{"title":"对英国《议事录》语言民主化的语料语法分析","authors":"Turo Hiltunen, Turo Vartiainen","doi":"10.1075/jhp.00075.hil","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In this article, we investigate changes in British parliamentary discourse by using the Hansard Corpus\n (1803–2005). Our first goal is to determine whether parliamentary speeches have become colloquialised by studying frequency\n changes of select features associated with informal spoken language. Second, by analysing data from the House of Commons and the\n House of Lords separately, we show that the texts from the two Houses should be considered distinct sub-registers, each with their\n own conventions and development paths. Finally, we analyse a pattern that seems particularly relevant to parliamentary debates:\n one where speakers imply disagreement by referring to their peers in the third person, thus circumventing a parliamentary\n regulation whereby speakers are prohibited from addressing one another directly. Our findings support the idea of an ongoing\n colloquialisation/democratisation trend affecting parliamentary discourse while also suggesting that this process is not entirely\n transparent in the written record because of editorial interference.","PeriodicalId":54081,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Historical Pragmatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A corpus-pragmatic analysis of linguistic democratisation in the British Hansard\",\"authors\":\"Turo Hiltunen, Turo Vartiainen\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/jhp.00075.hil\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n In this article, we investigate changes in British parliamentary discourse by using the Hansard Corpus\\n (1803–2005). Our first goal is to determine whether parliamentary speeches have become colloquialised by studying frequency\\n changes of select features associated with informal spoken language. Second, by analysing data from the House of Commons and the\\n House of Lords separately, we show that the texts from the two Houses should be considered distinct sub-registers, each with their\\n own conventions and development paths. Finally, we analyse a pattern that seems particularly relevant to parliamentary debates:\\n one where speakers imply disagreement by referring to their peers in the third person, thus circumventing a parliamentary\\n regulation whereby speakers are prohibited from addressing one another directly. Our findings support the idea of an ongoing\\n colloquialisation/democratisation trend affecting parliamentary discourse while also suggesting that this process is not entirely\\n transparent in the written record because of editorial interference.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54081,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Historical Pragmatics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Historical Pragmatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.00075.hil\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Historical Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.00075.hil","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
A corpus-pragmatic analysis of linguistic democratisation in the British Hansard
In this article, we investigate changes in British parliamentary discourse by using the Hansard Corpus
(1803–2005). Our first goal is to determine whether parliamentary speeches have become colloquialised by studying frequency
changes of select features associated with informal spoken language. Second, by analysing data from the House of Commons and the
House of Lords separately, we show that the texts from the two Houses should be considered distinct sub-registers, each with their
own conventions and development paths. Finally, we analyse a pattern that seems particularly relevant to parliamentary debates:
one where speakers imply disagreement by referring to their peers in the third person, thus circumventing a parliamentary
regulation whereby speakers are prohibited from addressing one another directly. Our findings support the idea of an ongoing
colloquialisation/democratisation trend affecting parliamentary discourse while also suggesting that this process is not entirely
transparent in the written record because of editorial interference.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Historical Pragmatics provides an interdisciplinary forum for theoretical, empirical and methodological work at the intersection of pragmatics and historical linguistics. The editorial focus is on socio-historical and pragmatic aspects of historical texts in their sociocultural context of communication (e.g. conversational principles, politeness strategies, or speech acts) and on diachronic pragmatics as seen in linguistic processes such as grammaticalization or discoursization. Contributions draw on data from literary or non-literary sources and from any language. In addition to contributions with a strictly pragmatic or discourse analytical perspective, it also includes contributions with a more sociolinguistic or semantic approach.