Cover not available
Article published In:
Languages in Contrast
Vol. 21:2 (2021) ► pp.163–185

“I guess anyone would do that wouldn’t they?”

How do native speakers of Norwegian and English hedge in informal conversations?

ORCID logo | University of Oslo , Norway
Hedging is a complex phenomenon with an indefinite number of potential realisations. The complexity and versatility of hedging strategies make them particularly interesting to study across languages. This contrastive study compares the realisations of the pragmatic function of hedging in everyday Norwegian and English conversations using data from four corpora of Norwegian and English informal spoken conversations (the Norwegian Speech Corpus, the Nordic Dialect Corpus, the BigBrother corpus, and the BNC2014). The results show that speakers of both languages mainly use pragmatic particles, adverbs, and first-/second-person pronouns + cognitive verbs [1/2 pers. + Cog. V] to express hedging. Furthermore, English speakers use significantly more [1/2 pers. + Cog. V] and modal verbs than Norwegian speakers, who use significantly more adjectives, prepositional phrases and clauses to hedge their utterances.
Keywords: hedging, spoken conversations, corpus pragmatics, English/Norwegian
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Previous research on hedging
  • 3.Data and methodology
  • 4.Form-based taxonomy of hedging strategies
  • 5.Results and discussion
    • 5.1General overview of cross-linguistic contrasts
    • 5.2Pragmatic particles
    • 5.3Adverbs
    • 5.4First-/second-person pronoun + cognitive verb [1/2 pers. + Cog. V]
  • 6.Concluding remarks
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 27 October 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.19025.joh
References (69)
References
Adolphs, S. and Carter, R. 2013. Spoken Corpus Linguistics: From Monomodal to Multimodal. New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aijmer, K. 1984. “Sort of” and “Kind of” in English Conversation. Studia Linguistica 381: 118–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2002. English Discourse Particles. Evidence from a Corpus. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aijmer, K. and Rühlemann, C. 2015. Corpus Pragmatics: A Handbook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aijmer, K. and Simon-Vandenbergen, A.-M. 2006. Introduction. In Pragmatic Markers in Contrast, K. Aijmer and A.-M. Simon-Vandenbergen (eds), 1–10. Oxford: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Andersen, G. 2010. A Contrastive Approach to Vague Nouns. In New Approaches to Hedigng, G. Kaltenböck, W. Mihatsch and S. Schneider (eds), 35–48. Bingley: Emerald Bingley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Andvik, E. E. 1992. A Pragmatic Analysis of Norwegian Modal Particles. Arlington: The Summer Institute of Linguistics, University of Texas.Google Scholar
1994. Recourse to Consensus in Norwegian Modal Particles. PhD Thesis, University of Texas.Google Scholar
Beeching, K. 2016. Pragmatic Markers in British English: Meaning in Social Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berthelin, S. R. and Borthen, K. 2019. The Semantics and Pragmatics of Norwegian Sentence-Internal jo . Nordic Journal of Linguistics 42(1): 3–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. and Finegan, E. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
BigBrother-korpuset. Tekstlaboratoriet, ILN, Universitetet i Oslo. Available at [URL]
Blakemore, D. 1989. Denial and Contrast: A Relevance Theoretic Analysis of but . Linguistics and Philosophy 121: 15–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Borthen, K. 2018. Store spørsmål om små ord. Innledning til temanummer om pragmatiske partikler i norsk [Big Questions, Small Words. Introduction to a Special Issue on Pragmatic Particles in Norwegian]. Norsk Lingvistisk Tidsskrift 361: 225–247.Google Scholar
Brown, P. and Levinson, S. C. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Buysse, L. 2017. The Pragmatic Marker you know in Learner Englishes. Journal of Pragmatics 1211: 40–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018. “It Was a Bit Stressy as Well Actually”. The Pragmatic Markers actually and in fact in Spoken Learner English. Journal of Pragmatics 1561: 28–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Channell, J. 1994. Vague Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Clemen, G. 1997. The Concept of Hedging: Origins, Approaches and Definitions. In Hedging and Discourse Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts, R. Markkanen and H. Schröder (eds), 235–248. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coates, J. 1987. Epistemic Modality and Spoken Discourse. Transactions of the Philological Society 851: 110–131. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Estling Vannestål, M. 2015. A University Grammar of English: With a Swedish Perspective. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
