Cover not available
Part of
Pragmatic Markers, Discourse Markers and Modal Particles: New perspectives
Edited by Chiara Fedriani and Andrea Sansó
[Studies in Language Companion Series 186] 2017
► pp. 1–33

Introduction
Pragmatic Markers, Discourse Markers and Modal Particles

What do we know and where do we go from here?

| University of Genoa
| University of Insubria
Article outline
  • 1.Preliminary remarks
  • 2.PMs, DMs, their definitions and delimitations: What do we know?
  • 3.PMs, DMs, their definitions and delimitations: Where do we go from here?
  • 4.The status of modal particles: What do we know and where do we go from here?
  • 5.The diachrony of PMs/DMs: What do we know?
  • 6.The diachrony of PMs/DMs: Where do we go from here?
  • 7.PMs/DMs and sociolinguistic variation: What do we know?
  • 8.PMs/DMs and sociolinguistic variation: Where do we go from here?
  • 9.This volume
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 13 November 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.186.01fed
References (96)
References
Abraham, Werner. 2009. Die Urmasse von Modalität und ihre Ausgliederung. Modalität anhand von Modalverben, Modalpartikeln und Modus. Was ist das Gemeinsame, was das Trennende, und was steckt dahinter? In Modalität: Epistemik und Evidentialität bei Modalverb, Adverb, Modalpartikel und Modus, Werner Abraham & Elisabeth Leiss (eds), 251–302. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
. 2012. Illocutive force is speaker and information source concern. What type of syntax does the representation of speaker deixis require? Templates vs. derivational structure? In Modality and Theory of Mind Elements across Languages, Werner Abraham & Elisabeth Leiss (eds), 67–108. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. Certainty. Its conceptual differential. In Certainty-uncertainty – and the Attitudinal Space in Between [Studies in Language Companion Series 165], Sibilla Cantarini, Werner Abraham & Elisabeth Leiss (eds), 29–45. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Abraham, Werner & Elisabeth Leiss. 2012. Introduction: Theory of mind elements across languages. Traces of Bühler’s legacy in modern linguistics. In Modality and Theory of Mind Elements across Languages, Werner Abraham & Elisabeth Leiss (eds), 1–36. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aijmer, Karin. 1997. I think – an English modal particle. In Modality in Germanic languages: Historical and comparative perspectives, Toril Swan & Olaf Jansen Westwik (eds), 1–47. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. Understanding Pragmatic Markers: A Variational Pragmatic Approach. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
. 2015. “Will you fuck off please”. The use of please by London teenagers / “Jódete por favor”. El uso de please por parte de los adolescents londinenses. Pragmatica Sociocultural/Sociocultural Pragmatics 3(2): 127–149.Google Scholar
Aijmer, Karin & Andersen, Gisle. 2012. Introducing the pragmatics of society. In Pragmatics of Society, Karin Aijmer & Gisle Andersen (eds), 1–27. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Aijmer, Karin & Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie. 2006. Introduction. In Pragmatic Markers in Contrast, Karin Aijmer & Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen (eds), 1–10. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Asher, Nicolas & Lascarides, Alex. 2009. Commitments, beliefs and intentions in dialogue. Proceedings of the 12th Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialog (Longdial), London, 35–42.Google Scholar
Barron, Anne. 2008. The structure of requests in Irish English and English English. In Schneider & Barron (eds), 35–67.Google Scholar
Barron, Anne & Schneider, Klaus P. (eds). 2005. The Pragmatics of Irish English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bazzanella, Carla. 2006. Discourse markers in Italian: Towards a compositional meaning. In Fischer (ed.), 449–464.Google Scholar
. 2011. Segnali discorsivi. In Enciclopedia dell’italiano. Roma: Istituto della Enciclopedia italiana Giovanni Treccani.Google Scholar
Beeching, Kate. 2016. Pragmatic Markers in British English: Meaning in Social Interaction. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beeching, Kate & Detges, Ulrich (eds). 2014. Discourse Functions at the Left and Right Periphery: Crosslinguistic Investigations of Language Use and Language Change. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berruto, Gaetano. 1995. Fondamenti di sociolinguistica. Bari: Laterza.Google Scholar
Blakemore, Diane. 1987. Semantic Constraints on Relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana & House, Juliane. 1989. Cross-cultural and situational variation in requesting behavior. In Cross-Cultural Pragmatics. Requests and Apologies, Shoshana Blum-Kulka, Juliane House & Gabriele Kasper (eds), 123–154. Norwood NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 1990. The development of discourse markers in English. In Historical Linguistics and Philology, Jacek Fisiak (ed.), 45–71. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001. Historical discourse analysis. In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Deborah Schiffrin, Deborah Tannen & Heidi E. Hamilton (eds), 138–160. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
2008. The Comment Clause in English: Syntactic Origins and Pragmatic Development. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan L., Perkins, Revere & Pagliuca, William. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Coniglio, Marco. 2012. Modal particles, speaker-hearer links, and illocutionary force. In Modality and Theory of Mind Elements across Languages, Werner Abraham & Elisabeth Leiss (eds), 253–296. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cuenca, Maria Josep. 2013. The fuzzy boundaries between discourse marking and modal marking. In Degand et al. (eds), 191–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan (ed). 2011. Historical Sociopragmatics . Special issue of Journal of Historical Pragmatics 10(2). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan & Archer, Dawn. 2008. Requests and directenss in Early Modern English trial proceedings and play-texts, 1640–1760. In Speech Acts in the History of English [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 176], Andreas H. Jucker & Irma Taavitsainen (eds), 45–84. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Degand, Liesbeth, Cornillie, Bert & Pietrandrea, Paola (eds). 2013. Discourse Markers and Modal Particles. Categorization and Description [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 234]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Detges, Ulrich & Waltereit, Richard. 2016. Grammaticalization and pragmaticalization. In Manual of Grammatical Interfaces in Romance, Susann Fischer & Christoph Gabriel (eds), 635–658. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dostie, Gaétane. 2009. Discourse markers and regional variation in French: A lexico-semantic approach. In Sociolinguistic Variation in Contemporary French [Impact: Studies in Language and Society 26], Kate Beeching, Nigel Armstrong & Françoise Gadet (eds), 201–214. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eckert, Penelope. 2014. Stylistic innovation and indexical obsolescence. Talk given at NWAV 43 at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
Eckert, Penelope & Wenger, Étienne. 2005. Communities of practice in sociolinguistics: What is the role of power in sociolinguistic variation? Journal of Sociolinguistics 9(4): 582–589. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferri, Rolando. 2008. Politeness in Latin comedy: Some preliminary thoughts. Materiali e Discussioni per l’Analisi dei Testi Classici 61: 15–28.Google Scholar
Fischer, Kerstin. 2006a. Approaches to Discourse Particles [Studies in Pragmatics 1]. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
. 2006b. Towards an understanding of the spectrum of approaches to discourse particles. In Fischer (ed.), 1–20.Google Scholar
Fischer, Kerstin & Alm, Maria. 2013. A radical construction grammar perspective on the modal particle-discourse particle distinction. In Degand et al. (eds), 47–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fraser, Bruce. 1999. What are discourse markers? Journal of Pragmatics 31: 931–952. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. Towards a theory of discourse markers. In Fischer (ed.), 189–204.Google Scholar
Ghezzi, Chiara. 2014. The development of discourse and pragmatic markers. In Ghezzi & Molinelli (eds), 10–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ghezzi, Chiara & Molinelli, Piera. 2014a. Deverbal pragmatic markers from Latin to Italian (Lat. quaeso and It. prego): The cyclic nature of functional developments. In Ghezzi & Molinelli (eds), 60–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(eds). 2014b. Discourse and Pragmatic Markers from Latin to the Romance Languages. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1981. Forms of Talk. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Hansen, Maj-Britt M. 2006. A dynamic polysemy approach to the lexical semantics of discourse markers (with an exemplary analysis of French toujours) . In Fischer (ed.), 21–41.Google Scholar
2009. The grammaticalization of negative reinforcers in Old and Middle French: A discourse-functional approach. In Current Trends in Diachronic Semantics and Pragmatics, Maj-Britt Mosegaard Hansen & Jacqueline Visconti (eds), 227–251. Bingley: Emerald. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hansen, Maj-Britt M. & Rossari, Corinne. 2005. The evolution of pragmatic markers. Introduction. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 6(2): 177–187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hansen, Maj-Britt M. & Visconti, Jacqueline. 2009. On the diachrony of reinforced negation in French and Italian. In Grammaticalization and Pragmatics. Facts, Approaches, Theoretical Issues, Corinne Rossari, Claudia Ricci & Adriana Spiridon (eds), 137–171. Bingley: Emerald. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. The evolution of negation in French and Italian: Similarities and differences. Folia Linguistica 46: 453–482. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd. 2002. On the role of context in grammaticalization. In New Reflections on Grammaticalization [Typological Studies in Language 49], Ilse Wischer & Gabriele Diewald (eds), 83–101. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. On discourse markers: Grammaticalization, pragmaticalization, or something else? Linguistics 51(6): 1205–1247. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Kuteva, Tania. 2002. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Höhle, Tilman. 1992. Über Verum Fokus in Deutschen. Linguistische Berichte 60: 20–45.Google Scholar
