A broad view of evidentiality is adopted, based on Chafe (1986) and Haviland (1987) which goes beyond the grammatical marking of the speaker’s or writer’s perceived sources of knowledge and reliability of these sources to encode, not only what the speaker knows and how s/he knows it, but also what can be taken to be an addressee’s state of knowledge. According to this view, evidentials are contemplated as interactive devices or resources for redefining common ground between interlocutors. They go beyond referential content to signal such meanings as confrontation and contradictory assumptions. They are necessarily situated in social contexts and have an indexical function. They may also overlap with epistemic stances and with affect, ranging in the case of surely from surprise, disbelief, doubt and disapproval to persuasion and an invitation to share beliefs or to agree on future courses of action. Using data from the British National Corpus, I analyse a sample of concordances of surely with subject personal pronouns, with the aim of providing a preliminary characterisation of the range of interpersonal attitudes expressed by surely and the determining factors which trigger these apparently contradictory stances.
2004. A model and a methodology for the study of pragmatic markers: the semantic field of expectation. Journal of Pragmatics 36:10 ► pp. 1781 ff.
Almeida, Francisco Alonso
2015. The functions ofseemandparecerin early medical writing. Discourse Studies 17:2 ► pp. 121 ff.
Alonso-Almeida, Francisco & Mª Isabel González-Cruz
2012. Exploring Male and Female Voices through Epistemic Modality and Evidentiality in Some Modern English Travel Texts on the Canaries. Research in Language 10:3 ► pp. 323 ff.
2006. Epistemological positioning and evidentiality in English news discourse: A text-driven approach. Text & Talk - An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse Communication Studies 26:6 ► pp. 635 ff.
2012. Pragmatics of Stance. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics,
Hidalgo‐Downing, Laura
2015. Grammar and Evaluation. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, ► pp. 1 ff.
Kim, Brian
2015. This paper surely contains some errors. Philosophical Studies 172:4 ► pp. 1013 ff.
Kimps, Ditte
2007. Declarative constant polarity tag questions: A data-driven analysis of their form, meaning and attitudinal uses. Journal of Pragmatics 39:2 ► pp. 270 ff.
Kimps, Ditte & Kristin Davidse
2008. Illocutionary force and conduciveness in imperative constant polarity tag questions: A typology. Text & Talk - An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse Communication Studies 28:6 ► pp. 699 ff.
Larsson, Tove, Marcus Callies, Hilde Hasselgård, Natalia Judith Laso, Sanne van Vuuren, Isabel Verdaguer & Magali Paquot
2018. Evaluating stance-annotated sentences from the Brexit Blog Corpus: A quantitative linguistic analysis. ICAME Journal 42:1 ► pp. 133 ff.
Simaki, Vasiliki, Carita Paradis & Andreas Kerren
2019. A two-step procedure to identify lexical elements of stance constructions in discourse from political blogs. Corpora 14:3 ► pp. 379 ff.
Tagliamonte, Sali A. & Jennifer Smith
2021. Obviously undergoing change: Adverbs of evidentiality across time and space. Language Variation and Change 33:1 ► pp. 81 ff.
Tantucci, Vittorio
2021. Language and Social Minds,
Tantucci, Vittorio & Matteo Di Cristofaro
2021. Pre-emptive interaction in language change and ontogeny: the case of [there is no NP]. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 17:3 ► pp. 715 ff.
Tantucci, Vittorio & Aiqing Wang
2018. Illocutional concurrences: The case of evaluative speech acts and face-work in spoken Mandarin and American English. Journal of Pragmatics 138 ► pp. 60 ff.
Van Olmen, Daniël & Vittorio Tantucci
2022. Getting attention in different languages: A usage-based approach to parenthetical look in Chinese, Dutch, English, and Italian. Intercultural Pragmatics 19:2 ► pp. 141 ff.
Zheng, Wuxi
2022. The final particle uè in Longxi Qiang: A marker of realis and stance. Journal of Pragmatics 189 ► pp. 17 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 march 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.