Cover not available
Part of
Pragmatic Markers in Irish English
Edited by Carolina P. Amador-Moreno, Kevin McCafferty and Elaine Vaughan
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 258] 2015
► pp. 248–269

Pragmatic markers as implicit emotive anchoring

Modality as evidence of trauma in the 1641 depositions

| University of Ulster
| University of Ulster
This chapter analyses pragmatic markers within survivor depositions taken after the 1641 rebellion in Ireland. Specifically, we are concerned with those markers which modify or delimit evidentiality, that is degrees of commitment to participant claims or statements. In this way we re-evaluate the ‘truth-as-evidence’ nature of the depositions and query critical views of the corpus as hearsay, propaganda and a crude form of insurance claim. This shall also highlight a pragmatic distinction between legal and therapeutic disclosure, opening up new avenues for pragmatic analysis of what we will call ‘the victims’ voice’.
Published online: 15 July 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.258.11wil
References (56)
References
Abadi, Adina. 1990. “The Speech Act of Apology in Political Life”. Journal of Pragmatics 14: 467–487. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. 2006. Fourth edition.Google Scholar
Andersen, Gisle. 2001. Pragmatic Markers and Sociolinguistic Variation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biggar, Nigel. 2001. Burying the Past: Making Peace and Doing Justice after Civil Conflict. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Blakemore, Diane. 1987. Semantic Constraints on Relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 2002. Relevance and Linguistic Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brewin, Chris R., Ruth A. Lanius, Andrei Novac, Ulrich Schnyder, and Sandro Galea. 2009. “Reformulating PTSD for DSM-V: Life After Criterion A” Journal of Traumatic Stress 22 (5): 366–373. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Christianson, Sven-Åke. 1992. “Emotional Stress and Eyewitness Memory: A Critical Review.” Psychological Bulletin 112: 284–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conley, John M., William M. O’Barr, and E. Allen Lind. 1979. “The Power of Language: Presentational Style in the Courtroom”. Duke Law Journal 1978 (6): 1375–1399. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan. 2009. “Historical Sociopragmatics”. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 10 (2): 179–186. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan, and Merja Kytö. 1999. “Investigating Non-standard Language in A Corpus of Early Modern English Dialogues: Methodological Considerations and Problems.” In Writing in Nonstandard English, ed. by Irma Taavitsainen, Gunnel Melchers and Paivi Pahta, 171–187. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Darcy, Eamon. 2013. The Irish Rebellion of 1641 and the Wars of the Three Kingdoms. London: Royal Historical Society.Google Scholar
Dunbar, Robin. 1996. Grooming, Gossip and the Evolution of Language. London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
Dwyer, Philip G. 2009. “‘It Still Makes me Shudder’: Memories of Massacres and Atrocities during the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars”. War in History 16: 381–405. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fennell, Barbara, and Mark Sweetnam. 2011. “Natural Language Processing and Early-modern Dirty Data: Applying IBM Languageware to the 1641 Depositions”. Literary and Linguistic Computing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Frankl, Viktor E. 2006. Man’s Search for Meaning: An Introduction to Logotherapy. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Fraser, Bruce. 2010. “Pragmatic Competence: The Case of Hedging”. In New Approaches to Hedging, ed. by Gunther Kaltenböck, Wiltrud Mihatsch, and Stefan Schneider, 15–34. Bingley: Emerald Group. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Govier, Trudy, and Wilhelm Verwoerd. 2002. “The Promise and Pitfalls of Apology”. Journal of Social Philosophy 33: 67–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hedtke, Lorraine. 2002. “Rethinking Deathbed Rituals.” The International Journal of Narrative therapy and Community Work 1: 14–17.Google Scholar
Hölker, Klaus. 1991. Französisch: Partikelforschung. Lexikon der romantischen Linguistik. Vol. V. 77–88. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Ide, Risako. 1998. “‘Sorry for Your Kindness’: Japanese Interactional Ritual in Public Discourse”. Journal of Pragmatics 29: 509–529. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kytö, Merja, and Terry Walker. 2006. “Guide to A Corpus of English Dialogues 1560–1760” Studia Anglistica Upsaliensia 130. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.Google Scholar
Kuivalainen, Paivi. 2009. “Emotions in Narrative: A Linguistic Study of Katherine Mansfield’s Short Fiction”. The Electronic Journal of the Department of English at the University of Helsinki 5.Google Scholar
Langbein, John H. 1978. The Criminal Trial Before the Lawyers. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Law Reform Act. 1996. Abolition of the Year and a Day Rule. House of Lords Parliamentary Debates.Google Scholar
