LEADER 05467nam 2200661 a 450 001 9910785928703321 005 20230801225123.0 010 $a1-283-90232-X 010 $a90-272-7370-7 035 $a(CKB)2670000000272576 035 $a(EBL)1043405 035 $a(OCoLC)815672112 035 $a(SSID)ssj0000756636 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)12267059 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000756636 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)10750859 035 $a(PQKB)10074145 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC1043405 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL1043405 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebr10613340 035 $a(CaONFJC)MIL421482 035 $a(EXLCZ)992670000000272576 100 $a20120502d2012 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aur|n|---||||| 181 $ctxt 182 $cc 183 $acr 200 00$aPragmatic markers and pragmaticalization$b[electronic resource] $elessons from false friends /$fedited by Peter Lauwers, Gudrun Vanderbauwhede and Stijn Verleyen 210 $aAmsterdam ;$aPhiladelphia $cJohn Benjamins Pub. Co.$d2012 215 $a1 online resource (166 p.) 225 0$aBenjamins current topics,$x1874-0081 ;$vv. 44 300 $aDescription based upon print version of record. 311 $a90-272-0263-X 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references and index. 327 $aPragmatic Markers and Pragmaticalization; Editorial page; Title page; LCC data; Table of contents; How false friends give true hints about pragmatic markers; 1. Definition and delineation of the topic; 2. State of the art; 3. The relevance of the study of cognates; 3.1 Descriptive challenges; 3.2 Relevance to linguistic typology; 3.3 Relevance to the study of grammaticalization and pragmaticalization; 4. Summary; Note; References; Semantic change; 1. Introduction; 2. Current debates on the evolution of hedging particles; 2.1 Terminological preliminaries; 2.2 Traugott and Dasher's (2002) IITSC 327 $a2.3 Grammaticalisation or pragmaticalisation?2.4 Formal factors and the syntactic nature of the source; 2.5 The role of persistence; 2.6 An ecology of competing terms; 3. The pragmaticalisation of 'effectively' and finalement; 3.1 Methodology: Corpora of spontaneous spoken French and English; 3.2 Effectivement and 'effectively'; 3.2.1 French effectivement; 3.2.2 English 'effectively'; 3.3 'Finally' and finalement; 3.3.1 The 'summing up' sense of finalement; 3.3.2 The hedging use of finalement; 4. Towards a cross-linguistic semantic map; 4.1 Persistence; 4.2 Degrees of pragmaticalisation 327 $a4.3 Translation equivalence?5. Conclusions; Notes; References; Corpora; Degrees of pragmaticalization; 1. Research context and aims; 2. Methodology and theoretical framework; 3. Synchronic functions; 3.1 English 'actually'; 3.2 French actuellement; 3.3 Synchronic correspondences; 4. Diachronic development; 4.1 Earliest meanings: 13th-16th centuries; 4.2 Divergence: 17th and 18th centuries; 4.3 Most recent developments: 19th century-present; 5. Conclusions and theoretical implications; Notes; References; Corpora; "You're absolutely right!!"; 1. Structure of the article 327 $a2. Preliminary considerations2.1 The meaning of 'absolutely' and absolutamente; 2.2 Comments to previous literature on stance adverbials and contrastive analysis; 2.3 Hypotheses on the contrastive analysis of 'absolutely' and absolutamente; 2.4 Description of the data; 3. The syntactic functions of 'absolutely' and absolutamente; 3.1 Modifiers of words; 3.2 Clausal constituents: Verbal Group-oriented Adjuncts and clause-oriented Adjuncts; 3.3 (Parts of) minor clauses; 4. Results of the quantitative analysis and discussion 327 $a4.1 Frequencies of 'absolutely' and absolutamente in the BNC and the CREA4.2 'Absolutely' and absolutamente as modifiers of words; 4.2.1 Modifiers of adjectives; 4.2.2 Modifiers of adverbs; 4.2.3 Modifiers of pronouns; 4.2.4 Modifiers of prepositions; 4.2.5 Modifiers of determiners; 4.2.6 Modifiers of modal auxiliaries; 4.2.7 Modifiers of nouns; 4.3 'Absolutely' and absolutamente as clausal constituents; 4.3.1 VG-oriented adverbs; 4.3.2 Clause-oriented adverbs; 4.4 'Absolutely'/absolutamente as (parts of) minor clauses 327 $a5. Maximal degree versus certainty: Similarity between the discourse functions of 'absolutely' and absolutamente and those of adverbs of certainty 330 $aIn this paper, we investigate the evolution from imperatives to discourse markers in Romance, with a corpus-based approach. We focus on the case of items coming from verbs meaning 'to look', in a semasiological perspective: Spanish and Catalan mira, Portuguese olha, Italian guarda, French regarde, Romanian uite. We show that they all share many uses, among which turn-taking, introduction of reported speech, hesitation phenomenon, topic-shifting and modalization, except for French regarde. We then establish (against Waltereit, 2002) that the development 410 0$aBenjamins Current Topics 606 $aPragmatics 606 $aDiscourse markers 615 0$aPragmatics. 615 0$aDiscourse markers. 676 $a401/.45 701 $aLauwers$b Peter$0689354 701 $aVanderbauwhede$b Gudrun$01187091 701 $aVerleyen$b Stijn$0699283 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910785928703321 996 $aPragmatic markers and pragmaticalization$93854559 997 $aUNINA