Degrees of procedure activation and the german modal particles ja and doch – part 1
In this paper I argue that a unitary account of the modal and non-modal uses of the German particlesja and doch can be provided by appealing to essentially non-representational properties of the theory of procedural meaning in Relevance Theory (RT). According to Wilson (2011), procedural indicators...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis 2016, Vol.133 (1), p.31-45 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 45 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 31 |
container_title | Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis |
container_volume | 133 |
creator | Unger, Christoph |
description | In this paper I argue that a unitary account of the modal and non-modal uses of the German particlesja and doch can be provided by appealing to essentially non-representational properties of the theory of procedural meaning in Relevance Theory (RT). According to Wilson (2011), procedural indicators such as ja and doch function by raising the activation level of cognitive procedures, increasing the likelihood that audiences following the RT comprehension heuristic will use these procedures. Partially following proposals by König (1997) and Blass (2000, 2014), I would like to posit that ja and doch trigger a procedure to raise the epistemic strength of the proposition conveyed. Doch triggers a second procedure in addition, a constraint on context selection to the effect that the proposition conveyed must be processed in a context containing its negation. Since raising the activation level of cognitive procedures can be done in degrees, I argue that the basic difference between modal and non-modal uses of ja and doch is a reflection of differences in the degree of activation level rise: non-modal uses of ja and doch raise the activation of the manifestness procedure to a high degree, giving rise to effects such as emphasis or contrast, whereas modal uses raise this procedure’s activation level merely to some degree. As a result, modal ja and doch are uniquely suitable to mark propositions that do not need much evidential strengthening but would benefit from some such effect. This is most typically the case in mutually manifest assumptions that the communicator intends to use as premises in arguments. However, in some discourse contexts assumptions that are not mutually manifest may also fit this description. The prediction of this analysis is that the modal uses of ja and doch do not form a clearly delimited class; rather, borderline cases exist defying generalizations. I will present data from a qualitative corpus study that confirms these predictions. |
doi_str_mv | 10.4467/20834624SL.15.003.4892 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>ceeol_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1807533256</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ceeol_id>476124</ceeol_id><sourcerecordid>476124</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c119t-a08e130a69ec7ee2d0d19b96132b881caa4c48e8a54e548a96b9594035d224863</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFjstKA0EQRRtRMMT8gUiD6xm7-jXdS4kahYALzTpUuisvJtNxHq79B__QL3GSCNbmLs6pW8XYDYhca1vcSeGUtlK_TXMwuRAq187LMzY4gOxAztkAnC8yEMZfslHTbEU_ystCugGbPdCqJmp4WvJ9nQLFriaOod18YrtJFccq8nZNfEX1Diu-SxFLvse63YSyX9vi0YgprPnP1_eRcLhiF0ssGxr95ZDNnh7fx8_Z9HXyMr6fZgHAtxkKR6AEWk-hIJJRRPALb0HJhXMQEHXQjhwaTUY79HbhjddCmSildlYN2e2pt3_9o6OmnW9TV1f9yTk4URilpDlY1ycrEKXyX9GFBanVL05cXX4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1807533256</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Degrees of procedure activation and the german modal particles ja and doch – part 1</title><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Unger, Christoph</creator><creatorcontrib>Unger, Christoph</creatorcontrib><description>In this paper I argue that a unitary account of the modal and non-modal uses of the German particlesja and doch can be provided by appealing to essentially non-representational properties of the theory of procedural meaning in Relevance Theory (RT). According to Wilson (2011), procedural indicators such as ja and doch function by raising the activation level of cognitive procedures, increasing the likelihood that audiences following the RT comprehension heuristic will use these procedures. Partially following proposals by König (1997) and Blass (2000, 2014), I would like to posit that ja and doch trigger a procedure to raise the epistemic strength of the proposition conveyed. Doch triggers a second procedure in addition, a constraint on context selection to the effect that the proposition conveyed must be processed in a context containing its negation. Since raising the activation level of cognitive procedures can be done in degrees, I argue that the basic difference between modal and non-modal uses of ja and doch is a reflection of differences in the degree of activation level rise: non-modal uses of ja and doch raise the activation of the manifestness procedure to a high degree, giving rise to effects such as emphasis or contrast, whereas modal uses raise this procedure’s activation level merely to some degree. As a result, modal ja and doch are uniquely suitable to mark propositions that do not need much evidential strengthening but would benefit