How to do contrastive semantics
with propositional modifiers:
The case of hearsay adverbs
'Re-thinking synonymy:
semantic sameness and similarity
in languages and their description‘
Helsinki, 28.10.2010
Björn Wiemer (Mainz)
Anna Socka (Gdańsk)
1
1. INTRODUCTION
2
1. Introduction
(cf. Dahl 2000)
3
2. OUR CASE: REPORTIVE ADVERBS
IN POLISH AND GERMAN
AND THEIR “EPISTEMIC OVERTONES”
4
2. Our case: reportive adverbs in Polish and German
and their “epistemic overtones”
• Our concern: the semantic description of a couple
of propositional modifiers indicating hearsay:
– Pol. rzekomo, jakoby, podobno,
– Germ. angeblich, vorgeblich.
• These hearsay markers have been claimed to
carry epistemic overtones by which the actual
speaker transmits his/her doubts into the
contents of the message referred to.
• On first sight, these lexemes do so to a varying
extent.
5
2. Our case: reportive adverbs in Polish and German
and their “epistemic overtones”
• But: Any of the aforementioned hearsay markers
can become void of epistemic overtones in specific
contexts.
6
2. Our case: reportive adverbs in Polish and German
and their “epistemic overtones”
(5)
Przy określaniu wymogów wizowych głównym
argumentem ma być nie poziom rozwoju albo więzi
historyczne z Unią, ale liczba nielegalnych imigrantów
przedostających się do krajów członkowskich UE. Według
niektórych dyplomatów państw Unii wyjątkowo trudny
może być zatem przypadek Rumunii, skąd rzekomo wciąż
napływają nowi imigranci. („Rzeczpospolita“, 01.15.2000)
‘While defining visa requirements the main argument is not
to be the level of development or historical bonds with the
Union, but the number of illegal immigrants getting into the
EU member states. According to some diplomats from the
Union countries, exceptionally difficult may be the case of
Romania, from which allegedly new immigrants constantly
come in.’
7
2. Our case: reportive adverbs in Polish and German
and their “epistemic overtones”
(7) Durch Chlorgas sind in Räbke in Niedersachsen 24
Menschen verletzt worden. Der Schwimmeister des
Freibades hatte bemerkt, daß das Gas aus einem Tank
austrat. Feuerwehren versuchten, mit Wasser das Chlor zu
binden. Für Anwohner bestand angeblich keine Gefahr.
(„Mannheimer Morgen“, 15.05.1998)
‚24 persons have been injured by chlorine in Räbke in Lower
Saxony. The beach guard noticed gas escaping from a tank.
Firemen tried to bind the gas to water. Local people were
allegedly not at risk.’
8
2. Our case: reportive adverbs in Polish and German
and their “epistemic overtones”
(cf.
Ramat/Ricca
(1998:230)
• With a pair (or set) of merely epistemic adverbs this opposition
results in certainty higher than 50% for the marked member
(‘probably’). The marked member of the reportive pair is supposed to
be simply neutral (‘reportedly’), thus close to 50%, since its unmarked
counterpart (‘allegedly’) regularly implies speaker’s distrust toward P
being true, i.e. an epistemic value below 50%.
9
2. Our case: reportive adverbs in Polish and German
and their “epistemic overtones”
• Pol. rzekomo and Germ. angeblich lose their
epistemic overtones in (con)texts in which
speakers utter statements for which they can
be made juridically responsible.
10
2. Our case: reportive adverbs in Polish and German
and their “epistemic overtones”
(9) Francja. Oskarżony rosyjski marynarz. Przed sądem w mieście Brest
na zachodzie Francji rozpoczął się proces […] drugiego dowódcy na
statku Melbridge Bilbao, który rzekomo nie zapobiegł osadzeniu
jednostki na mieliźnie na wodach Zatoki Mojańskiej. 43-letni
Władimir Czernyszow został oskarżony o spowodowanie zagrożenia
życia i zdrowia załogi przez pogwałcenie podstawowych obowiązków
i zasad sztuki nawigacyjnej - napisano w akcie oskarżenia.
(“Rzeczpospolita” 01.09.2002)
‘France. Russian officer accused. The trial began in the city of Brest
in Western France of [...] an officer on the ship Melbridge Bilbao,
who allegedly did not prevent the ship from running aground in the
Bay of Molene. Vladimir Tshernyshov, aged 43, is accused of
endangering the lives of his fellow crew by flouting of basic duties
and rules of the art of navigation - the indictment states.’
