Cover not available
Part of
Pragmatic Markers and Peripheries
Edited by Daniël Van Olmen and Jolanta Šinkūnienė
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 325] 2021
► pp. 415–448

Chapter 15
A cross-linguistic look at the right periphery

Utterance-final pragmatic markers in English, Spanish and Lithuanian

ORCID logo | Vilnius University
ORCID logo | Complutense University of Madrid
This paper compares the formal and functional features of two sets of English, Spanish and Lithuanian pragmatic markers, one of linking adverbials (then, entonces, tada) and another of evidential adverbials (obviously, evidentemente, aišku). The study deals with the contribution of the right periphery occurrences of the markers to the utterances that they modify, considering the illocutionary, propositional, subjective and interpersonal levels. It also compares this contribution to that of the same markers in other positions. The higher frequency of the markers in the right periphery correlates with their distribution in a wider range of speech acts and with their semantic domain. Across the three languages, the linking adverbials are more common in the right periphery than the evidential adverbials.
Keywords: right periphery, left periphery, cross-linguistic, relational, interpersonal, speech act, inferential evidentiality
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Clause peripheries and their research in English, Spanish and Lithuanian: The state of the art
  • 3.Methods and data selection
  • 4. Then, entonces and tada
    • 4.1Meaning, position and distribution in speech acts
    • 4.2 Then, entonces and tada in the right periphery
    • 4.3Functions of then, entonces and tada in the right periphery
      • 4.3.1Right periphery then, entonces and tada with assertive speech acts
      • 4.3.2Right periphery then, entonces and tada with expressive speech acts
      • 4.3.3Right periphery then, entonces and tada with directive speech acts
      • 4.3.4Right periphery then, entonces and tada with rogative speech acts
      • 4.3.5Right periphery then, entonces and tada with commissive speech acts
      • 4.3.6Summary
  • 5. Obviously, evidentemente and aišku
    • 5.1Meaning, position and distribution in speech acts
    • 5.2 Obviously, evidentemente and aišku in the right periphery
    • 5.3Functions of obviously, evidentemente and aišku in the right periphery
      • 5.3.1Right periphery obviously, evidentemente and aišku with assertive speech acts
      • 5.3.2Right periphery obviously, evidentemente and aišku with expressive, rogative, commissive and directive speech acts
  • 6.Discussion and concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 13 October 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.325.15rus
References (55)
References
Aijmer, Karin. 1997. “ I think – an English Modal Particle.” In Modality in the Germanic Languages: Historical and Comparative Perspectives, ed. by Toril Swan, and Olaf Jansen Westvik, 1–47. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. “Analyzing Modal Adverbs as Modal Particles and Discourse Markers.” In Discourse Markers and Modal Particles: Categorization and Description, ed. by Liesbeth Degand, Bert Cornillie, and Paola Pietrandrea, 96–106. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. “Revisiting actually in Different Positions in Some National Varieties of English.” In Corpus-Based Studies on Language Varieties, ed. by Francisco Alonso Almeida, Laura Cruz García, and Víctor González Ruiz, 115–144. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
. 2019. “Challenges in the Contrastive Study of Discourse Markers: The Case of then .” In Empirical Studies of the Construction of Discourse, ed. by Óscar Loureda, Inés Recio Fernandez, Laura Nadal, and Adriana Cruz, 17–42. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alarcos Llorach, Emilio. 1992. “Pues”. Gramma-Temas 1: 11–26.Google Scholar
Beeching, Kate. 2016. “ Alors/donc/then at the Right Periphery: Seeking Confirmation of an Inference.” Journal of Historical Pragmatics 17 (2): 208–230. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bernicot, Josie, Judith Comeau, and Helga Feider. 1993. “Speech Acts by Mother and Child: Determining their Nature and Form.” European Journal of Psychology of Education 8 (1): 35–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blank, Andreas. 1997. Prinzipien des lexikalischen Bedeutungswandels am Beispiel der romanischen Sprachen [Principles of the lexical change of meaning: The case of Romance languages]. Niemeyer: Tübingen. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Borreguero Zuloaga, Margarita. 2014. “Left Periphery in Discourse: Frame Unit and Discourse Markers.” In Left Peripheries in Spanish: Diachronic, Variationist and Comparative Perspectives, ed. by Andreas Dufter, and Álvaro S. Octavio de Toledo y Huerta, 345–382. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018. “The Evolution of Temporal Adverbs into Consecutive Connectives and the Role of Discourse Traditions: The Case of It. allora and Sp. entonces .” In Beyond Grammaticalization and Discourse Markers: New Issues in the Study of Language Change (Studies in Pragmatics), ed. by Salvador Pons, and Óscar Loureda, 231–270. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boye, Kasper, and Peter Harder. 2012. “A Usage-based Theory of Grammatical Status and Grammaticalization.” Language 88 (1): 1–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brinton, Laurel. 2008. The Comment Clause in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carretero, Marta, Juana I. Marín-Arrese, and Julia Lavid-López. 2017. “Adverbs as Evidentials: An English-Spanish Contrastive Analysis of Twelve Adverbs in Spoken and Newspaper Discourse.” Kalbotyra 70: 32–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corum, Claudia. 1975. “A Pragmatic Analysis of Parenthetic Disjuncts.” In Papers from the Eleventh Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, ed. by Robin E. Grossman, L. James Sam, and Timothy J. Vance, 131–141. Chicago: University of Chicago, Department of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Degand, Liesbeth. 2014. “‘So very fast then’: Discourse Markers at Left and Right Periphery in Spoken French.” In Discourse Functions at the Left and Right Periphery: Cross-Linguistic Investigations of Language Use and Language Change, ed. by Kate Beeching, and Ulrich Detges, 151–187. Brill: Leiden. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fernández Sánchez, Javier. 2020. Right Peripheral Fragments: Right Dislocation and Related Phenomena in Romance. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Kerstin, and Maiken Heide. 2018. “Inferential Processes in English and the Question whether English has Modal Particles.” Open Linguistics 4 (1): 509–536. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fretheim, Thorstein. 2015. “A Relevance-Theoretic Perspective on the Norwegian Utterance-Final Particles da and altså Compared to their English Counterpart then .” In Final Particles, ed. by Sylvie Hancil, Alexander Haselow, and Margje Post, 249–284. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fuentes Rodríguez, Catalina. 2012. “El margen derecho del enunciado [The right margin of the utterance].” Revista española de lingüística (RSEL) 42 (2): 63–94.Google Scholar
. 2019. “Combinaciones entre operadores argumentativos: el regulador escalar si cabe [Combinations between argumentative operators: The scalar regulator si cabe ].” Spanish in Context 16 (2): 151–172. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gutiérrez-Bravo, Rodrigo. 2013. Structural Markedness and Syntactic Structure: A Study of Word Order and the Left Periphery in Mexican Spanish. New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gutiérrez-Rexach, Javier. 2001. “Spanish Exclamatives and the Semantics of the Left Periphery”. In Selected Papers from Going Romance 99, ed. by Yves de Hulst, Johan Rooryck, and Jan Schroten, 167–194. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hancil, Sylvie, Margje Post, and Alexander Haselow. 2015. “Introduction: Final Particles from a Typological Perspective.” In Final Particles, ed. by Sylvie Hancil, Alexander Haselow, and Margje Post, 3–36. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haselow, Alexander. 2011. “Discourse Marker and Modal Particle: The Functions of Utterance-Final then in Spoken English.” Journal of Pragmatics 43 (14): 3603–3623. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. “Subjectivity, Intersubjectivity and the Negotiation of Common Ground in Spoken Discourse: Final Particles in English.” Language and Communication 32 (3): 182–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. “Arguing for a Wide Conception of Grammar: The Case of Final Particles in Spoken Discourse.” Folia Linguistica 47 (2): 375–424. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. “Left vs. Right Periphery in Grammaticalization: The Case of anyway .” In New Directions in Grammaticalization Research, ed. by Andrew D. M. Smith, Graeme Trousdale, and Richard Waltereit, 157–186. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hernanz, M. Lluïsa. 2010. “Assertive bien in Spanish and the Left Periphery.” In Mapping the Left Periphery: The Cartography of Syntactic Studies Vol. 5, ed. by Paola Benincà, and Nicola Munaro, 19–62. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. 1991. “On Some Principles of Grammaticalization.” In Approaches to Grammaticalization, ed. by Elizabeth Closs Traugott, and Bernd Heine, 17–35. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Izutsu, Katsunobu, and Mitsuko Narita Izutsu. 2013. “From Discourse Markers to Modal/Final Particles: What the Position Reveals about the Continuum.” In Discourse Markers and Modal Particles: Categorization and Description, ed. by Liesbeth Degand, Bert Cornillie, and Paola Pietrandrea, 217–235. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaltenböck, Gunther, Bernd Heine, and Tania Kuteva. 2011. “On Thetical Grammar.” Studies in Language 35 (4): 852–897. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1972. Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 1995 Reprint. Thoughts on Grammaticalization. Revised and expanded version. First published edition. München: Lincom Europa. Original edition, Köln: Kölner Universalienprojekt, 1982.Google Scholar
