización del igual americano como reformulador y concesivo: ¿caso de réplica de lo mismo?” Onomázein, 56.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Llopis Cardona, Ana and Marta Pilar Montañez Mesas
    2020 “Los marcadores apelativos en el español peninsular”. In Antonio Hidalgo and Adrián Cabedo (eds), Pragmática del español hablado: hacia nuevos horizontes, 319–336. València: Universitat de València.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Lyons, John
    1977Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Martinet, Andre
    1952 “Function, Structure, and Sound Change”. Word8 (1): 1–32. 10.1080/00437956.1952.11659416
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1952.11659416 [Google Scholar]
  35. Moliner, Maria
    1967Diccionario de uso del espanol. Madrid: Gredos.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Pardo Llibrer, Adrià
    2019 “Approximatives vs. approximators: a case of spiral-like cycle?” 2nd Workshop on Cyclicity in Semantic–Pragmatic Change. 8–9October 2018 University of Manchester. doi:  10.13140/RG.2.2.26154.47043
    https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.26154.47043 [Google Scholar]
  37. Pons Bordería, Salvador
    2008 “Grammaticalization por tradiciones discursivas: el caso de esto es”. In Johannes Kabatek (ed.), Sintaxis historica del espanoly cambio linguistico: nuevasperspectivas desde las tradiciones discursivas, 249–274. Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert Iberoamericana.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. (ed.) 2014aDiscourse Segmentation in Romance Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.250
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.250 [Google Scholar]
  39. 2014b “Paths of Grammaticalization in Spanish o sea ”. In Chiara Ghezzi and Piera Molinelli (eds), Discourse and Pragmatic Markers from Latin to the Romance Languages, 109–138. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199681600.003.0007
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199681600.003.0007 [Google Scholar]
  40. 2018 “Paths of grammaticalization: beyond the LP/RP debate”. In Salvador Pons and Oscar Loureda (eds), Beyond Grammaticalization and Discourse Markers: New Issues in the Study of Language Change, XX–XX. Amsterdam: Brill. 10.1163/9789004375420_012
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004375420_012 [Google Scholar]
  41. Pons Bordería, Salvador and Oscar Loureda Lamas
    (eds) 2018Beyond Grammaticalization and Discourse Markers: New Issues in the Study of Language Change. Amsterdam: Brill. 10.1163/9789004375420
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004375420 [Google Scholar]
  42. Real Academia Espanola
    Real Academia Espanola 1739Diccionario de Autoridades. Madrid: Real Academia Espanola.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Sevi, Aldo
    1998 A Semantics for ‘Almost’ and ‘Barely’. Tel-Aviv University, Master Dissertation: Tel-Aviv.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Tovar Llorente, Antonio
    1968Latín de Hispania. Aspectos léxicos de la romanización. Discurso de recepción en la Real Academia. Madrid: Real Academia Española.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Richard Dasher
    2002Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Graeme Trousdale
    2013Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  47. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
    2018 “Modeling Language Change with Constructional Networks”. In Salvador Pons and Oscar Loureda (eds), Beyond Grammaticalization and Discourse Markers: New Issues in the Study of Language Change, 17–50. Amsterdam: Brill. 10.1163/9789004375420_003
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004375420_003 [Google Scholar]
  48. Val.Es.Co. Research Group
    Val.Es.Co. Research Group 2014 “Las unidades del discurso oral. La propuesta Val.Es.Co de segmentation de la conversation (coloquial)”. Estudios de Linguistica del español/Infoling35 (1): 13–73.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Weinreich, Uriel
    1954 “Is a Structural Dialectology Possible?” Word10, 288–400. 10.1080/00437956.1954.11659535
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1954.11659535 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jhp.00046.pon
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jhp.00046.pon
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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