Has madam read Wilson (2016)?A procedural account of the T/V forms in Polish
AgnieszkaPiskorska
University of Warsaw
Abstract
This paper offers an account of Polish addressative forms encoding deference and familiarity in terms of the relevance-theoretic notion of procedural meaning, which underlies a heterogeneous range of phenomena linked to different cognitive domains. The procedure encoded by pronouns used referentially can be seen as targeting the domain of inferential comprehension and contributing to the truth-conditional meaning of an utterance by identifying a referent of a pronoun. It is claimed here that addressative forms marking the politeness distinction encode another procedure, targeting the social cognition module and activating the hearer’s readiness to identify the form as (in)congruent with social norms. It is argued that the politeness element in addressative forms does not involve conceptual encoding. The potential of the T/V forms for giving rise to stylistic effects is also explored. It is suggested that the proposal can be extended to other languages with the T/V distinction.
Being a cognitively oriented framework, relevance theory has not been extensively applied to the analysis of politeness phenomena. The few exceptions include the work of Jary (1998), Escandell-Vidal (1998, 2004), Padilla Cruz (2007) and Mazarella (2015). This paper makes a contribution to this largely unchartered territory by offering an account of addressative forms in Polish, focusing on the distinction between those that encode closeness between interlocutors (ty + a 2nd person verb form; an equivalent of the T form in the T/V opposition) and those that encode deference (pan/pani + a 3rd person singular verb; an equivalent of the V form in the T/V opposition). The account proposed herein relies solely on the already available relevance-theoretic toolkit and offers an extension of the treatment of pronouns to the realm of social deixis, as defined by Levinson (1979). By confining the scope of the paper to a single politeness-related phenomenon, I intend to align with the trend in 21st-century politeness research that prioritizes first-order politeness phenomena over second-order theoretical constructs (see Terkourafi 2019 for an overview).
References
Blakemore, Diane
1987Semantic Constraints on Relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson
1987Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: CUP.
Brown, Roger, and Albert Gilman
1960 “The Pronouns of Power and Solidarity.” In Style in Language, ed. by Thomas Sebeok, 253–276. London and New York: The Technology Press of Massachusetts Institute of Technology and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Carston, Robyn
2016 “The Heterogeneity of Procedural Meaning.” Lingua 175–176: 154–166.
Casson, Sarah
2020 “The Greek Connective gar: Different Genres, Different Effects?” In Relevance Theory, Figuration, and Continuity in Pragmatics, ed. by Agnieszka Piskorska, 95–119. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Curcó, Carmen
2011 “On the Status of Procedural Meaning in Natural Language.” In Procedural Meaning: Problems and Perspectives, ed. by Victoria Escandell-Vidal, Manuel Leonetti, and Aoife Ahern, 33–54. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.
Escandell-Vidal, Victoria
1998 “Politeness: A Relevant Issue for Relevance Theory.” Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 11: 45–57.
Escandell-Vidal, Victoria
2004 “Norms and Principles: Putting Social and Cognitive Pragmatics Together.” In Current Trends in the Pragmatics of Spanish, ed. by Rosina Márquez-Reiter, and María Elena Placencia, 347–371. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Escandell-Vidal, Victoria
2017 “Notes for a Restrictive Theory of Procedural Meaning.” In Doing Pragmatics Interculturally: Cognitive, Philosophical, and Sociopragmatic Perspectives, ed. by Rachel Giora, and Michael Haugh, 79–96. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter/Mouton.
Escandell-Vidal, Victoria, and Manuel Leonetti
2011 “The Rigidity of Procedural Meaning.” In Procedural Meaning: Problems and Perspectives, ed. by Victoria Escandell-Vidal, Manuel Leonetti, and Aoife Ahern, 81–102. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.
Fillmore, Charles. J.
1997Santa Cruz Lectures on Deixis. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Fodor, Jerry A.
1983The Modularity of Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Fraser, Bruce
1990 “Perspectives on Politeness.” Journal of Pragmatics 14: 219–236.
Haugh, Michael
2013 “Speaker Meaning and Accountability in Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 48: 41–56.
Higashimori, Isao
1992 “BUT/YET/STILL and Relevance Theory.” In Papers Presented to Professor Yoshimitsu Narita on the Occasion of his Sixtieth Birthday, 333–354. Tokyo: Eihosha.
Jary, Mark
1998 “Relevance Theory and the Communication of Politeness.” Journal of Pragmatics 30: 1–19.
Jucker, Andreas H.
1993 “The Discourse Marker Well: A Relevance-Theoretical Account.” Journal of Pragmatics 19: 435–452.
Kaplan, David
1989 “Demonstratives.” In Themes from Kaplan, ed. by. Joseph Almog, John Perry, and Howard Wettstein, 481–563. Oxford: OUP.
