{"title":"Between placeholder and filler","authors":"Inga Hennecke, Wiltrud Mihatsch","doi":"10.1075/pc.22003.hen","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.22003.hen","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 French truc and machin (‘thing’) can function as placeholders, fillers or in\u0000 general extender constructions. The aim of our paper is to investigate whether the prosodic characteristics of these three\u0000 different uses may give a clue as to their respective status. For our analysis, we extracted 112 occurrences of\u0000 truc and 57 occurrences of machin from the audio data of the PFC Corpus, which were analysed\u0000 using Praat, focusing on the acoustic duration, the individual pitch contour and the integration of machin and\u0000 truc into the intonation contour of the utterance. As in previous studies, our results show that the prosodic\u0000 patterns vary remarkably and show a highly heterogeneous picture so that the use of prosodic properties as cues for disambiguation\u0000 is problematic. However, we are able to show some weak tendencies which point to a close functional link between placeholders and\u0000 fillers reflecting their pragmatic functions. There is no evidence for prosodic weakening or even phonetic reduction in\u0000 placeholders. Furthermore, we detect some evidence for the detachment typical of pragmatic markers in the case of fillers. The\u0000 prosodic characteristics of truc and machin in general extender constructions diverge from both\u0000 the placeholder and the filler functions. Their prosody seems to be largely determined by the particular respective construction into which\u0000 both forms are strongly integrated.","PeriodicalId":254887,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatics and Cognition","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126060330","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Managing turns, building common ground, planning discourse","authors":"","doi":"10.1075/pc.21022.fed","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.21022.fed","url":null,"abstract":"This paper discusses the discursive and interpersonal functions conveyed by the Italian negative operator\u0000 no(?) ‘no’, suggesting a possible pathway of functional enrichment that can account for its high degree of\u0000 polyfunctionality. Drawing on the KIParla corpus of contemporary spoken Italian, we chart the values of\u0000 no(?) as a discourse marker, which are all clearly connected to the incremental co-construction of discourse\u0000 in interaction, either in terms of turn management or of shared knowledge and mutual alignment. We then explore its\u0000 sociolinguistic distribution, showing that register variation plays a major role in this respect. We argue that conversational\u0000 uses of no(?) as a discourse marker, including its role as a pause-filler, are motivated by cooperative needs in\u0000 discourse construction, shaping its functional profile at the intersection of mental processes and communicative practices.","PeriodicalId":254887,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatics and Cognition","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122149240","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Raquel Meister Ko. Freitag, P. Cardoso, Julian Tejada
{"title":"Linguistic and paralinguistic constraints on the function of\u0000 (eu) acho que as DM in Brazilian Portuguese","authors":"Raquel Meister Ko. Freitag, P. Cardoso, Julian Tejada","doi":"10.1075/pc.21024.fre","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.21024.fre","url":null,"abstract":"Like I think in English, (eu) acho\u0000 que in Brazilian Portuguese can function as a discourse marker (DM)\u0000 with more than one meaning, and these meanings are curiously diametrically\u0000 opposed. Certainty, doubt or uncertainty is inferred by hearers in an\u0000 interactional context. In a sample of audio-video recorded interviews, the\u0000 occurrences of this DM were classified by meaning, and association tests between\u0000 meanings and linguistic factors (pronoun realization, polarity, position in\u0000 utterance), real-world features (type of evidence from which the speaker says\u0000 something, and discursive topic), prosody (F0, intensity and duration), and\u0000 facial expressions were carried out. Differences that distinguish these factors\u0000 were identified among certainty, doubt and uncertainty uses. The certainty\u0000 meaning of (eu) acho que was associated with pronoun presence, more\u0000 formality and topics in which the speaker had direct evidence. Uncertainty and\u0000 doubt were associated with pronoun absence, less formality and topics in which\u0000 the speaker did not have direct evidence. Patterns of intensity and duration\u0000 acted to distinguish the certainty, doubt and uncertainty meanings of (eu)\u0000 acho que. In a conditional decision tree, the position in utterance,\u0000 presence of a pronoun, type of speaker’s evidence, discursive topic, and\u0000 duration helped to disambiguate the meanings of (eu) acho que.\u0000 These results suggest the relevance of a multilevel approach to describe DM, in\u0000 different languages, at least with respect to mental state verbs.","PeriodicalId":254887,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatics and Cognition","volume":"66 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131423703","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Ad hoc concepts, affective attitude and epistemic stance","authors":"Manuel Padilla Cruz","doi":"10.1075/pc.20002.pad","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.20002.pad","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In relevance-theoretic pragmatics the lower-level or first-order explicature is\u0000 a propositional form resulting from a series of inferential developments of the logical form. It amounts to the message the\u0000 speaker communicates explicitly. The higher-level or second-order explicature is a description\u0000 of the speech act that the speaker performs, her affective attitude towards what she says or her epistemic stance to the\u0000 communicated information. Information about the speaker’s affective attitude or epistemic stance need not solely be represented in\u0000 the latter, though. It could be included as beliefs in the mental files of pragmatically adjusted conceptual representations\u0000 featuring in lower-level explicatures. Those beliefs would originate as lexical pragmatic processes operate and their\u0000 representation would be triggered by elements like evaluative morphemes, expressive expletives, insulting terms and evidential\u0000 participles. Although they may be true or false in their own right, such beliefs would not affect the truth-conditional content of\u0000 the expressed proposition.","PeriodicalId":254887,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatics and Cognition","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127240522","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"L1 and non-L1 perceptions of discourse markers in English","authors":"Lieven Buysse, Meaghan Blanchard","doi":"10.1075/pc.21023.bla","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.21023.bla","url":null,"abstract":"Although critical reception of discourse markers (DMs) such as like and\u0000 you know has often been noted, surprisingly little research has actually investigated this attitudinal\u0000 perspective on usage. Moreover, a recent, rapidly expanding body of research on non-L1 speakers’ use of discourse markers in\u0000 English has suggested that their more or less frequent use of specific markers may be due to familiarity with these markers and\u0000 positive or negative marker perceptions. The present study presents the results of a survey measuring British English L1 speakers’, English as Foreign Language (EFL) learners’, and English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) speakers’ perceptions\u0000 of the discourse markers so, like, well and you know and their\u0000 reactions to either abundance or lack of DMs. The survey measured speaker attitudes by asking participants to evaluate the usage\u0000 of other DMs. We found that L1, EFL, and ELF have varying attitudes about certain markers, and these markers are perceived\u0000 differently for traits like politeness and friendliness. Generally speaking, L1 speakers were more positively disposed towards\u0000 markers than either of the other groups, who in their turn rated the propositional functions of the markers as more acceptable\u0000 than interactional functions.","PeriodicalId":254887,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatics and Cognition","volume":"494 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115884810","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"“Dr. Shelby, that’s a world record!”","authors":"Shelby R. Miller, Hilal Ergül, S. Attardo","doi":"10.1075/pc.22009.mil","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.22009.mil","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Participation in experimental studies can be conceptualized as Goffmanian frames, i.e. a set of rules which\u0000 include the fact the experimenter will be observing participant behavior through (the recording of) the experiment. This study is\u0000 focused on frame breaches in 16 video- and audio-recorded dyadic conversations taking place in an experimental setting. Our main\u0000 conclusion is that the experimental frame is conceptualized by participants as including constraints that go beyond\u0000 non-experimental interactions, and in particular the need to mitigate frame breaches, which are seen as face-threatening. Analyses revealed\u0000 that participants only broke the research frame after they completed the task they were assigned by the researcher, and that\u0000 breaches did not necessarily correspond to changes in key. Insights gained in relation to face and mitigation are discussed, as\u0000 well as the participants’ need to determine their next steps once the research purpose has been perceived complete.","PeriodicalId":254887,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatics and Cognition","volume":"19 4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132088297","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Investigation into the linguistic category membership of the Finnish\u0000 planning particle tota","authors":"Minna Kirjavainen, A. Nikolaev","doi":"10.1075/pc.21019.kir","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.21019.kir","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Even though hesitations (e.g., um/uh) were\u0000 historically perceived as involuntary non-linguistic items (e.g., Maclay & Osgood 1959), more\u0000 recently, a number of scholars have suggested that hesitations can behave like\u0000 (a) lexical items (e.g., Clark & Fox\u0000 Tree 2002), and (b) at least in some contexts and with some functions\u0000 as grammatical items like suffixes/clitics (Kirjavainen, Crible & Beeching 2022; Tottie 2017). The current study contributes to this\u0000 body of work and presents two spoken language corpus analyses (frequency\u0000 analysis; network analysis) investigating the nature of the Finnish planning\u0000 particle tota. Our results suggest that tota\u0000 is more similar to grammatical items than lexical items.","PeriodicalId":254887,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatics and Cognition","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129597712","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"From implicit to explicit","authors":"Joanna Blochowiak, C. Grisot, Liesbeth Degand","doi":"10.1075/pc.21001.blo","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.21001.blo","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The presence of discourse relations can be marked explicitly with lexical items such as specialized and\u0000 underspecified connectives or left implicit. It is now well established that the presence of specialized connective facilitates\u0000 the processing of these relations. The question is to gauge how different degrees of explicitness affect the processing of\u0000 discourse relations. This study investigates this question with respect to two relations, which are fundamental to our cognition\u0000 and which are closely tied: causal relations and temporal relations. We carried out a self-paced reading experiment, in which we\u0000 sought to compare the cost of inferring the presence of causal vs. temporal relations in the absence vs. presence of a connective\u0000 indicating a given relation in French. For the explicit marking, two types of connectives were tested – one specialized for each\u0000 relation (donc for causality and puis for temporality) and one underspecified\u0000 (et in its temporal and causal readings). Overall, our results confirm the facilitator role of discourse\u0000 connectives: we find that explicit discourse relations are processed faster than implicit ones. The specific (rather than\u0000 underspecified) connective facilitates processing for temporal relations but not for causal relations; and temporal relations were\u0000 read equally fast as causal relations.","PeriodicalId":254887,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatics and Cognition","volume":"55 9","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132241795","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Mathematics, relevance theory and the situated cognition paradigm","authors":"Kate McCallum","doi":"10.1075/pc.21005.mcc","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.21005.mcc","url":null,"abstract":"Mathematics is a highly specialised arena of human endeavour, one in which complex notations are invented and are subjected to complex and involved manipulations in the course of everyday work. What part do these writing practices play in mathematical communication, and how can we understand their use in the mathematical world in relation to theories of communication and cognition? To answer this, I examine in detail an excerpt from a research meeting in which communicative board-writing practices can be observed, and attempt to explain the observed exchanges with reference to relevance theory (a cognitivist theory of pragmatics), in combination with the situated cognition paradigm. Successful communication in the excerpt appears well described by the notion of metacognitive acquaintance, as described in Sperber & Wilson (2015), especially when a situated view of cognition is adopted. Though this example is taken from a relatively informal face-to-face communicative situation, characteristics of such situations extend even into formal written mathematics, since even the technical terminology developed in the course of the meeting includes details that may provide readers with a kind of access to the mathematicians’ cognitive processes.","PeriodicalId":254887,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatics and Cognition","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121489042","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Worrying about your future","authors":"Heng Li","doi":"10.1075/pc.20019.li","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.20019.li","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 According to the Temporal Focus Hypothesis, people’s sagittal mental space-time mappings are conditioned by their\u0000 temporal-focus attention. Based on this, it can be predicted that, by virtue of their future-oriented thinking, individuals with\u0000 high anxiety should be more likely to think about time according to the future-in-front mapping than those with low anxiety.\u0000 Utilizing a combined correlational and experimental approach, we found converging evidence for this prediction. Studies 1 and 2\u0000 found that individuals higher in dispositional anxiety and state anxiety, who characteristically worry about the future, were more\u0000 likely to conceptualize the future as in front of them and the past as behind than individuals lower in dispositional anxiety and\u0000 state anxiety. Study 3 showed that participants who were induced with anxiety mood tended to map the future on a frontal position,\u0000 compared to those in the baseline condition. These findings shed further light on the Temporal Focus Hypothesis, thus providing\u0000 the first experimental evidence that emotional experience can influence people’s temporal-focus attention in determining their\u0000 metaphorical sagittal orientation of time.","PeriodicalId":254887,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatics and Cognition","volume":"429 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132726333","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