from some such effect. This is most typically the case in mutually manifest assumptions that the communicator intends to use as premises in arguments. However, in some discourse contexts assumptions that are not mutually manifest may also fit this description. The prediction of this analysis is that the modal uses of ja and doch do not form a clearly delimited class; rather, borderline cases exist defying generalizations. I will present data from a qualitative corpus study that confirms these predictions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1897-1059</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2083-4624</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.4467/20834624SL.15.003.4892</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego</publisher><subject>Evidentiality ; Foreign languages learning ; German ; German language ; Grammar ; Meaning ; Modal particles ; Morphology ; Philology ; Relevance theory ; Semantics ; Series & special reports</subject><ispartof>Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis, 2016, Vol.133 (1), p.31-45</ispartof><rights>Copyright Jagiellonian University-Jagiellonian University Press 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Uhttps://www.ceeol.com//api/image/getissuecoverimage?id=picture_2016_29732.jpg</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,4010,27900,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Unger, Christoph</creatorcontrib><title>Degrees of procedure activation and the german modal particles ja and doch – part 1</title><title>Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis</title><addtitle>Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis</addtitle><description>In this paper I argue that a unitary account of the modal and non-modal uses of the German particlesja and doch can be provided by appealing to essentially non-representational properties of the theory of procedural meaning in Relevance Theory (RT). According to Wilson (2011), procedural indicators such as ja and doch function by raising the activation level of cognitive procedures, increasing the likelihood that audiences following the RT comprehension heuristic will use these procedures. Partially following proposals by König (1997) and Blass (2000, 2014), I would like to posit that ja and doch trigger a procedure to raise the epistemic strength of the proposition conveyed. Doch triggers a second procedure in addition, a constraint on context selection to the effect that the proposition conveyed must be processed in a context containing its negation. Since raising the activation level of cognitive procedures can be done in degrees, I argue that the basic difference between modal and non-modal uses of ja and doch is a reflection of differences in the degree of activation level rise: non-modal uses of ja and doch raise the activation of the manifestness procedure to a high degree, giving rise to effects such as emphasis or contrast, whereas modal uses raise this procedure’s activation level merely to some degree. As a result, modal ja and doch are uniquely suitable to mark propositions that do not need much evidential strengthening but would benefit from some such effect. This is most typically the case in mutually manifest assumptions that the communicator intends to use as premises in arguments. However, in some discourse contexts assumptions that are not mutually manifest may also fit this description. The prediction of this analysis is that the modal uses of ja and doch do not form a clearly delimited class; rather, borderline cases exist defying generalizations. I will present data from a qualitative corpus study that confirms these predictions.</description><subject>Evidentiality</subject><subject>Foreign languages learning</subject><subject>German</subject><subject>German language</subject><subject>Grammar</subject><subject>Meaning</subject><subject>Modal particles</subject><subject>Morphology</subject><subject>Philology</subject><subject>Relevance theory</subject><subject>Semantics</subject><subject>Series & special reports</subject><issn>1897-1059</issn><issn>2083-4624</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>REL</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNpFjstKA0EQRRtRMMT8gUiD6xm7-jXdS4kahYALzTpUuisvJtNxHq79B__QL3GSCNbmLs6pW8XYDYhca1vcSeGUtlK_TXMwuRAq187LMzY4gOxAztkAnC8yEMZfslHTbEU_ystCugGbPdCqJmp4WvJ9nQLFriaOod18YrtJFccq8nZNfEX1Diu-SxFLvse63YSyX9vi0YgprPnP1_eRcLhiF0ssGxr95ZDNnh7fx8_Z9HXyMr6fZgHAtxkKR6AEWk-hIJJRRPALb0HJhXMQEHXQjhwaTUY79HbhjddCmSildlYN2e2pt3_9o6OmnW9TV1f9yTk4URilpDlY1ycrEKXyX9GFBanVL05cXX4</recordid><startdate>2016</startdate><enddate>2016</enddate><creator>Unger, Christoph</creator><general>Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego</general><general>Jagiellonian University Press</general><general>Jagiellonian University-Jagiellonian University Press</general><scope>AE2</scope><scope>BIXPP</scope><scope>REL</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7T9</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8BM</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BYOGL</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CPGLG</scope><scope>CRLPW</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PADUT</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2016</creationdate><title>Degrees