Cover not available
Part of
Constructing Collectivity: 'We' across languages and contexts
Edited by Theodossia-Soula Pavlidou
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 239] 2014
► pp. 45–64

Singular perception, multiple perspectives through ‘we’

Constructing intersubjective meaning in English and German

ORCID logo | The University of Nottingham, UK
This paper presents the results of a corpus-based investigation of the role of the first-person plural pronoun in the construction of intersubjective meaning among evidential perception verbs of sight and sound in English and German (with most attention being given to written rather than spoken data). Whereas the first-person singular pronoun only signifies that the evidence rests solely with the speaker/writer, the first-person plural pronoun allows a much wider range of intersubjective meanings concerning the nature of the evidence. It is also shown how English and German perception verbs express intersubjective evidential meaning in a number of different complementation patterns, how the type of this meaning is often linked to these patterns, and how the use of the first-person plural pronoun can vary among and within these constructions. The possibility of a diachronic development in this domain is also given some attention, hence data are drawn from the Early Modern and Modern periods of these two languages.
Published online: 27 February 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.239.06whi
References (35)
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.2004. Evidentiality . Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Benveniste, Emile. 1971 (1966). Problems in General Linguistics , Mary E. Meek(trans). Coral Gables, FL: The University of Miami Press.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas and Edward Finegan. 1989. “Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and effect.” Text 9(1): 93–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bréal, Michel.1900. Semantics: Studies in the Science of Meaning , Mrs.Henry Cust(trans). London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J.2012. The Comment Clause in English: Syntactic Origins and Pragmatic Development . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace. 1986. “Evidentiality in English conversation and academic writing.” In Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology , Wallace Chafe and Johanna Nichols(eds), 261–272. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corp.Google Scholar
Diewald, Gabriele and Elena Smirnova. 2010. Evidentiality in German: Linguistic Realization and Regularities in Grammaticalization . Berlin/New York: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gisborne, Nikolas. 2010. The Event Structure of Perception Verbs . Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gisborne, Nikolas and Jasper Holmes. 2007. “A history of English evidential verbs of appearance.” English Language and Linguistics 11(1): 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grund, Peter J.2012. “The nature of knowledge: Evidence and evidentiality in the witness depositions from the Salem witch trials.” American Speech 87(1): 7–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haan, Ferdinand de.2001. “The relation between modality and evidentiality.” In Modalität und Modalverben im Deutschen , Reimar Müller and Marga Reis(eds), 201–216. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.Google Scholar
Harm, Volker. 2000. Regularitäten des Semantischen Wandels bei Wahrnehmungsverben des Deutschen . Stuttgart: Steiner.Google Scholar
Hunston, Susan and Francis, Gill.2000. Pattern Grammar: A Corpus-Driven Approach to the Lexical Grammar of English . Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, Ken. 2005. “Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse.” Discourse Studies 7(2): 173–192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ifantidou, Elly. 2001. Evidentials and Relevance . Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1971 (1957). “Shifters, verbal categories, and the Russian verb.” In Roman Jakobson: Selected Writings. Vol. II: Word and Language . The Hague: Mouton, 130–147.Google Scholar
Joseph, Brian D.2003. “Evidentials: Summation, questions, prospects.” In Studies in Evidentiality , Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald and R. M. W. Dixon(eds), 307–327. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George and Johnson, Mark.2003 [1980]. Metaphors We Live By . 2nd edition. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W.1990. “Subjectification.” Cognitive Linguistics 1: 5–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1999. “Losing control: Grammaticalization, subjectification, and transparency.” In Historical Semantics and Cognition , Andreas Blank and Peter Koch(eds), 147–175. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mühlhäusler, Peter and Harré, Rom.1990. Pronouns and People: The Linguistic Construction of Social and Personal Identity . Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Nuyts, Jan. 2001. Epistemic Modality, Language, and Conceptualization: A Cognitive-Pragmatic Perspective . Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Palmer, Frank R.2001. Mood and Modality . 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smirnova, Elena. 2006. Die Entwicklung der Konstruktion würde + Infinitiv im Deutschen: Eine Funktional-semantische Analyse unter Besonderer Berücksichtigung Sprachhistorischer Aspekte. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sweetser, Eve E.1990. From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1982. “From propositional to textual and expressive meanings: Some semantic-pragmatic aspects of grammaticalization.” In Perspectives in Historical Linguistics , W. P. Lehmann and Yakov Malkiel(eds), 245–271. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1989. “On the rise of epistemic meaning in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change.” Language 65: 31–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1997. “Subjectification and the development of epistemic meaning: The case of promise and threaten.” In Modality in Germanic Languages: Historical and Comparative Perspectives , Toril Swan and Olaf Jansen Westvik(eds), 185–210. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Dasher, Richard B.2002. Regularity in Semantic Change . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Verhagen, Arie. 2005. Constructions of Intersubjectivity: Discourse, Syntax, and Cognition . Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Viberg, Åke.1983. “The verbs of perception: A typological study.” Linguistics 21: 123–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whitt, Richard J.2009. “Auditory evidentiality in English and German: The case of perception verbs.” Lingua 119(7): 1083–1095. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010. Evidentiality and Perception Verbs in English and German . Oxford/Bern: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011. “(Inter)Subjectivity and evidential perception verbs in English and German.” Journal of Pragmatics 43(1): 347–360. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Willett, Thomas. 1988. “A cross-linguistic survey of the grammaticalization of evidentiality.” Studies in Language 12(1): 51–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

Fried, Mirjam
2021. Discourse-referential patterns as a network of grammatical constructions. Constructions and Frames 13:1 ► pp. 21 ff. DOI logo
Whitt, Richard J.
2018. Evidentiality and propositional scope in Early Modern German. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 19:1 ► pp. 122 ff. DOI logo
Simões Marques, Isabelle & Michèle Koven
2017. “We are going to our Portuguese homeland!”. Narrative Inquiry 27:2 ► pp. 286 ff. DOI logo
Simões Marques, Isabelle & Michèle Koven
2019. “We are going to our Portuguese homeland!”. In Storytelling in the Digital World [Benjamins Current Topics, 104], ► pp. 79 ff. DOI logo
Steele, Felicia Jean
2017. Studies in the history of the English language VIII: Generalizing vs. particularizing methodologies in historical linguistic analysis. 2016. Ed. by Don Chapman, Colette Moore & Miranda Wilcox. Diachronica 34:4 ► pp. 577 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2021. The Sociopragmatics of Stance [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 329], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 20 september 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.