1887
Volume 15, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1877-9751
  • E-ISSN: 1877-976X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This study is an analysis of the relation between emotion and cognition exhibited by the various uses of meditative-polemic in English. In its primary uses linked to the expression of emotions, the syntactic construction exhibits a negative evaluative meaning in the superordinate clause, which posits the propositional content of the subordinate clause as counter-expected and therefore endowed with a mirative value. In more intellectual uses in which the superordinate clause does not explicitly express negative meanings, the semantic mirative meaning is preserved, illustrating a case of multistratal modality. In these cases, the initial mirative value is exploited in argumentation as discursive mirativity, counter-expectancy being used as a built-in foundation for more elaborate meanings, allowing a subject to express a particular value while anticipating contradiction on the part of another subject.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.15.2.06ari
2017-12-08
2019-12-11
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aikhenvald, A. Y.
    (2012) The essence of mirativity. Linguistic Typology, 16(3), 435–485. doi: 10.1515/lity‑2012‑0017
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lity-2012-0017 [Google Scholar]
  2. Arigne, V.
    (1984) Shall-should: Contribution à l’étude des modalités en anglais contemporain, Thèse de 3e cycle, Paris, Université de Paris 7 (ms.)
    [Google Scholar]
  3. (1989)  Shall et should, étude de modalités. In A. Gauthier (Dir.), Explorations en linguistique anglaise (pp.153–228). Bern: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. (2007) Grammaticalization, polysemy and iterated modality: The case of should . Corela, 5(1). corela.revues.org. doi: 10.4000/corela.343
    https://doi.org/10.4000/corela.343 [Google Scholar]
  5. (2010) Subjectivité et référence : Questions de sémantique. Dossier soumis pour l’Habilitation à diriger des recherches, Université Paris-Sorbonne (Paris 4), vol.1 : Synthèse de l’activité scientifique. hal-univ-paris13.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00691193
    [Google Scholar]
  6. (2014) L’affect et les émotions dans la construction du discours argumenté. In P. Blumenthal , I. Novakova , & D. Siepmann (Eds.), Les émotions dans le discours/Emotions in discourse (pp.255–266). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. (2015) La modalité appréciative: vers une sémantique de good . Anglophonia, 19. anglophonia.revues.org. doi: 10.4000/anglophonia.509
    https://doi.org/10.4000/anglophonia.509 [Google Scholar]
  8. Behre, F.
    (1950) The origin and early history of meditative-polemic should in that clauses. Göteborgs Högsolas Arsskrift, 56(3), 275–309.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. (1955)  Meditative-polemic should in Modern English that-clauses . Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
  10. Bourdier, V.
    (2015)  Should après un adjectif de valuation : Un marqueur inattendu?Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 60(2), 187–201.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Culioli, A.
    (1968) La formalisation en linguistique. Les Cahiers pour l’Analyse, 9, 106–117
    [Google Scholar]
  12. (1974) A propos des énoncés exclamatifs. Langue française, 22, 6–15. doi: 10.3406/lfr.1974.5671
    https://doi.org/10.3406/lfr.1974.5671 [Google Scholar]
  13. DeLancey, S.
    (1997) Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology, 1, 33–52. doi: 10.1515/lity.1997.1.1.33
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.1997.1.1.33 [Google Scholar]
  14. Desurmont, C.
    (2016) L’adjectif appréciatif nice : observations sur la nature variable de la prédication. Corela, 14(1). corela.revues.org. doi: 10.4000/corela.4566
    https://doi.org/10.4000/corela.4566 [Google Scholar]
  15. Huddleston, R. , & Pullum, G. K.
    (2002) The Cambridge grammar of the English language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/9781316423530
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316423530 [Google Scholar]
  16. Jacobsson, B.
    (1988)  Should and would in factual that-clauses. English Studies, 69(1), 72–84. doi: 10.1080/00138388808598555
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00138388808598555 [Google Scholar]
  17. Onions, C. T.
    (1966) The Oxford dictionary of English etymology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Pennec, B.
    (2011)  After all: l’introducteur d’une résurgence. Cercles, 20, 154–169.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Peterson, T.
    (2013) Rethinking mirativity: The expression and implication of surprise. Manuscript. University of Toronto. semanticsarchive
  20. Piéraut-Le-Bonniec, G.
    (1974) Le raisonnement modal: étude génétique. Paris: École des Hautes Études/Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Rett, J.
    (2011) Exclamatives, degrees and speech acts. Linguistics and Philosophy, 34(5), 411–442. doi: 10.1007/s10988‑011‑9103‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-011-9103-8 [Google Scholar]
  22. Salkie, R.
    (2009) Degrees of modality. In R. Salkie , P. Busuttil , & J. van der Auwera (Eds.), Modality in English: Theory and description (pp.79–103). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110213331.79
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110213331.79 [Google Scholar]
  23. Samuels, M. L.
    (1957) Review of Behre 1955. The Review of English Studies, 8, 343–5. doi: 10.1093/res/VIII.31.343
    https://doi.org/10.1093/res/VIII.31.343 [Google Scholar]
  24. Skorin-Kapov, J.
    (2015) The aesthetics of desire and surprise. New York: Lexington Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Traugott, E.
    (2004) Le rôle de l’évolution des Marqueurs Discursifs dans une théorie de la grammaticalisation. In M. M. J. Fernandez-Vest & S. Carter-Thomas (Eds.), Structure informationnelle et particules énonciatives (pp.295–333). Paris: L’Harmattan.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Zeevat, H.
    (2009) “Only” as a mirative particle. Sprache und Datenverarbeitung, 33(1–2), 179–196.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/rcl.15.2.06ari
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