Holmes, Janet. 1997. Women, language and identity. Journal of Sociolinguistics 1(2): 195–223. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
House, Juliane. 2012. Global and intercultural communication. In Pragmatics of Society, Karin Aijmer & Gisle Andersen (eds), 607–626. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Izutsu, Katsunobu & Izutsu, Mitsuko Narita. 2013. From discourse markers to modal/final particles. What the position reveals about the continuum. In Degand et al. (eds), 217–236.Google Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H. 1997. The discourse marker well in the history of English. English Language and Linguistics 1(1): 91–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2002. Discourse markers in Early Modern English. In Alternative Histories of English, Peter Trudgill & Richard J. Watts (eds), 210–230. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
2011. Historical speech act analysis: Greetings and farewells. In Proceedings of Anglistentag 2010 Saarbrücken, Joachim Frenk & Lena Steveker (eds), 397–406. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.Google Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H. & Taavitsainen, Irma. 2012. Diachronic speech act analysis: Insults from flyting to flaming. In Corpus Linguistics, Vol. II: Grammar, Douglas Biber & Randi Reppen (eds), 237–260. Los Angeles CA: Sage. Reprinted from Journal of Historical Pragmatics 1(1): 67–95.Google Scholar
Kaltenböck, Gunther, Heine, Bernd & Kuteva, Tania. 2011. On thetical grammar. Studies in Language 35(4): 848–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lech, Peter G. Barrios. 2016. Linguistic Interaction in Roman Comedy. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 1999. The distribution and function of vocatives in American and British English conversation. In Out of Corpora. Studies in Honour of Stig Johansson, Hilde Hasselgård & Signe Oksefjell (eds), 107–118. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Leiss, Elisabeth. 2012. Epistemicity, evidentiality, and Theory of Mind (ToM). In Modality and Theory of Mind Elements across Languages, Werner Abraham & Elisabeth Leiss (eds), 39–65. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. Modes of modality in an un-Cartesian framework. In Certainty-uncertainty – and the Attitudinal Space in Between [Studies in Language Companion Series 165], Sibilla Cantarini, Werner Abraham & Elisabeth Leiss (eds), 47–62. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Lewis, Diane. 2006. Discourse markers in English: A discourse-pragmatic view. In Fischer (ed.), 43–59.Google Scholar
Lutzky, Ursula. 2012. Discourse Markers in Early Modern English [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 227]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maché, Jakob. 2012. Exploring the Theory of Mind interface. In Modality and Theory of Mind Elements across Languages, Werner Abraham & Elisabeth Leiss (eds), 109–146. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maschler, Yael. 1994. Metalanguaging and discourse markers in bilingual conversation. Language in Society 23: 325–366. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maschler, Yael & Schiffrin, Deborah. 2015. Discourse markers: Language, meaning, and context. In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, 2nd edn, Deborah Tannen, Heidi E. Hamilton & Deborah Schiffrin (eds), 189–221. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Matras, Yaron. 1998. Utterance modifiers and universals of grammatical borrowing. Linguistics 36: 281–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2000. Fusion and the cognitive basis for bilingual discourse markers. International Journal of Bilingualism 4: 505–528. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mazzon, Gabriella. 2012. Now what? The analysis of Middle English discourse markers and advances in historical dialogue studies. In The Use and Development of Middle English, Richard Dance & Laura Wright (eds), 61–86. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Meinl, Marja E. 2014. Electronic Complaints: An Empirical Study on British English and German Complaints. Berlin: Frank & Timme.Google Scholar
Meisnitzer, Benjamin. 2012. Modality in the Romance languages. In Modality and Theory of Mind Elements across Languages, Werner Abraham & Elisabeth Leiss (eds), 335–359. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mendoza-Denton, Norma. 2008. Homegirls: Language and Cultural Practice among Latina Youth Gangs. Maiden MA: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Milroy, Leslie. 2002. Social networks. In The Handbook of Language Variation and Change, Jack K. Chambers, Peter Trudgill & Natalie Schilling-Estes (eds), 549–572. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Norén, Kerstin & Linell, Per. 2007. Meaning potentials and the interaction between lexis and contexts: An empirical substantiation. Pragmatics 17(3): 387–416. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Placencia, María Elena. 2008. Requests in corner shop transactions in Ecuadorian Andean and Coastal Spanish. In Schneider & Barron (eds), 307–332.Google Scholar