Lewis, Diana M. 2018. “Grammaticalizing Connectives in English and Discourse Information Structure.” In New Trends in Grammaticalization and Language Change, ed. by Sylvie Hancil, Tine Breban, and José V. Lozano, 135–157. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Makauskaitė, Indrė. 2016. “Multifunctionality of the Lithuanian TADA and English THEN in Spoken Discourse: A Cross-Linguistic Analysis.” Kalbotyra 68: 96–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marín-Arrese, Juana I. 2015. “Epistemicity and Stance: A Cross-Linguistic Study of Epistemic Stance Strategies in Journalistic Discourse in English and Spanish.” Discourse Studies 17 (2): 210–225. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017. “Multifunctionality of Evidential Expressions in Discourse Domains and Genres: Evidence from Cross-Linguistic Case Studies.” In Evidentiality Revisited: Cognitive Grammar, Functional and Discourse-Pragmatic Perspectives, ed. by Juana I. Marín-Arrese, Gerda Hassler, and Marta Carretero, 411–445. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mittwoch, Anita, Rodney Huddleston, and Peter Collins. 2002. “The Clause: Adjuncts.” In The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, ed. by Rodney Huddleston, and Geoffrey K. Pullum, 663–784. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nastri, Jacqueline, Jorge Peña, and Jeffrey T. Hancock. 2006. “The Construction of Away Messages: A Speech Act Analysis.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 11 (4): 1025–1045. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Osa, Adriana. 2017. “Negotiation of Discourse Moves: Right Periphery Tags.” In Proceedings of the 21st Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue (SEMDIAL 2017), ed. by Volha Petukhova, and Ye Tian, 97–103. Saarbrucken: Saarland University. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruskan, Anna. 2015. “Evidential Adverbials in Lithuanian.” Kalbotyra 67: 104–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. “Functional Variation of Discourse Particles in Lithuanian: A Look at Clause Peripheries.” Corpus Pragmatics 3: 303–325. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sameer, Imad Hayif. 2017. “Analysis of Speech Act Patterns in two Egyptian Inaugural Speeches.” Studies in English Language and Education 4 (2): 134–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sato, Shie. 2017. “On Establishing I think as a Final Particle in Interactions: Some Comparisons with Sentence-Final Particles in Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics 110: 83–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah. 1987. Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Searle, John R. 1976. “A Classification of Illocutionary Acts.” Language in Society 5 (1): 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie and Karin Aijmer. 2007. The Semantic Field of Modal Certainty: A Corpus-based Study of English Adverbs. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1995. “Subjectification in Grammaticalisation.” In Subjectivity and Subjectivisation: Linguistic Perspectives, ed. by Dieter Stein and Susan Wright, 31–54. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1999. “The Rhetoric of Counter-Expectation in Semantic Change: A Study in Subjectification.” In Historical Semantics and Cognition, ed. by Andreas Blank, and Peter Koch, 177–196. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. “Intersubjectification and Clause Periphery.” English Text Construction 5 (1): 7–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. “On the Rise of Types of Clause-Final Pragmatic Markers in English.” Journal of Historical Pragmatics 17 (1): 26–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ureña Gómez-Moreno, Pedro. 2015. “Sentence-Final Adverbials: Recurrent Types and Usage.” In Final Particles, ed. by Sylvie Hancil, Alexander Haselow, and Margje Post, 39–54. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Usonienė, Aurelija. 2013. “On the Morphosyntactic Status of Complement-Taking Predicate Clauses in Lithuanian.” Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 45 (1): 73–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. “Non-morphological Realizations of Evidentiality: The Case of Parenthetical Elements in Lithuanian.” In Contemporary Approaches to Baltic Linguistics, ed. by Peter Arkadiev, Axel Holvoet, and Björn Wiemer, 437–463. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar