Journal of Historical Pragmatics - Volume 17, Issue 1, 2016

Former studies have attributed little attention to the historical factors surrounding the development of counterfactual meanings in almost, though some refer to evidence of expletive negation found in proximatives crosslinguistically. In this study, the historical development of the adverb will be considered in investigating more recent data from Late Modern English, in which an overwhelming number of counterfactual uses appear with a complement referring to undesirable events, some even hyperbolic in nature. It is hypothesised that the presence of intersubjectivity contributed significantly to the development of counterfactual meanings, in focusing attention on the aversion of, rather than the proximity to, the event described in the complement. Intersubjectivity also explains the evidence of expletive negation in proximatives in other languages though this is not attested in the history of English almost.

Much work on pragmatic markers in the history of English has been devoted to expressions used clause-initially at “left periphery”. By contrast, this study provides an account in broad outlines of the incremental development of pragmatic markers in clause-final “right periphery” position. Particular attention is paid to the rise of comment clauses, question tags, general extenders, and retrospective contrastive markers. Traditional characterizations of pragmatic markers, such as occurrence primarily at left periphery and with prosodic breaks are critiqued.

This paper provides a novel view on marginalia from the perspective of linguistic pragmatics. It is based on the observation that existing studies often exclude entries in medieval manuscripts that do not comment on the text directly. Many of them, however, are crucial for understanding what medieval monks did when they studied manuscripts. Searle’s (1969) Speech Act Theory, his typology of illocutionary forces, offers a suitable framework for the systematic analysis of the different kinds of manuscript entries and to reconstruct the intellectual contexts of medieval glossing. We can see that in addition to assertives (i.e., glosses that provide further information on a specific text passage) expressives, directives, commissives and declaratives can also be identified in the margins of medieval manuscripts. Sometimes, even the perlocution of marginalia, their effect on medieval readers, can be traced today.

This study addresses the development undergone by para colmo, a form which is in the process of becoming fixed as an argumentative operator and additive connector. Para colmo has undergone a process of subjectification (Traugott 1995a), which is crucial in the development of discourse markers, where the presence of the speaker is manifested in various ways to cover important areas of meaning in the interpretation of the discourse. It has polarized its meaning in the negative and has progressed to indicate scalar saturation, or a position at the highest level of the argumentative scale, with an evaluation of excess on the part of the speaker. The study has been carried out on the basis of both diachronic and synchronic corpora compiled by the Real Academia Española, and covers the period from 1200 to 2004.

The paper discusses three instances of silence in the life and writings of Sir Thomas More in terms of conversational and thematic silence. The first is the silence of the London citizenry in More’s History of Richard the Third (1513). The second is the House of Commons’ response of silence, in 1523, to Cardinal Wolsey’s request to provide him, the Chancellor, with a substantial grant for state affairs; at that time, More was Speaker of the House. The third is More’s fatal silence when he was required to take an oath supporting Henry VIII’s divorce from Catherine and subsequent marriage to Anne Boleyn, and his refusal to discuss Henry’s break from the Pope and the Roman Church.

This paper deals with the “hot news” use of the English present perfect. Previous research has suggested that this use marks the end point of the perfect category, paving the way for further grammaticalisation to a perfective or past tense. To examine its historical development in Modern English, verb forms in the leads of hard news reports in the New York Times and the Sydney Morning Herald were examined, with comparison made between two time periods, 1851–1900 and 1951–2000. Attention was given to contextual influence on the choice between the present perfect and the past tense for expressing hot news meanings. The quantitative findings show that the hot news perfect has not taken over the ground of other tense forms, but has become increasingly associated with unspecified, recent past time. The evolution of the English present perfect in general is characterised by register-mediated functional specialisation.