Volume 19, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1571-0718
  • E-ISSN: 1571-0726
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



This article offers a characterization of the biased polar interrogative with , frequent in Mexican Spanish. This characterization is based on the system proposed by Sudo (2013) and shows that Sudo’s two notions of epistemic bias and evidential bias are necessary and sufficient to characterize the conventional non-propositional meaning associated with the three kinds of questions in Mexican Spanish: the positive polarity question codes a negative epistemic bias and a [+positive] or [+negative] evidential bias; the negative polarity question with inside negation codes a positive epistemic bias and a [+negative] evidential bias; and the negative polarity question with outside negation codes a positive epistemic bias and a [−negative] evidential bias. Lastly, the article discusses to what extent these characterizations are also compatible with the interactional uses of the short questions and


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Albelda, Marta
    2015 “Evidentiality in non-evidential languages: Are there evidentials in Spanish?” Introducción al número especial deJournal of Pragmatics85: 135–37. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.04.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.04.002 [Google Scholar]
  2. Armstrong, Meghan E.
    2017 “Accounting for intonational form and function in Puerto Rican Spanish polar questions.” Probus20: 1–40. 10.1515/probus‑2014‑0016
    https://doi.org/10.1515/probus-2014-0016 [Google Scholar]
  3. Asher, Nicholas, and Brian Reese
    2007 “Intonation and Discourse: Biased Questions.” Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure8: 1–38.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. AALE
    AALE. Diccionario de Americanismos. Consulta en línea. https://www.asale.org/recursos/diccionarios/damer
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bezuidenhout, Anne
    2004 “Procedural meaning and the semantics/pragmatics interface.” InThe semantics/pragmatics distinction, ed. byClaudia Bianchi, 101–131. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Blakemore, Diane
    2002Relevance and linguistic meaning: the semantics and pragmatics of discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486456
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486456 [Google Scholar]
  7. Casado Velarde, Manuel
    2013 “¿Multiculturaliqué? La interrogación ecoica con ¿-qué? en español y sus funciones discursivas.” Oralia16: 59–79.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Cruse, David Alan
    1986Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Davies, Mark
    2016Corpus del Español: Two billion words, 21 countries, www.corpusdelespanol.org/web-dial/ [consultado el9 de octubre de 2018]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. De la Mora, Juliana, y Ricardo Maldonado
    2015 “Dizque: Epistemics blurring evidentials in Mexican Spanish,” Journal of Pragmatics85: 168–180. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.019
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.019 [Google Scholar]
  11. Diccionario del Español de México
    Diccionario del Español de Méxicodem.colmex.mx, El Colegio de México, A.C.
  12. Dumitrescu, Domnita
    1984 “Estructura y función de las preguntas retóricas repetitivas en español.” InActas Irvine – 92: Actas del XI Congreso de la Asociación Internacional de Hispanistas, ed. byJuan Villegas, 139–147. Madrid: Asociación Internacional de Hispanistas.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Escandell Vidal, M. Victoria
    1999 “Los enunciados interrogativos. Aspectos semánticos y pragmáticos.” InGramática descriptiva de la lengua española, ed. byIgnacio Bosque and Violeta Demonte. 3929–3992. Madrid: Espasa.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Gärtner, Hans-Martin, and Beáta Gyuris
    2017 “On Delimiting the Space of Bias Profiles for Polar Interrogatives.” Linguistische Berichte251: 293–316.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Gómez Silva, Guido [Google Scholar]
  16. Gutzmann, Daniel
    2015Use-conditional Meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198723820.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198723820.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  17. Gyuris, Beáta
    2017 “New Perspectives on Bias in Polar Questions: A Study of Hungarian -e.” International Review of Pragmatics9: 1–50. 10.1163/18773109‑00000003
    https://doi.org/10.1163/18773109-00000003 [Google Scholar]
  18. Hamblin, C. L.
    1958 “Questions.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy36: 159–168. 10.1080/00048405885200211
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00048405885200211 [Google Scholar]
  19. Heine, Bernd
    2013 “On Discourse Markers: Grammaticalization, Pragmaticalization, or Something Else?” Linguistics51(6): 1205–47. 10.1515/ling‑2013‑0048
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2013-0048 [Google Scholar]
  20. Heritage, John
    2002 “The limits of questioning: negative interrogatives and hostile question content.” Journal of Pragmatics34: 1427–1446. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00072‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00072-3 [Google Scholar]
  21. Hopper, Paul J., and Elizabeth Closs Traugott
    2003Grammaticalization. 2nd ed.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139165525
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165525 [Google Scholar]
  22. Karttunen, Luri
    1977 “Syntax and Semantics of Questions.” Linguistics and Philosophy1: 3–44. 10.1007/BF00351935
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00351935 [Google Scholar]
  23. Krifka, Manfred
    2001 “For a structured account of questions and answers.” InAudiatur vox sapientiae. A Festschrift for Achim von Stechow, ed. byCaroline Féry and Wolfgang Sternefeld, 287–319. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Ladd, D. Robert
    1981 “A first look at the semantics and pragmatics of negative questions and tag questions.” Papers from the 17th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society17: 164–171.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Martín Butragueño, Pedro, and Yolanda Lastra
    (coords.) 2011–2015Corpus sociolingüístico de la Ciudad de México. México: El Colegio de México.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Potts, Christopher
    2007 “The expressive dimension.” Theoretical Linguistics33: 165–197. 10.1515/TL.2007.011
    https://doi.org/10.1515/TL.2007.011 [Google Scholar]
  27. Reese, Brian
    2007Bias in Questions. Tesis de doctorado. University of Texas at Austin.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Reig Alamillo, Asela
    2019 “Las interrogativas hipotéticas con qué invariable en español: un tipo de interrogativas parciales marcadas.” Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics12 (1): 155–177. 10.1515/shll‑2019‑2004
    https://doi.org/10.1515/shll-2019-2004 [Google Scholar]
  29. 2020 “La interrogativa total con ¿no que.? y su significado evidencial.” Nueva Revista de Filología Hispánica (NRFH)68 (1): 47–66. 10.24201/nrfh.v68i1.3582
    https://doi.org/10.24201/nrfh.v68i1.3582 [Google Scholar]
  30. Rodríguez Ramalle, Teresa M.
    2015 “Evidentiality and illative markers in Spanish.” Journal of Pragmatics85: 200–2011. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.007 [Google Scholar]
  31. Seelinger, Heiko, and Sphie Repp
    2018 “Biased declarative questions in Swedish and German: Negation meets modal particles (νäl and doch wohl).” InThe Grammatical Realization of Polarity Contrast: Theoretical, empirical, and typological approaches, ed. byChristine Dimroth and Stefan Sudhoff, 129–172. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.249.05see
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.249.05see [Google Scholar]
  32. Sudo, Yasutada
    2013 “Biased Polar Questions in English and Japanese.” InBeyond Expressives. Explorations in Conventional Non-truth -conditional Meaning, ed. byDaniel Gutzmann and Hans Martin Gärtner, 277–297. Leiden: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. van Rooy, Robert, and Marie Šafářová
    2003 “On Polar Questions.” SALT13: 292–309. 10.3765/salt.v13i0.2887
    https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v13i0.2887 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): a poco; biased interrogative; polar interrogatives
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