of procedure activation and the german modal particles ja and doch – part 1</title><author>Unger, Christoph</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c119t-a08e130a69ec7ee2d0d19b96132b881caa4c48e8a54e548a96b9594035d224863</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Evidentiality</topic><topic>Foreign languages learning</topic><topic>German</topic><topic>German language</topic><topic>Grammar</topic><topic>Meaning</topic><topic>Modal particles</topic><topic>Morphology</topic><topic>Philology</topic><topic>Relevance theory</topic><topic>Semantics</topic><topic>Series & special reports</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Unger, Christoph</creatorcontrib><collection>Central and Eastern European Online Library (C.E.E.O.L.) (DFG Nationallizenzen)</collection><collection>CEEOL: Open Access</collection><collection>Central and Eastern European Online Library</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ComDisDome</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>East Europe, Central Europe Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Linguistics Collection</collection><collection>Linguistics Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Research Library China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Unger, Christoph</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Degrees of procedure activation and the german modal particles ja and doch – part 1</atitle><jtitle>Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis</jtitle><addtitle>Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis</addtitle><date>2016</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>133</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>31</spage><epage>45</epage><pages>31-45</pages><issn>1897-1059</issn><eissn>2083-4624</eissn><abstract>In this paper I argue that a unitary account of the modal and non-modal uses of the German particlesja and doch can be provided by appealing to essentially non-representational properties of the theory of procedural meaning in Relevance Theory (RT). According to Wilson (2011), procedural indicators such as ja and doch function by raising the activation level of cognitive procedures, increasing the likelihood that audiences following the RT comprehension heuristic will use these procedures. Partially following proposals by König (1997) and Blass (2000, 2014), I would like to posit that ja and doch trigger a procedure to raise the epistemic strength of the proposition conveyed. Doch triggers a second procedure in addition, a constraint on context selection to the effect that the proposition conveyed must be processed in a context containing its negation. Since raising the activation level of cognitive procedures can be done in degrees, I argue that the basic difference between modal and non-modal uses of ja and doch is a reflection of differences in the degree of activation level rise: non-modal uses of ja and doch raise the activation of the manifestness procedure to a high degree, giving rise to effects such as emphasis or contrast, whereas modal uses raise this procedure’s activation level merely to some degree. As a result, modal ja and doch are uniquely suitable to mark propositions that do not need much evidential strengthening but would benefit from some such effect. This is most typically the case in mutually manifest assumptions that the communicator intends to use as premises in arguments. However, in some discourse contexts assumptions that are not mutually manifest may also fit this description. The prediction of this analysis is that the modal uses of ja and doch do not form a clearly delimited class; rather, borderline cases exist defying generalizations. I will present data from a qualitative corpus study that confirms these predictions.</abstract><cop>Kraków</cop><pub>Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego</pub><doi>10.4467/20834624SL.15.003.4892</doi><tpages>15</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1897-1059 |
ispartof | Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis, 2016, Vol.133 (1), p.31-45 |
issn | 1897-1059 2083-4624 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1807533256 |
source | EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
subjects | Evidentiality Foreign languages learning German German language Grammar Meaning Modal particles Morphology Philology Relevance theory Semantics Series & special reports |
title | Degrees of procedure activation and the german modal particles ja and doch – part 1 |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-07T07%3A22%3A34IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-ceeol_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Degrees%20of%20procedure%20activation%20and%20the%20german%20modal%20particles%20ja%20and%20doch%20%E2%80%93%20part%201&rft.jtitle=Studia%20Linguistica%20Universitatis%20Iagellonicae%20Cracoviensis&rft.au=Unger,%20Christoph&rft.date=2016&rft.volume=133&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=31&rft.epage=45&rft.pages=31-45&rft.issn=1897-1059&rft.eissn=2083-4624&rft_id=info:doi/10.4467/20834624SL.15.003.4892&rft_dat=%3Cceeol_proqu%3E476124%3C/ceeol_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1807533256&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ceeol_id=476124&rfr_iscdi=true |