Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (23)
- Review (13)
- Part of a Book (4)
- Part of Periodical (1)
Language
- English (41) (remove)
Keywords
- evidentiality (2)
- Adverbs (1)
- Ferdinand de Saussure (1)
- Ideologues (1)
- Plato´s Cratylus (1)
- adverbial locutions (1)
- anachronism (1)
- conceptual history (1)
- epistemic modality (1)
- function (1)
Institute
- Institut für Romanistik (41) (remove)
Degérando’s three prize essays and the shift in linguistic thought at the turn of the 19th century
(2016)
Degérando started out from the views of the French ideologists on the relationship of language and thought, but increasingly distanced himself from them. This is already evident based on the choice of reference authors and also on the increasing emphasis on empirical research. His prize essays reflect the fundamental changes in linguistic thought during the late 18th century. He was successful in the competition of the Institut National (1797/1799) and with another essay at the Berlin Academy (1802). His main argument against Condillac and the ideologists is that empirical knowledge does not depend on signs. Therefore, the development of better languages will not improve this kind of human knowledge.
In recent years the category of evidentiality has come into use also for the description of Romance languages. This has been contingent on a change in its interpretation from a typological category to a semantic-pragmatic category, which allows an application to languages lacking specialised morphemes for the expression of evidentiality. In the following we will first describe the theoretical framework in which we use the category of evidentiality for the description of Romance languages. A key question to be elucidated here will be the determination of evidentiality as a deictic phenomenon. This will also be the basis for discussing the distinction between evidentiality and epistemic modality.
It has often been pointed out that there is some overlap between epistemic modality and evidentiality (Chafe & Nichols 1986, Cornillie 2007, De Haan 1999, Dendale & Tasmowski 2001, Plungian 2001, Squartini 2004). In this paper I would like to offer several reflections about the necessity of drawing a boundary between modality and evidentiality. Starting from the typological category of evidentiality - extended here for use in pragmatic studies - I will then explore demarcation problems in Romance languages, which lack grammaticalized forms for expressing evidentiality. The underlying premise of this paper is that evidentiality as marker of the origin of the speaker's knowledge stands in relation to the speaker's pragmatic stance. Because the perspective of the speaker is thus incorporated into the utterance, it seems appropriate to analyse the applicability of the deictic category. Finally, under the aspect of deixis, I shall attempt a demarcation between evidentiality and modality.
Acknowlegements
(2011)
Introduction
(2012)
Introduction
(2008)
The assumption of linguistics relativity and the definition of languages as epiphenomena are certainly known as two contradictory positions from the last century. But I will start my discussion of them in the period of their appearance and then use this as a basis to evaluate the heuristic value of these positions in present day linguistics. I will start with the definition of language as an epiphenomenon and then I will go on with the linguistic relativity.
The notion of ʽepiphenomenon’ is usually used to exclude certain aspects of a scientific object because they are considered to be deduced from others. In linguistics, restrictions of the research object were made, invoking the notion of ʽepiphenomenonʼ, which was partially done with a polemical attitude, and was always responded to polemically.
In this paper evidential and modal adverbs will be studied, such as French apparemment, évidemment, visiblement, Italian apparentemente, evidentemente, ovviamente, and Spanish aparentemente, evidentemente and visiblemente. The development of their signification will be discussed, including German adverbs like offensichtlich. In these means of expression, the functional-semantic categories evidentiality and epistemic modality seem to overlap: on the one hand, they are used if the state of affairs talked about cannot be verified, that is, if there is still a moment of insecurity concerning the transmitted information. Then adverbials with a special structure (preposition + article + nominal form of a verb) will be analysed, and we will examine if they behave in the same way.