Pons Bordería, Salvador. 2006. A functional approach to discourse markers. In Fischer (ed.), 77–99.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of Grammar: Handbook of Generative Syntax, Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Klaus P. & Barron, Anne (eds). 2008. Variational Pragmatics [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 178]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah. 2006. Discourse marker research and theory: Revisiting and . In Fischer (ed.), 315–338.Google Scholar
Schölmberger, Ursula. 2008. Apologizing in French French and Canadian French. In Schneider & Barron (eds), 333–354.Google Scholar
Schwenter, Scott A. 2003. No and Tampoco: A pragmatic distinction in Spanish negation. Journal of Pragmatics 35: 999–1030. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005. The pragmatics of negation in Brazilian Portuguese. Lingua 115: 1427–1456. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006. Fine-tuning Jespersen’s cycle. In Drawing the Boundaries of Meaning. Neo-Gricean Studies in Pragmatics and Semantics in Honor of Laurence R. Horn [Studies in Language Companion Series 80], Betty J. Birner & Gregory Ward (eds), 327–344. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Dan & Deirdre Wilson. 1986. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1995. Subjectification in grammaticalization. In Subjectivity and Subjectivisation, Dieter Stein & Susan Wright (eds), 37–54. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trosborg, Anna. 1995. Interlanguage Pragmatics: Requests, Complaints and Apologies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Visconti, Jacqueline. 2009. From ‘textual’ to ‘interpersonal’: On the diachrony of the Italian particle mica . Journal of Pragmatics 41: 937–950. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Waltereit, Richard. 2001. Modal particles and their functional equivalents: a speech-act-theoretic approach. Journal of Pragmatics 33: 1391–1417. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. The rise of discourse markers in Italian: A specific type of language change. In Fischer (ed.), 61–76.Google Scholar
Waltereit, Richard & Detges, Ulrich. 2007. Different functions, different histories. Modal particles and discourse markers from a diachronic point of view. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 6: 61–80.Google Scholar
Warga, Muriel. 2008. Requesting in German as a pluricentric language. In Schneider & Barron (eds), 245–266.Google Scholar
Cited by (11)

Cited by 11 other publications

BORISOVA, Elena G. & Anna M. IVANOVA
2023. A CASE FOR EMPHATIC PARTICLES IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE. Moscow University Bulletin. Series 19. Linguistics and Intercultural Communication :Issue №1_2023 ► pp. 25 ff. DOI logo
Islentyeva, Anna, Luise Pesendorfer & Igor Tolochin
2023. “Can I have a cup of tea please?” Politeness markers in the Spoken BNC2014. Journal of Politeness Research 19:2 ► pp. 297 ff. DOI logo
Robledo, Hernán & Rogelio Nazar
2023. A proposal for the inductive categorisation of parenthetical discourse markers in Spanish using parallel corpora. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 28:4 ► pp. 500 ff. DOI logo
Collins, Peter Craig
2022. Comment markers in world Englishes. World Englishes 41:2 ► pp. 244 ff. DOI logo
Jeppesen Kragh, Kirsten
2021. Proposition d’une classification des marqueurs discursifs comme membres d’un paradigme. Langue française N° 209:1 ► pp. 119 ff. DOI logo
Kocsány, Piroska
2021. Az ott szokatlan szerepei. Jelentés és Nyelvhasználat 8:1 ► pp. 47 ff. DOI logo
Marmorstein, Michal
2021. Discourse markers as a lens to variation across speech and writing. Functions of Language 28:2 ► pp. 153 ff. DOI logo
Van Olmen, Daniël & Jolanta Šinkūnienė
2021. Introduction. Pragmatic markers and peripheries. In Pragmatic Markers and Peripheries [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 325], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Magliacane, Annarita
2020. Erasmus students in an Irish studyabroad context. Study Abroad Research in Second Language Acquisition and International Education 5:1 ► pp. 89 ff. DOI logo
Waltereit, Richard
2020. Chapter 7. Is the information-structural contribution of modal particles in the syntax, in discourse structure, or in both?. In Information-Structural Perspectives on Discourse Particles [Studies in Language Companion Series, 213], ► pp. 178 ff. DOI logo
Ivanová, Martina
2018. Pragmatický Marker Fair Enough A Jeho Prekladové Ekvivalenty V Anglicko­Slovenskom Paralelnom Korpuse. Journal of Linguistics/Jazykovedný casopis 69:3 ► pp. 395 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 july 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.