11
2. Our case: reportive adverbs in Polish and German
and their “epistemic overtones”
(10)
Das Gericht läßt derzeit auch jene bulgarische Freundin
Crapanzanos suchen, die am Tatabend angeblich kurz vor dem
Opfer die Bar verließ. Für die Verteidigung ist denkbar, daß
diese Frau die Täterin sein könnte. […] Die Verhandlung wird
am Mittwoch um 9 Uhr fortgesetzt.
(“Mannheimer Morgen”, 14.07.1995)
‘'The court is ordering a search for Crapanzano's Bulgarian girl
friend, who, on the night of the act, allegedly left the bar
shortly before the victim. It is conceivable to the defense that
this woman could have been the perpetrator. The trial will
continue on Wednesday at 9 a.m.’
12
2. Our case: reportive adverbs in Polish and German
and their “epistemic overtones”
In German the sentence adverb most common in such contexts is mutmaßlich:
– It does not express doubt but rather affirmation.
– It provides a reasoning based somehow on sensory data.
– This is often an inference of an instance mentioned in context (e.g. the police),
which is repeated by the actual speaker.
(11) Britische und russische Ermittler befragten gestern in Moskau drei Stunden lang
den Schlüsselzeugen in der Affäre, Andrej Lugowoi. Der Ex-Geheimdienstler sagte
danach der Agentur Interfax, er sei als Zeuge befragt worden. Lugowoi hatte am 1.
November das Treffen in London organisiert, bei dem Litwinenko mutmaßlich mit
dem radioaktiven Polonium 210 vergiftet wurde. („Mannheimer Morgen”, 12.12.2006)
‘Yesterday British and Russian investigators questioned for three hours Andrey
Lugovoi, a key witness in the affair. This former intelligence member then told the
Interfax news agency that he had been questioned as a witness. On November 1st
Lugovoi arranged a meeting in London at which Litvinienko was presumably
poisoned with radioactive polonium-210.’
13
2. Our case: reportive adverbs in Polish and German
and their “epistemic overtones”
14
2. Our case: reportive adverbs in Polish and German
and their “epistemic overtones”
15
2. Our case: reportive adverbs in Polish and German
and their “epistemic overtones”
• In German, reportive expressions are the sentence adverbs
angeblich and vorgeblich and the modal verb constructions
wollen / sollen + infinitive.
16
2. Our case: reportive adverbs in Polish and German
and their “epistemic overtones”
17
2. Our case: reportive adverbs in Polish and German
and their “epistemic overtones”
• The lexicalization degree seems to be the reason why
angeblich is used instead of the modal verb construction:
• in clauses already containing another modal verb
• in clauses containing a verb in the subjunctive (or the analytic würdeconstruction)
• when you speak in the present tense about present or future situations
• in headlines
• if there is an attributive adjective in scope of the hearsay marker
• if there is already a sollen+infinitive in the previous sentence
• Almost 2/3 of the examples in our corpus in which no
epistemic doubt arises, display one of these situations.
18
2. Our case: reportive adverbs in Polish and German
and their “epistemic overtones”
• Compared to rzekomo, the epistemic overtone of
distrust carried by angeblich seems to be weaker.
• angeblich is equally likely to appear in different
registers or text genres for which in Polish individual
lexemes are preferred (e.g., podobno in colloquial
speech, jakoby in polemical discourse).
19
•the relation between reportive value and epistemic judgment as a
generalized conversational implicature (3.1)
• the specific kind of implicature responsible for the whole mechanism
(3.2)
• trying to gather the harvest (3.3)
3. A PROPOSAL OF HOW TO EXPLAIN
THE FACTS
20
3. A proposal of how to explain the facts
3.1. Epistemic overtones as results of generalized
conversational implicatures
“ (a) An implicature I from utterance U is
particularized iff U implicates I only by virtue of
specific contextual assumptions that would not
invariably or even normally obtain.
(b) An implicature I is generalized iff U implicates I
unless there are unusual specific contextual
assumptions that defeat it.” (Levinson 2000: 16)
21
3. A proposal of how to explain the facts
3.2. Which specific kind(s) of GCI is/are at work?
3.2.1.Principles based on the Quantity maxim:
(21)
Speaker: Do not say less than is required (bearing
the I-principle in mind).
Addressee: What is not said is not the case.
(Huang 2007:41)
3.2.1.1. based on Horn-scale (Horn’s Q-principle),
or Q-scalar implicatures?