Lederach, John Paul. 1999. The Journey toward Reconciliation. Scottdale, PA: Herald Press.Google Scholar
Lucariello, John, and Katherine Nelson. 1987. “Remembering and Planning Talk between Mothers and Children.” Discourse Processes 10: 219–235. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacLeod, Nicci. 2012. “Rogues, Villaines and Base Trulls: Constructing the Other in the 1641 Depositions”. In The 1641 Depositions and the Irish Rebellion, ed. by Eamon Darcy, Annaleigh Margey, and Elaine Murphy, 113–127. London: Pickering and Chatto.Google Scholar
. 2013. “Forensic Linguistics” in The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, ed. by Chapelle, Carole A. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacLeod, Nicci, and Barbara A. Fennell. 2012. “Lexical Portraits of Vulnerable Women in War: The 1641 Depositions” Journal of Historical Pragmatics 13 (2): 259–290. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McKinney, Kelly. 2007. “Breaking the Conspiracy of Silence: Testimony, Traumatic Memory, and Psychotherapy with Survivors of Political Violence”. Ethos 3: 265–299 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mendeloff, David. 2004. “Truth-seeking, Truth-telling, and Post-conflict Peace-building: Curb the Enthusiasm?” International Studies Review 6 (3): 355–380. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miall, David S., and Don Kuiken. 2001. “Shifting Perspectives: Readers’ Feelings and Literary Response.” In New Perspectives on Narrative Perspective, ed. by Willie Van Peer, and Seymour Benjamin Chatman, 289–301. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Ministry of Justice. Rules and Practice Directions within Court Procedure Rules Part 34: Witnesses, Depositions and Evidence for Foreign Courts. Rule 34.8.
Morgan, Louise, Jane Scourfield, David Williams, Anne Jasper, and Glyn Lewis. 2003. “The Aberfan Disaster: 33-year Follow-up of Survivors”. British Journal of Psychiatry 182: 532–536. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Murphrey, Emily R. 2011. “Effective Treatment of Complex Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Early Attachment Trauma”. Professional Psychology Doctoral Projects: Paper 4. University of St Thomas, Minnesota.Google Scholar
Nicolle, Steve. 1997. “A Relevance-Theoretic Account of ‘Be Going To’” Journal of Linguistics 33 (2): 355–377. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Neumann, Richard K. 2001. Legal Reasoning and Legal Writing: Structure, Strategy, and Style. Gaithersburg, NY: Aspen Law and Business.Google Scholar
O’Barr, William M., and B.K. Atkins. 1980. “‘Women’s language’ or ‘powerless language’?” In Women and Language in Literature and Society, ed. by Sally McConnell-Ginet, Ruth Borker, and Nelly Thurman, 93–110. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Östman, Jan-Ola. 1981.‘You Know’: A Discourse-Functional Study. Amsterdam: John Benjamins DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1986. Pragmatics as Implicitness: An Analysis of Question Particles in Solf Swedish, with Implications for the Study of Passive Clauses and the Language of Persuasion. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of California: Berkeley.Google Scholar
. 1995. “Pragmatic Particles Twenty Years After”. In Organization in Context: Proceedings from the Turku Conference, ed. by Brita Wårvik, Sanna-Kaisa Hiltunen, and Risto Hiltunen, 95–108. Turku: University of Turku.Google Scholar
Östman, Jan-Ola, and Jef Verschueren. (eds.). 2008. Handbook of Pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Palmer, Frank Robert. 1986. Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Potts, Christopher. 2007. “The Expressive Dimension.” Theoretical Linguistics 33 (2): 165–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rosnow, Ralph L., and Gary Alan Fine. 1976. Rumor and Gossip: The Social Psychology of Hearsay. New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Sánchez Macarro, Antonia, and Ronald Carter (eds.). 1989. Linguistic Choice across Genres. Variation in Spoken and Written English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seils, Paul F. 2002. “The Limits of Truth Commissions in the Search for Justice: An Analysis of the Truth Commissions of El Salvador and Guatemala and Their Effect in Achieving Post-conflict Justice”. In Post-Conflict Justice, ed. by M. Cherif Bassiouni, 775–795. Ardsley, NY: Transnational.Google Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah. 1987. Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swales, John M. 1982. “The Case of Cases in English for Academic Legal Purposes”. IRAL, Modality in L2 Legal Writing 20 (2): 139–148.Google Scholar
Thompson, Kate. 2004. “Journal Writing as a Therapeutic Tool”. In Writing Cures, ed. by Gillie Bolton, Stephanie Howlett, Colin Lago, and Jeannie K. Wright, 72–84. London: Brunner Routledge.Google Scholar
van der Kolk, Bessel A., and Onno van der Hart. 1991. “The Intrusive Past: The Flexibility of Memory and the Engraving of Trauma”. American Imago 48 (4): 425–454.Google Scholar
Virtanen, Tuija. (ed.). 2004. Approaches to Cognition through Text and Discourse. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Young, Allan. 1995. The Harmony of Illusions: Inventing Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar