Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (26) (remove)
Language
- English (26) (remove)
Keywords
- Adverbs (2)
- evidentiality (2)
- function (2)
- functional unit (2)
- grammatography (2)
- meaning (2)
- modal verbs (2)
- modality (2)
- oppositions (2)
- pragmaticalisation (2)
- Ferdinand de Saussure (1)
- Ideologues (1)
- Plato´s Cratylus (1)
- anachronism (1)
- conceptual history (1)
- grammar (1)
- language and thought (1)
- linguistic historiography (1)
- salon (1)
- sign (1)
- word order (1)
Institute
This paper intends to explore the interaction between aspect and lexical means, in this case temporal adverbials, in the bounding of representations of situations. First, the theoretical basis is outlined, followed by the results of a corpus analysis of coccurrences with adverbs that limit situations. The term situation encompasses all representable processes, states, events, or actions. Finally, some theoretical conclusions are drawn concerning the cognitive category of bounding, using the example of aspectuality. The imperfective verb forms maintain their aspectuality in delimiting connections with adverbs, resulting in a complex, multi-dimensional aspectuality. In nongrammaticalized forms, such as lexical markers, the speaker is free to make a temporal localization or an aspectual perspective. Lexical expressions can make temporal and aspect markings even more precisely and clearly than tenses. They can also limit or extend situations and thus express aspect. Aspectuality thus presents itself as a compositional category, in which external bounding and the internal representation of a course of action or development can interact.
The name Ideologues refers to a group of philosophers, psychologists, grammarians, educational theorists and medical specialists who for a short period from 1795 to 1805 determined the intellectual climate in France and sought to develop a science of ideas (idéologie). The Ideologues had a rather reserved attitude to Condillac’s (1714–1780) ideas and his sensualist sign theory. They strove for the perfection of language for the needs of thought and of scientific knowledge. The connections with the Ideologues can also be discerned in Russia. In the educational theory, Jean-Baptiste Maudru (1740–1808) was close to the Ideologues and, despite his insufficient knowledge of the Russian language, made some interesting remarks on the connection between the language and the national character. According to Maudru and in agreement with the Ideologues, different typologies of word order are not just an indication of greater or lesser closeness to the natural order. Rather, they indicate differences in national character, which manifest themselves in the specific character of individual languages. Maudru taught at the military academy in Saint Petersburg and published the first Russian grammar in France (Maudru 1802). In his grammar, he sought to link mechanically the specific features of languages and of national characters with the climatic influences. His attempt to revive the theory of climatic influences was criticized by Karamzin. Karamzin also treated the discussion of the metaphoric extension of word meanings as an absurd undertaking, which had no place in grammar.
Meaning and Function
(2022)
The use of the word functional in the most diverse theories and approaches has contributed in no small measure to the confusion in linguistics today. This article does not claim to give an overview of the different directions of functionalism in linguistics. Rather, the aim is to present what Coseriu‘s view characterised as functional in his time and to what extent his theory outlined a path that still makes sense in functional-cognitive linguistics today. This will involve an examination of Coseriu‘s difficult-to-identify concept of function. Furthermore, the article will also show that functional thinking is relevant for current grammatography.
Meaning and Function
(2021)
The use of the word functional in the most diverse theories and approaches has contributed in no small measure to the confusion in linguistics today. This article does not claim to give an overview of the different directions of functionalism in linguistics. Rather, the aim is to present what Coseriu‘s view characterised as functional in his time and to what extent his theory outlined a path that still makes sense in functional-cognitive linguistics today. This will involve an examination of Coseriu‘s difficult-to-identify concept of function. Furthermore, the article will also show that functional thinking is relevant for current grammatography.
In recent years, the category of evidentiality has also come into use for the description of Romance languages and of German. 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. We consider evidentiality to be a structural dimension of grammar, the values of which are expressed by types of constructions that code the source of information which a speaker imparts. If we look at the situation in Romance languages and in German, drawing a boundary between epistemic modality and evidentiality presents problems that are difficult to solve. Adding markers of the source of the speaker’s knowledge often limits the degree of responsibility of the speaker for the content of the utterance. Evidential adverbs are a frequently used means of marking the source of the speaker’s knowledge. The evidential meaning is generalised to marking any source of knowledge, what can be regarded as a result of a process of pragmaticalisation. The use of certain means which also carry out evidential markings can even contribute to the blurring of the different kinds of evidentiality. German also has modal verbs which in conjunction with the perfect tense of the verb have a predominantly evidential use (sollen and wollen). But even here the evidential marking is not without influence on the modality of the utterance. The Romance languages, however, do not have such specialised verbs for expressing evidentiality in certain contexts. To do this, they mark evidentiality – often context bound – by verb forms such as the conditional and the imperfect tense. This article shall contrast the different architectures used in expressing evidentiality in German and in the Romance languages.
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)
In recent years, the category of evidentiality has also come into use for the description of Romance languages and of German. 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. We consider evidentiality to be a structural dimension of grammar, the values of which are expressed by types of constructions that code the source of information which a speaker imparts. If we look at the situation in Romance languages and in German, drawing a boundary between epistemic modality and evidentiality presents problems that are difficult to solve. Adding markers of the source of the speaker's knowledge often limits the degree of responsibility of the speaker for the content of the utterance. Evidential adverbs are a frequently used means of marking the source of the speaker's knowledge. The evidential meaning is generalised to marking any source of knowledge, what can be regarded as a result of a process of pragmaticalisation. The use of certain means which also carry out evidential markings can even contribute to the blurring of the different kinds of evidentiality. German also has modal verbs which in conjunction with the perfect tense of the verb have a predominantly evidential use (sollen and wollen). But even here the evidential marking is not without influence on the modality of the utterance. The Romance languages, however, do not have such specialised verbs for expressing evidentiality in certain contexts. To do this, they mark evidentiality - often context bound - by verb forms such as the conditional and the imperfect tense. This article shall contrast the different architectures used in expressing evidentiality in German and in the Romance languages.