Q-scalar : <x, y>
y +> Q-scalar x
(ibid. 42)
22
3. A proposal of how to explain the facts
(22)
(23)
(24)
(25)
The soup is not only warm, but hot.
She’s not just good, she’s excellent.
That’s not only bad, but desastrous.
*He has broken his leg not reportedly, but
allegedly.
*Złamał sobie nogę nie podobno, tylko rzekomo.
*Złamał sobie nogę podobno, a nawet rzekomo.
‘He has broken his leg podobno, in fact rzekomo.’
*He apparently / reportedly has broken his leg, in
fact allegedly.
A speaker, in saying ‘... p ...’, conversationally implicates that (for all he or she knows) ‘... at most p ...’
23
3. A proposal of how to explain the facts
3.2.1.2. based on clausal implicature?
Q-clausal : <X(p), Y(p)>
Y(p) +> Q-clausal p, p
(Huang 2007:42)
(26)
(27)
(28a)
(28b)
I know that John is away.
(= X(p))
I believe that John is away. (= Y(p))
<necessarily p, possibly p>
It’s possible that Buddhism is the world’s oldest living
religion.
(28b) +> ‘It’s possible that Buddhism is the world’s oldest living
religion, and it’s possible that Buddhism isn’t the world’s
oldest living religion.’ – or:
(28b') +> ‘It’s not necessarily the case that Buddhism is the
world’s oldest living religion.’ (ibid. 43)
(29a) Podobno P.
(29b) +> ‘... It’s possible that P is true, and it’s possible that P isn’t
true.’
24
3. A proposal of how to explain the facts
3.2.2. based on the I(nformativeness)-Principle?
I-scale : [x, y]
y +> I x
(30)
(31)
(Huang 2007:47)
Speaker: Do not say more than is required
(bearing the Q-principle in mind).
Addressee: What is generally said is
stereotypically and specifically exemplified. (ibid. 46)
A speaker in saying ‘... p ...’, conversationally
implicates that (for all he or she knows) ‘... more
than p ...’. (vs. (25))
25
3. A proposal of how to explain the facts
Typical cases:
(32a) p and q +> and then / therefore q
(32b) John pressed the spring and (+> then) the drawer opened
/ and (+> thereby) caused the drawer to open.
(Huang 2007:47)
(33a) frame-based inference
(33b) Mary pushed the cart to the checkout.
+> Mary pushed the cart full of groceries to the
supermarket checkout in order to pay for them (and so
on).
(ibid.)
26
3. A proposal of how to explain the facts
3.2.3. based on the M(anner)-Principle?
M-scale : {x, y}
y +> M x
(Huang 2007:51)
(34a) John stopped the car.
+> John stopped the car in the usual manner.
(34b) John caused the car to stop.
+> John stopped the car in an unusual way, for
example, by bumping into a wall. (ibid.)
27
3. A proposal of how to explain the facts
3.3. Trying to gather the harvest
Quantity-based
(21) Speaker: Do not say less than is required
(bearing the I-principle in mind).
Addressee: What is not said is not the case.
Informativeness-based
(30) Speaker: Do not say more than is required
(bearing the Q-principle in mind).
Addressee: What is generally said is
stereotypically and specifically exemplified.
28
3. A proposal of how to explain the facts
(35) Implicature cancellation procedure
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
background assumptions
contextual factors
semantic entailments
conversational implicatures
Q-implicatures
Q-clausal implicatures
Q-scalar implicatures
M-implicatures
I-implicatures
(Gazdar 1979, Huang 2007:54)
-- Knowledge about possible legal consequences of an assertion
in a news report belongs to background knowledge of the
journalist (and probably his/her reader, too), as does
knowledge about the significance and function of different
text genres.
29
•How can reportive adverbs be described in the lexicon? (4.1)
•How can reportive adverbs be compared across languages? (4.2)
•Can the methods and principles of lexical typology be extended to the
analysis of reportive adverbs? (4.3)
4. CONSEQUENCES
30
4. Consequences
4.1. How can reportive adverbs be described in the
lexicon?
(36a) Podobno / jakoby / rzekomo P.
(36b) (i) ‘I want to say what someone else says.’
(= reportive component)
(ii) ‘I say: P.’
(iii) ‘I don’t say I know that P.’ (= epistemic
component, agnostic stance)
(iv) ‘I think that other people can think the same.’
(Wiemer 2006, cf. Wierzbicka 2006)
31
4. Consequences
A second epistemic component
(36c) (v) ‘I think that P might be / can be / is not true.’
can now be removed to a system of pragmatic
principles which in section 3 we tried to reduce to
GCI.