Kostro, Monika, and Krystyna Wróblewska-Pawlak
2013 “Formy adresatywne jako środek jawnej i ukrytej deprecjacji kobiet polityków w polskim dyskursie polityczno-medialnym.” (“Addressative Forms as a Means of Overt and Covert Discrimination of Female Politicians in Polish Political and Media Discourse”). Tekst i Dyskurs 6: 153–168.
Łaziński, Marek
2006O panach i paniach: Polskie rzeczowniki tytularne i ich asymetria rodzajowo–płciowa (On Ladies and Gentlemen: Polish Titulary Nouns and their Gender Asymmetry). Warsaw: PWN.
Levinson, Stephen C.
1979 “Pragmatics and Social Deixis: Reclaiming the Notion of Conventional Implicature.” Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society: 206–223.
Lubberger, Beate
2020 “Metarepresentation Markers in Indus Kohistani: A Study with Special Reference to the Marker of Desirable Utterances loo.” In Relevance Theory, Figuration, and Continuity in Pragmatics, ed. by Agnieszka Piskorska, 121–164. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Mazzarella, Diana
2015 “Politeness, Relevance and Scalar Inferences.” Journal of Pragmatics 79: 93–106.
Mercier, Hugo, and Dan Sperber
2009 “Intuitive and Reflective Inferences.” In In Two Minds: Dual Processes and Beyond, ed. by Jonathan S. B. T. Evans, and Keith Frankish, 149–170. Oxford: OUP.
Nicolle, Stephen
1998 “A Relevance Theory Perspective on Grammaticalization.” Cognitive Linguistics 9: 1–35.
Padilla Cruz, Manuel
2007 “Politeness: Always Implicated?” In International Perspectives on Gender and Language, ed. by José Santaemilia, Patricia Bou, Sergio Maruenda, and Gora Zaragoza, 350–372. València: University of València.
Padilla Cruz, Manuel
2020 “Towards a Relevance-Theoretic Approach to the Diminutive Morpheme.” Russian Journal of Linguistics 24: 774–795.
de Saussure, Louis
2011 “On Some Methodological Issues in the Conceptual/Procedural Distinction.” In Procedural Meaning: Problems and Perspectives, ed. by Victoria Escandell-Vidal, Manuel Leonetti, and Aoife Ahern, 55–79. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.
Piskorska, Agnieszka
2016 “Perlocutionary Effects and Relevance Theory.” In Relevance Theory: Recent Developments, Current Challenges and Future Directions, ed. by Manuel Padilla Cruz, 287–305. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Scott, Kate
2016 “Pronouns and Procedures: Reference and Beyond.” Lingua 175–176: 69–82.
Sperber, Dan
1994 “The Modularity of Thought and the Epidemiology of Representations.” In Mapping the Mind: Domain Specificity in Cognition and Culture, ed. by Lawrence Hirschfield, and Susan Gelman, 39–67. Cambridge: CUP.
Sperber, Dan
2001a “In Defense of Massive Modularity.” In Language, Brain and Cognitive Development: Essays in Honor of Jacques Mehler, ed. by Emmanuel Dupoux, 47–57. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Sperber, Dan
2001b “An Evolutionary Perspective on Testimony and Argumentation.” Philosophical Topics 29: 401–413.
Sperber, Dan, Fabrice Clément, Christoph Heintz, Olivier Mascaro, Hugo Mercier, Gloria Origgi, and Deirdre Wilson
2010 “Epistemic Vigilance.” Mind and Language 25: 359–393.
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson
1986Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
Terkourafi, Marina
2019 “Im/politeness: A 21st Century Appraisal.” Foreign Languages and Their Teaching 1 (6): 1–17.
Unger, Christoph
2012a “Procedural Semantics, Metarepresentation, and Some Particles in Behdini Kurdish.” Lingua 122: 1613–1635.
Unger, Christoph
2012b “Epistemic Vigilance and the Function of Procedural Indicators in Communication and Comprehension.” In Relevance Theory: More than Understanding, ed. by Ewa Wałaszewska, and Agnieszka Piskorska, 45–73. New Castle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Watts, Richard
2003Politeness. Cambridge: CUP.
Wharton, Tim
2003 “Interjections, Language and the ‘Showing–Saying’ Continuum.” Pragmatics and Cognition 11: 39–91.
Wharton, Tim
2009Pragmatics and Non-Verbal Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wilson, Deirdre
2011 “Procedural Meaning: Past, Present, Future.” In Procedural Meaning: Problems and Perspectives, ed. by Victoria Escandell-Vidal, Manuel Leonetti, and Aoife Ahern, 3–31. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.
Wilson, Deirdre
2016 “Reassessing the Conceptual–Procedural Distinction.” Lingua 175–176: 5–19.
Wilson, Deirdre, and Dan Sperber
1993 “Linguistic Form and Relevance.” Lingua 90: 1–25.