Faarlund, J. T., Lie, S. and Vannebo, K. I. 1997. Norsk Referansegrammatikk. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Farr, F. and O’Keeffe, A. 2002. Would as a Hedging Device in an Irish Context: An Intra-Varietal Comparison of Institutionalised Spoken Interaction. In Using Corpora to Explore Linguistic Variation, R. Reppen, S. M. Fitzmaurice and D. Biber (eds), 25–48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fraser, B. 1980. Conversational Mitigation. Journal of Pragmatics 41: 341–350. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1996. Pragmatic Markers. Pragmatics Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) 61: 167–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010. Pragmatic Competence: The Case of Hedging. In New Approaches to Hedging, G. Kaltenböck, W. Mihatsch and S. Schneider (eds), 15–34. Bingley: Emerald Bingley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fretheim, T. 1979. Demperen “nesten” En pragmatisk studie. Maal og Minne 3–41: 182–219.Google Scholar
1981. “Ego”-dempere og “alter”-dempere. Maal og Minne: 86–100.Google Scholar
Hasselgård, H. 2020. Corpus-Based Contrastive Studies: Beginnings, Developments and Directions. Languages in Contrast 20(2): 184–208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hardjanto, T. 2016. Hedging through the Use of Modal Auxiliaries in English Academic Discourse. Humaniora 281: 37–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hasund, I. K. 2003. The Discourse Markers like in English and liksom in Norwegian Teenage Language: A Corpus-Based, Cross-Linguistic Study. PhD Thesis, University of Bergen/Agder University College.Google Scholar
Hasund, I. K., Opsahl, T. and Svennevig, J. 2012. By three Means: The Pragmatic Functions of three Norwegian Quotatives. In Quotatives: Cross-Linguistic and Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives, I. Buchstaller and I. van Alphen (eds), 37–67. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hübler, A. 1983. Understatements and Hedges in English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hunston, S. 2002. Corpora in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K. 1996. Writing without Conviction? Hedging in Science Research Articles. Applied Linguistics 171: 433–454. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1998. Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johannessen, J. B., Priestley, J., Hagen, K., Åfarli, T. A. and Vangsnes, Ø. A. 2009. The Nordic Dialect Corpus – An Advanced Research Tool. Proceedings of the 17th Nordic Conference of Computational Linguistics (NODALIDA 2009). Odense, Denmark, 14–16 May 2009. 283–286.Google Scholar
Johansen, S. H. 2019. Exploring the Use of Probes in a Corpus Pragmatic Study of Hedging Strategies. Nordic Journal of English Studies 18(1): 121–148. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jucker, A. H., and Ziv, Y. 1998. Discourse Markers: Descriptions and Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaltenböck, G., Mihatsch, W. and Schneider, S. 2010. New Approaches to Hedging. Bingley: Emerald Bingley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kimps, D., Davidse, K. and Cornillie, B. 2014. A Speech Function Analysis of Tag Questions in British English Spontaneous Dialogue. Journal of Pragmatics 661: 64–85. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kozubíková Šandová, J. 2017. “…And Our Study Might Therefore Have Been Slightly Underpowered”: A Cross-Linguistic Analysis of Hedging in English and Czech Medical Research Articles. Acta Universitatis Carolinae Philologica: 115–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kranich, S. 2011. To Hedge or not to Hedge: The Use of Epistemic Modal Expressions in Popular Science in English Texts, English–German Translations, and German Original Texts. Text & Talk: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse & Communication Studies 31(1): 77–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. 1972. Hedges: A Study in Meaning Criteria and the Logic of Fuzzy Concepts. In Papers from the Eighth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, P. M. Peranteau, J. N. Levi and G. C. Phares (eds), 183–228. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Lind, M. 1994. Pragmatiske partikler i diskursanalytisk perspektiv: jo, altså, vel, nå og da i et norsk talemålsmateriale. Master’s Dissertation, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
