Discourse particles and modal particles as grammatical elements

2006 ◽  
pp. 403-425
Keyword(s):  
Modal Particles ◽  
Discourse Particles

scholarly journals A Balkan View on the Left Periphery: Modal and Discourse Particles

Languages ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 75
Author(s):  
Anna Roussou
Keyword(s):  
Lexical Item ◽  
Similar Distribution ◽  
Left Periphery ◽  
Lexical Borrowing ◽  
Discourse Marker ◽  
Modal Particles ◽  
Discourse Particles ◽  
The Future ◽  
Analytic Expressions

The present paper discusses two sets of so-called particles in the Balkan languages, arguing that the correspondences attested in the E-languages reveal abstract properties at the level of the I-language. The first set involves modal particles which participate in the analytic expressions of the “future” and the “subjunctive”. Future markers are construed as V-related elements externalizing a scope position of the verb, while the subjunctive markers take their features from the nominal set. The second set of data involves the discourse marker “haide” which is argued to externalize features associated with the force of the sentence and its anchoring to the discourse participants. In the case of modal particles, the languages under consideration retain their own lexica, while in the case of the discourse marker, they share the same lexical item (lexical borrowing). Analysis of these phenomena supports an articulated left periphery which also accounts for the similar distribution of the discourse marker “haide”. At the same time, the different externalizations leave room for further microparametric variation.

One ᵲa – many meanings. Syntax, semantics and prosody of the Moroccan modal particle ᵲa and its Egyptian Arabic counterparts

2012 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dina El Zarka
Keyword(s):  
Egyptian Arabic ◽  
Modal Particles ◽  
Discourse Particles

AbstractThis paper presents a study of certain modal particles in Moroccan and Egyptian Arabic that can be classified asIt has long been noted that other types of discourse particles (

scholarly journals comparison of "fei" and "aber"

2018 ◽  
Vol 60 ◽  
pp. 469-486
Author(s):  
Stefan Hinterwimmer ◽  
Cornelia Ebert
Keyword(s):  
Modal Particles ◽  
Discourse Particles ◽  
Conversational Implicatures ◽  
Issue Content

This paper compares the modal particle fei (Schlieben-Lange, 1979; Thoma, 2009)with the modal particle/sentence adverb aber (not to be confused with the conjunction aber,‘but’). Intuitively, both items express some form of contrast and correction. We will show thatboth are special among discourse particles in the following sense: They make a contributionthat is interpreted at a level distinct from the level where at-issue content (Potts, 2005) isinterpreted, as is standard for modal particles (see Gutzmann, 2015 and the references therein).But more interestingly, they exclusively relate to propositions that have not entered theCommon Ground via being the at-issue content of an assertion made by the addressee.Keywords: discourse particles, assertions, at-issue content, presuppositions, conventionalimplicatures, conversational implicatures.

scholarly journals German discourse particles in the second language classroom

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 184-210
Author(s):  
Andreas Trotzke ◽  
Ermenegildo Bidese ◽  
Manuela Caterina Moroni
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Second Language Learning ◽  
Second Language Learners ◽  
Proficiency Levels ◽  
Modal Particles ◽  
Discourse Particles ◽  
Cohesive Devices ◽  
Language Classroom

Abstract One of the main pedagogical objectives for language learners at high proficiency levels is to use ‘cohesive devices’ when writing a text or conducting a conversation. Usually, curricula stress the importance of clause-internal cohesion (by means such as connectives: and, but, when, because, etc.). By contrast, we stress the importance of cohesion at the level of the dialogue and in this context focus on discourse (aka ‘modal’) particles as a means to yield cohesion at that level. In this domain, German discourse particles represent a challenging learning objective for second language learners of German. This paper explores some production patterns of German discourse particles in L2 German by L1 Italian learners. We show that looking at those elements can provide new insights because these elements allow us to tease apart problems within syntax as compared to the lexicon-pragmatics interface in second language learning.

scholarly journals Discourse particles in Manado Malay

2000 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
pp. 185-198
Author(s):  
Ruben Stoel
Keyword(s):  
Discourse Particles