32
4. Consequences
4.2.
How can reportive adverbs be compared across
languages?
(37) *Probably he will come, probably he will not.
(38) Possibly he will come, possibly he will not.
(Ramat/Ricca 1998: Fn. 29)
(39)
(40a)
(40b)
(41)
Engl. *Allegedly he will come, allegedly he will not.
Pol.*Podobno przyjdzie, podobno nie przyjdzie.
*Rzekomo przyjdzie, rzekomo nie przyjdzie.
Germ. Wahrscheinlich / *Unwahrscheinlich kommt er.
Engl. Probably / *Improbably he will come.
Pol. Prawdopodobnie / *Nieprawdopodobnie
przyjdzie.
33
4. Consequences
4.3. How should a lexical typology of reportive adverbs
look like?
Evans (2010: 509) distinguishes:
– ‘etic grids’ by which we establish a language-independent
calculus of logically imaginable possibilities “regardless of
whether or not individual languages group them together” (an
onomasiological task);
– ‘emic grids’ (or descriptions) which aim at capturing “what is
common to all members of a category from within the
perspective of a particular language” (a semasiological task).
Synonymy (or closeness of meaning) presupposes a
semasiological viewpoint, but for purposes of
crosslinguistic comparison it is essential to project the
concrete items of the compared language onto a
conceptual (i.e. onomasiological) framework.
34
REFERENCES
35
References
Aikhenvald, A.Y. 2004: Evidentiality. Oxford etc.: Oxford U.P.
Croft, W. 20032: Typology and Universals. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge U.P.
Dahl, Ö. 2000) The tense-aspect systems of European languages in a typological
perspective. In: Dahl, Ö. (ed.): Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe. Berlin,
New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 3-25.
Diewald, G., Smirnova, E. 2010: Indirekte Rede zwischen Modus, Modalität und
Evidentialität. Paper read at the DSWI Conference in Rome.
Dik, S.C., Hengeveld, K., Vester, E., Vet, C. 1990: The hierarchical structure of the clause
and the typology of adverbial satellites. In: J. Nuyts, M. Bolkestein & C. Vet (eds.):
Layers and levels of representation in language theory. Amsterdam, Philadelphia:
Benjamins, 25-70.
Evans, N. 2010: Semantic typology. In: J. Jung Sung (ed.): The Oxford Handbook of
Linguistic Typology. Oxford etc.: Oxford U.P., 504-533. (to appear)
Gazdar, G. 1979: Pragmatics: implicature, presupposition and logical form. London:
Academic Press.
Huang, Y. 2007: Pragmatics. Oxford etc.: Oxford U.P.
Koptjevskaja-Tamm, M. 2008: Approaching lexical typology. In: M. Vanhove (ed.): From
Polysemy to Semantic Change (Towards a typology of lexical semantic associations).
Amsterdam, Philadelphia: Benjamins, 3-52.
36
References
Koptjevskaja-Tamm, M., Rakhlina, E. 2006: “Some like it hot”: On semantics of
temperature adjectives in Russian and Swedish. STUF 59-2 (Special Issue on Lexicon
in a Typological and Contrastive Perspective, ed. by G. Giannoulopoulou and T.
Leuschner), 253-269.
Levinson, S.C. 2000: Presumptive meanings. The theory of generalized conversational
implicature. Cambridge, M.A.: MIT Press.
Levinson, S.C. 200718: Pragmatics. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge U.P.
Ramat, P. & D. Ricca 1998: Sentence adverbs in the languages of Europe. In: van der
Auwera, J., Dónall P.Ó. Baoill (eds.): Adverbial Constructions in the Languages of
Europe. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 187-275.
Socka, A. 2010: Reportative Partikeln in kontrastiver Sicht (Polnisch – Deutsch). In: A.
Kątny & A. Socka (eds.): Modalität / Temporalität in kontrastiver und typologischer
Sicht. Frankfurt/M. etc.: Lang, 239-264.
Wiemer, B. 2006: Particles, parentheticals, conjunctions and prepositions as
evidentiality markers in contemporary Polish (A first exploratory study). Studies in
Polish Linguistics 3, 5-67.
Wierzbicka, A. 2006: English. Meaning and Culture. Oxford: Oxford U.P.
Corpus base
IDS – Electronic online corpus of the Institut für Deutsche Sprache (Mannheim)
NKJP – Electronic online National Corpus of Polish
PWN – Electronic online corpus of the PWN publishing company
37
THANK YOU!
38