Love, R., Dembry, C., Hardie, A., Brezina, V. and McEnery, T. 2017. The Spoken BNC2014. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 221: 319–344. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lukka, M. R. and Markkanen, R. 1997. Impersonalization as a Form of Hedging. In Hedging and Discourse: Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts, R. Markkanen and H. Schröder (eds), 168–187. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Magliacane, A. and Howard, M. 2019. The Role of Learner Status in the Acquisition of Pragmatic Markers during Study Abroad: The Use of Like in L2 English. Journal of Pragmatics 1461: 72–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Markkanen, R. and Schröder, H. 1997. Hedging and Discourse: Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mauranen, A. 2004. “They’re a Little Bit Different”. Observations on Hedges in Academic Talk. In Discourse Patterns in Spoken and Written Corpora, K. Aijmer and A.-B. Stenström (eds), 173–198. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norsk talespråkskorpus – Oslodelen. Tekstlaboratoriet, ILN, Universitetet i Oslo. Available at [URL]
O’Keeffe, A. 2018. Corpus-Based Function-to-Form Approaches. In Methods in Pragmatics, A. H. Jucker, K. P. Schneider and W. Bublitz (eds), 587–618. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Keeffe, A., Clancy, B. and Adolphs, S. 2020. Introducing Pragmatics in Use (2nd Edition). Abingdon: Routledge. (unpagenated manuscript).Google Scholar
Opsahl, T. 2002. “Jeg bare: Hæ?! Hva skjedde her da?”: En studie av de kommunikative funksjonene til diskurspartikkelen ‘bare’ i et ungdomsspråkmateriale. Master’s Dissertation, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
Östman, J.-O. 1982. Pragmatic Particles in an Applied Perspective. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen (Special Issue): 135–153.Google Scholar
Overstreet, M. 1999. Whales, Candlelight, and Stuff Like That: General Extenders in English Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Prince, E., Frader, J. and Bosk, C. 1982. On Hedging in Physician–Physician Discourse. In Linguistics and the Professions, R. J. di Pietro (ed.), 83–97. Norwood-New Jersey: Ablex.Google Scholar
Rygg, K. 2017. “Typically Norwegian to be Impolite.” Impoliteness according to Whom? FLEKS Scandinavian Journal of Intercultural Theory and Practice 2017 4(1): 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salager-Meyer, F. 1994. Hedges and Textual Communicative Function in Medical English Written Discourse. English for Specific Purposes 131: 149–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schiffrin, D. 1987. Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Solberg, T. K. 1990. Modalpartikler i norsk. Master’s Dissertation, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
Svennevig, J. 2007. “Ikke sant” as a Response Token in Norwegian Conversation. In Interpreting Utterances. Pragmatics and its Interfaces. Essays in Honour of Thorstein Fretheim, R.-A. Nilsen, N. A. A. Amfo and K. Borthen (eds), 175–189. Oslo: Novus Press.Google Scholar
2008. “Ikke sant” som respons i samtale. In Språk i Oslo Ny forskning omkring talespråk, J. B. Johannessen and K. Hagen (eds), 127–138. Oslo: Novus forlag.Google Scholar
2010. Pre-empting Reference Problems in Conversation. Language in Society 391: 173–202. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tchizmarova, I. K. 2005. Hedging Functions of the Bulgarian Discourse Marker xajde . Journal of Pragmatics 371: 1143–1163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vassileva, I. 2001. Commitment and Detachment in English and Bulgarian Academic Writing. English for Specific Purposes 201: 83–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vold, E. T. 2006. Epistemic Modality Markers in Research Articles: A Cross-Linguistic and Cross-Disciplinary Study. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 161: 61–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yang, Y. 2013. Exploring Linguistic and Cultural Variations in the Use of Hedges in English and Chinese Scientific Discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 50(1): 23–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zadeh, L. A. 1965. Fuzzy Sets. Information and Control 81: 338–353. DOI logoGoogle Scholar