Volume 29, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0929-0907
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9943
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


This paper discusses the discursive and interpersonal functions conveyed by the Italian negative operator ‘no’, suggesting a possible pathway of functional enrichment that can account for its high degree of polyfunctionality. Drawing on the corpus of contemporary spoken Italian, we chart the values of as a discourse marker, which are all clearly connected to the incremental co-construction of discourse in interaction, either in terms of turn management or of shared knowledge and mutual alignment. We then explore its sociolinguistic distribution, showing that register variation plays a major role in this respect. We argue that conversational uses of as a discourse marker, including its role as a pause-filler, are motivated by cooperative needs in discourse construction, shaping its functional profile at the intersection of mental processes and communicative practices.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Aijmer, Karin
    2002English discourse particles: Evidence from a corpus. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.10
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.10 [Google Scholar]
  2. Andersen, Gisle
    2001Pragmatic markers and sociolinguistic variation: A relevance-theoretic approach to the language of adolescents. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.84
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.84 [Google Scholar]
  3. Ariel, Mira & Caterina Mauri
    2018 Why use or?Linguistics561. 939–993. 10.1515/ling‑2018‑0020
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2018-0020 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bazzanella, Carla
    1995 I segnali discorsivi. InLorenzo Renzi, Giampaolo Salvi & Anna Cardinaletti (eds.), Grande grammatica italiana di consultazione (vol.31), 225–257. Bologna: Il Mulino.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Beeching, Kate
    2016Pragmatic markers in British English: Meaning in social interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139507110
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139507110 [Google Scholar]
  6. Beeching, Kate & Ulrich Detges
    2014 Introduction. InKate Beeching & Ulrich Detges (eds.), Discourse functions at the left and right periphery: Crosslinguistic investigations of language use and language change, 1–23. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004274822_002
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004274822_002 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bernini, Giuliano
    1995 Le profrasi. InLorenzo Renzi, Giampaolo Salvi & Anna Cardinaletti (eds.), Grande grammatica italiana di consultazione (vol.31), 175–222. Bologna: Il Mulino.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Brown, Penelope & Stephen C. Levinson
    1987Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813085
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085 [Google Scholar]
  9. Denis, Derek & Sali A. Tagliamonte
    2016 Innovation, right? Change, you know? Utterance-final tags in Canadian English. InHeike Pichler (ed.), Discourse-pragmatic variation and change in English: New methods and insights, 86–112. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781107295476.005
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107295476.005 [Google Scholar]
  10. Du Bois, John W.
    2014 Towards a dialogic syntax. Cognitive Linguistics25(3). 359–410. 10.1515/cog‑2014‑0024
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2014-0024 [Google Scholar]
  11. Fischer, Kerstin
    2006 Frames, constructions, and invariant meanings: The functional polysemy of discourse particles. InKerstin Fischer (ed.), Approaches to discourse particles, 427–447. Amsterdam: Elsevier. 10.1163/9780080461588_023
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9780080461588_023 [Google Scholar]
  12. Lo Baido, Maria Cristina
    2018 Categorization via exemplification: Evidence from Italian. Folia Linguistica Historica391. 69–95. 10.1515/flih‑2018‑0007
    https://doi.org/10.1515/flih-2018-0007 [Google Scholar]
  13. Mauri, Caterina
    2021Ad hoc categorization in linguistic interaction. InCaterina Mauri, Eugenio Goria & Ilaria Fiorentini (eds.), Building categories in interaction: Linguistic resources at work, 9–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.220.02mau
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.220.02mau [Google Scholar]
  14. Mauri, Caterina & Andrea Sansò
    2018 Linguistic strategies for ad hoc categorization: Theoretical assessment and cross-linguistic variation. Folia Linguistica Historica39(1). 1–35.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Mauri, Caterina, Ilaria Fiorentini & Eugenio Goria
    2021 Building categories in interaction: Theoretical and empirical perspectives. InCaterina Mauri, Eugenio Goria & Ilaria Fiorentini (eds.), Building categories in interaction: Linguistic resources at work, 1–8. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.220.01fio
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.220.01fio [Google Scholar]
  16. Mauri, Caterina, Silvia Ballarè, Eugenio Goria, Massimo Cerruti & Francesco Suriano
    2019 KIParla corpus: A new resource for spoken Italian. InRaffaella Bernardi, Roberto Navigli & Giovanni Semeraro (eds.), Proceedings of the 6th Italian Conference on Computational Linguistics (CLiC-it).
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Molinelli, Piera
    1988Fenomeni della negazione dal latino all’italiano. Firenze: La Nuova Editrice.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. 2020 Ma anche no! Trent’anni di un’espressione di successo. Lingua Italiana. [https://www.treccani.it/magazine/lingua_italiana/articoli/scritto_e_parlato/Ma_anche.html]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Moretti, Bruno
    1993 False partenze e contraddizioni logiche convenzionalizzate: “Sì o no”?Vox Romanica521. 85–95.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Schwenter, Scott A.
    2000 Viewpoints and polysemy: Linking adversative and causal meanings of discourse markers. InElizabeth Couper-Kuhler & Bernd Kortmann (eds.), Cause, condition, concession, contrast: Cognitive and discourse perspectives, 257–282. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110219043.3.257
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219043.3.257 [Google Scholar]
  21. Stivers, Tanya
    2013 Sequence organization. InJack Sidnell & Tanya Stivers (eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis, 191–209. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Tottie, Gunnel
    2014 On the use of uh and um in American English. Functions of Language21(1). 6–29. 10.1075/fol.21.1.02tot
    https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.21.1.02tot [Google Scholar]
  23. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
    2008 “All that he endeavoured to prove was …”: On the emergence of grammatical constructions in dialogual and dialogic contexts. InRobin Cooper & Ruth Kempson (eds.), Language in flux: Dialogue coordination, language variation, change and evolution, 143–177. London: King’s College Publications.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): alignment; common ground; register variation; spoken Italian; turn-management
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