Phrase Structure and Movement in Japanese

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mamoru Saito
Keyword(s):  
Complex Structure ◽  
Phrase Structure ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
Ample Evidence ◽  
Discourse Particles ◽  
Nominal Structure ◽  
Clausal Comparatives ◽  
The Right ◽  
Case Markers ◽  
Operator Movement

Japanese exhibits some unique features with respect to phrase structure and movement. It is well-known that its phrase structure is strictly head-final. It also provides ample evidence that a sentence may have more complex structure than its surface form suggests. Causative sentences are the best-known example of this. They appear to be simple sentences with verbs accompanying the causative suffix, -sase. But the causative suffix is an independent verb and takes a small clause vP complement in the syntactic representation. Japanese sentences can have a rich structure in the right periphery. For example, embedded clauses may contain up to three overt complementizers, corresponding to Finite (no), Interrogative (ka), and Report/Force (to). Matrix clauses may end in a sequence of discourse particles, such as wa, yo, and ne. Each of the complementizers and discourse particles has a selectional requirement of its own. More research is required to settle on the functional heads in the nominal structure. Among the controversial issues are whether D is present and whether Case markers should be analyzed as independent heads. Various kinds of movement operations are observed in the language. NP-movement to the subject position takes place in passive and unaccusative sentences, and clausal comparatives and clefts are derived by operator-movement. Scrambling is a unique movement operation that should be distinguished from both NP-movement and operator-movement. It does not establish operator-variable relations but is not subject to the locality requirements imposed on NP-movement. It cannot be PF-movement as it creates new binding possibilities. It is still debated whether head movement, for example, the movement of verb to tense, takes place in the language.

Prosody of Ojibwe Discourse Markers

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonja Frazier
Keyword(s):  
Great Lakes ◽  
Narrative Structure ◽  
Discourse Markers ◽  
Pitch Tracking ◽  
Discourse Particles ◽  
Global Coherence ◽  
Complex Picture ◽  
And Linguistics

Discourse markers (DMs) are optional, sequentially dependent sentence-initial items (Schiffrin, 1987) that are used to bracket units of talk (e.g. oh, well, because, y’know, now ). This research aims to better understand Ojibwe DMs which typically occur as the first or second element of a sentence (Fairbanks, 2016). The proposed analysis seeks to understand the prosody of Ojibwe DMs broadly and specifically their use in narrative structure. The data is drawn from Gakina Dibaajimowin Gwayakwaawan ( All Teachings are Correct ) by Nancy Jones, 2013. The analysis was done by using the programs Audacity and PRAAT to identify individual sentences and their pitch prominences. Through careful listening and pitch tracking, prosodic properties of DMs were found to indicate the following: DMs attract the most prominent pitch in the sentence. DMs are used by the speaker to attract the hearer’s attention; in this sense they are interactional (Franks-Job, 2006). DMs are used by the speaker to structure the narration; as such they interact with topic changes and emphasis (Lenk, 1998) This study creates a more complex picture of Ojibwe DMs and adds to our understanding of the language. References: Fairbanks, B. 2016. Ojibwe Discourse Markers. University of Nebraska Press. Franks-Job, B. 2006. A dynamic-interactional approach to discourse markers. In Approaches to discourse particles, K. Fischer (ed.) pp. 395–413. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Lenk, U. 1998. Discourse markers and global coherence in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 30(2):246-257 Ogimaawigwaebiik [Nancy Jones] 2013. Gakina Dibaajimowin Gwayakwaawan. In Dibaajimowinaan; Anishinaabe Stories of Culture and respect ; Nigaanigiizhig [Jim Saint-Arnold] (ed.), Great Lakes Indian Fish & Wildlife Commission, 9-10. Raso, Tommaso. 1996. Prosodic constraints for discourse markers. Spoken Corpora and Linguistic Studies. In Spoken Corpora and Linguistics Studies , T. Raso & H. Mello (eds.) 411-467. Benjamins: Amsterdam. Schiffrin, D. 1987. Discourse Markers. doi: 10.1017/cbo9780511611841.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document