Article published In:
PragmaticsVol. 30:4 (2020) ► pp.557–585
Korean general extenders tunci ha and kena ha ‘or something’
Approximation, hedging, and pejorative stance in cross-linguistic comparison
Using natural conversation corpora, I demonstrate that the Korean x-tunci ha ‘x-or do’ and x-kena ha ‘x-or do’, which originally list options (e.g., ‘x or y do’) have emerged as independent constructions that can indicate approximation, epistemic uncertainty, tentativeness, and even polite hedging. I argue that these Korean “general extenders” (Overstreet 1999) followed a similar (inter)subjectification process to English x-or something and Japanese x-tari suru ‘x-or do.’ I also illustrate how these two Korean general extenders specialize in different hedging strategies.
Ironically, Korean tunci ha and Japanese tari suru can also convey a speaker’s negative affective stance. I demonstrate that tunci ha was frequently used in making non-imposing suggestions (hedging) and obtained its negative affect in the context of suggesting an obvious but untried solution (i.e., the frustration of the suggesting speaker). This result differs from Suzuki (2008)’s argument of the Japanese case which attributes this development to a speaker’s non-committal attitude.
Keywords: disjunctive connective, general extender, hedging, affective stance, subjectification, intersubjectification,
tunci
,
kena
,
or something
,
tari suru
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Previous studies on English or something and Japanese tari suru
- 3.Two Korean general extenders and their distributional skewing
- 4.
Tunci general extender
- 4.1Epistemic uncertainty and the tentativeness of a plan
- 4.2Polite hedging
- 4.2.1Propositional hedging
- 4.2.2Speech act hedging
- 4.3Speaker’s negative affective stance
- 4.3.1Criticizing attitude toward Others
- 4.3.2Pejorative stance toward the speaker’s own problems
- 5.
Kena general extender
- 5.1Vague category and epistemic uncertainty
- 5.2Qualification and propositional hedging with negation
- 6.Conclusion
- Notes
-
References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
References
Aijmer, K.
Barsalou, L.
1983 “Ad hoc Categories.” Memory and Cognition 111: 211–227. 
Brems, L., Ghesquière, L. and Van de Velde, F.
eds. 2014 Intersubjectivity and Inter-subjectification in Grammar and Discourse: Theoretical and Descriptive Advances. Vol. 651. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. and Finegan, E.
1999 Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited.
Bybee, J. L.
2006 “From usage to grammar: The mind’s Response to Repetition.” Language 82(4): 711–733.
2010 Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bybee, J. L., Revere, P. and Pagliuca, W.
1994 The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Channell, J.
1994 Vague language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cheshire, J.
2007 “Discourse Variation, Grammaticalisation and Stuff like That.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 11(2): 155–193.
Carter, R. and McCarthy, M.
2006 Cambridge Grammar of English: A Comprehensive Guide; Spoken and Written English Grammar and Usage. Stuttgart: Ernst Klett Sprachen.
Cho, Y-M., Lee, H-S., Schulz, C., Sohn, H-M. and Sohn, S-O.
2012 Integrated Korean: Intermediate 1. 2nd edition. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Dines, E. R.
1980 “Variation in Discourse – ‘and stuff like that’.” Language in Society 91: 13–33.
Drake, A. V.
2015 “Indexing Uncertainty: The Case of Turn-final or
.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 48(3): 301–318.
Emanatian, M.
1992 “Chagga ‘come’ and ‘go’: Metaphor and the Development of Tense-Aspect.” Studies in Language 16(1): 1–33.
Erman, B.
1995 “Grammaticalization in Progress: The Case of or something
.” In Papers from the XVth Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics, ed. by Inger, M., Simonsen, HG. and Lødrup, H., 136–147. Oslo, Norway: Department of Linguistics, University of Oslo.
Evans, N. and Watanabe, H.
Fraser, B.
2010 “Pragmatic Competence: The Case of Hedging.” In New Approaches to Hedging, ed. by Kaltenböck, G., Mihatsch, W. and Schneider, S., 15–34. Emerald: Bingley.
Hopper, P. J. and Traugott, E. C.
2003 Grammaticalization. 2nd edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Itani, R.
1992 “Japanese Conjunction kedo ‘but’ in Utterance-final Use: A Relevance-based Analysis.” English Linguistics 91: 265–283.
Jefferson, G.
1990 “List Construction as a Task and Resource.” In Interaction Competence ed. by Psathas, G., 63–92. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America.
Kim, M.
2015 “From Choice to Counter-expectation: Semantic-pragmatic Connections of the Korean Disjunctive, Concessive, and Scalar Focus Particle -na
,” Journal of Pragmatics 801: 1–21.
2018 “From Connective to Final Particle: Korean tunci “or” and Cross-Linguistic Comparisons,” Journal of Pragmatics 1351: 24–38.
Lindström, A.
1997 Designing Social Actions: Grammar, Prosody, and Interaction in Swedish Conversation. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, USA.
Mulder, J. and Thompson, S. A.
2008 “The Grammaticization of but as a Final Particle in English Conversation.” In Crosslinguistic Studies of Clause Combining: The Multifunctionality of Conjunctions. ed. by Laury, R. 179–204, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Overstreet, M.
1999 Whales, Candlelight, and Stuff like That: General Extenders in English Discourse, New York: Oxford University Press.
Overstreet, M. and Yule, G.
1997 “On Being Inexplicit and Stuff in Contemporary American English,” Journal of English Linguistics 251: 250–258.
Prince, E., Frader, J. and Bosk, C.
1982 “On Hedging in Physician-physician Discourse.” In Linguistics and the Professions. Proceedings of the Second Annual Delaware Symposium on Language Studies. ed. by Di Pietro, R. J., 83–97, Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Suzuki, S.
1998 “Pejorative Connotation: A Case of Japanese.” In Discourse Markers: Descriptions and Theory, ed. by Jucker, A. H. and Ziv, Y. 261–276, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
2008 “Expressivity of Vagueness: Alienation in the verb-tari suru Construction.” Japanese Language and Literature 42(1):157–169.
Tagliamonte, S. A. and Denis, D.
2010 “The Stuff of Change: General Extenders in Toronto, Canada.” Journal of English Linguistics 38(4):335–368.
Traugott, E. C.
2003 “From Subjectification to Intersubjectification.” In Motives for Language Change. ed. by Hickey, R. 124–139, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2010 “Revisiting Subjectification and Intersubjectification.” In Subjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization. ed. by Davidse, K., Vandelanotte, L. and Cuyckens, H. 29–70, Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
2014 “Intersubjectification and Clause Periphery.” In Intersubjectivity and Intersubjectification in Grammar and Discourse: Theoretical and Descriptive Advances (Vol. 65). ed. by Brems, L., Ghesquière, L. and Van de Velde, F., 7–28, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Traugott, E. C. and Dasher, R. B.
2005 Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vaughan, E., McCarthy, M., and Clancy, B.
2017 “Vague Category Markers as Turn-final Items in Irish English.” World Englishes 36(2): 208–223.
Yeon, J. and Brown, L.
2011 Korean: A Comprehensive Grammar. London: Routledge.