This paper explores the form, function and distribution of certain discourse markers which seem to occur outside traditional clause boundaries and are used to request confirmation. These ‘confirmationals’ differ according to what is expected to be confirmed. Some confirmationals trigger a response from the addressee to confirm that the proposition is true; others require a response to confirm that the addressee knows that the proposition is true. This variation is reminiscent of scope effects and suggests that confirmationals should be analysed in syntactic terms despite their peripheral position. For our analysis, we adopt the Universal Spine Hypothesis (Wiltschko 2014), which promotes a hierarchically organized series of core functional projections. We propose that the highest functional projection of a clause is dedicated to a ‘grounding’ layer, which in turn consists of a speaker-oriented and an addressee-oriented structure. The topmost layer is dedicated to regulate response and consists of a position that encodes the call on the addressee. Our analysis of speech act structure is an updated version of Ross’ (1970) performative hypothesis. We explore the predictions and implications of this hypothesis for the syntax-pragmatics interface.
Culicover, Peter W. 1992. English tag questions in universal grammar. Lingua 88(3): 193-226.
Déchaine, Rose Marie & Wiltschko, Martina. 2002. Decomposing pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 33(3): 409-442.
De Wolf, Galean Dodds, Fee, Margery, Gregg, Robert J. & McAlpine, Janice. 2004. The Survey of Vancouver English: A Sociolinguistic Study of Urban Canadian English (No. 5). Strathy Language Unit, Queen's University.
Dombrowski, Ernst & Niebuhr, Oiver. 2005. Acoustic patterns and communicative functions of phrase-final f0 rises in German: Activating and restricting contours. Phonetica 62: 176-195.
Dombrowski, Ernst & Niebuhr, Oliver. 2010. Shaping phrase-final rising intonation in German. Proceedings of the
5th International Conference on Speech Prosody
, Chicago, USA.
Farkas, Donka F. & Bruce, Kim B. 2009. On reacting to assertions and polar questions. Journal of Semantics 27: 81-118.
Fraser, Bruce. 2006. Towards a theory of discourse markers. Approaches to Discourse Particles 1: 189-204.
Ginzburg, Jonathan. 2012. The Interactive Stance. Oxford: OUP.
Ginzburg, Jonathan. 1996. Interrogatives: Questions, facts and dialogue. In The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, Shalom Lappin (ed.), 385–422. Oxford: Blackwell.
Gibson, Deborah Jean. 1976. A Thesis on eh. PhD dissertation, University of British Columbia.
Gold, Elaine. 2008. Which eh is the Canadian eh?Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 27: 73-85.
Gunlogson, Christine. 2008. A question of commitment. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 22: 101-136.
Gunlogson, Christine. 2003. True to Form: Rising and Falling Declaratives as Questions in English. London: Routledge.
Gussenhoven, Carlos. 1984. On the Grammar and Semantics of Sentence Accents. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Haspelmath, Martin. 2007. Pre-established categories don't exist: Consequences for language description and typology. Linguistic Typology 11: 119-132.
Heim, Johannes. 2015. Expertise and common ground. Ms. UBC.
Holmberg, Anders. 2015. The syntax of yes and no. Oxford University Press.
Hinzen, Wolfram. 2014. Recursion and truth. In Recursion: Complexity in Cognition, Margaret Speas & Thomas Roeper (eds), 113-137. Dordrecht: Springer.
Hirschberg, Julia & Ward, Gregory. 1995. The interpretation of the high-rise question contour in English. Journal of Pragmatics 24: 407-412.
Kayne, Richard S. 1994. The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
Krifka, Manfred. 2013. Response particles as propositional anaphors. Semantics and Linguistic Theory. Vol. 23. 1–18.
Lam, Zoe Wai-Man. 2014. A complex ForceP for speaker- and addressee-oriented discourse particles in Cantonese. Studies in Chinese Linguistics 35: 61-80.
Malamud, Sophia A. & Stephenson, Tamina C. 2011. Three ways to avoid commitments: Declarative force modifiers in the conversational scoreboard. Journal of Semantics 31: 1-37.
Meyerhoff, Miriam. 1992. ‘We’ve all got to go one day, eh?’: Powerlessness and solidarity in the functions of a New Zealand tag. In Locating Power: Proceedings of the Second Annual Berkeley Women and Language Conference, Kira Hall, Mary Bucholtz & Birch Moonwomon (eds), Berkeley CA: Berkeley Women and Language Group.
Pierrehumbert, Janet, & Hirschberg, Julia. 1990. The meaning of intonational contours in the interpretation of discourse. In Intentions in Communication, Philip R. Cohen, Jerry Morgan & Martha E. Pollack (eds), 271-311. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
Pollock, Jean Yves. 1989. Verb movement, universal grammar and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry 20: 365-425.
Postal, Paul. 1969. Anaphoric islands. Chicago Linguistic Society 5: 205-239.
Ramchand, Gillian & Svenonius, Peter. 2014. Deriving the functional hierarchy. Language Sciences 46: 152-174.
Rizzi, Luigi. 1991. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of grammar, Liliane Haegeman (ed), 281–337. Dortrecht, Kluwer.
Ross, John R. 1970. On declarative sentences. In Readings in English Transformational Grammar, Roderick A. Jacobs & Peter S. Rosenbaum (eds), 222-272. Waltham MA: Ginn & Co.
Sailor, Craig. 2009. Tagged for Deletion: A Typological Approach to VP Ellipsis in Tag Questions. MA thesis, UCLA.
Searle, John R. 1969. Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Vol. 626. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stalnaker, Robert1978. Assertion. In Syntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics, Peter Cole (ed.), 315-332. New York NY: Academic Press.
Stubbe, Maria & Holmes, Janet. 1995. You know, eh and other exasperating ‘expressions’: An analysis of social and stylistic variation in the use of pragmatic devices in a sample of New Zealand English. Language and Communication 15: 63-88.
Trinh, Tue & Crnic, Luka. 2011. On the rise and fall of declaratives. Proceedings of
Sinn and Bedeutung (SuB)
15: 645-660.
Truckenbrodt, Harald. 2013. Satztyp, Prosodie und Intonation. In Satztypen des Deutschen, Jörg Meibauer, Markus Steinbach & Hans Altmann (eds), 570-601. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Truckenbrodt, Harald. 2012. Semantics of intonation. In Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, Vol. 3, Claudia Maienborn, Klaus von Heusinger & Paul Portner (eds), 2039-2969. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Wiltschko, Martina. in press-a. Ergative constellations in the structure of speech acts.
Wiltschko, Martina. in press-b. Response particles beyond answering. In Order and Structure in Syntax, Laura Bailey and Michelle Sheehan (eds). Berlin: Language Science Press.
Wiltschko, Martina. 2014. The Universal Structure of Categories: Towards a Formal Typology. Cambridge: CUP.
Wiltschko, Martina & Alex d’Arcy. 2015. Deriving variation in function. A case study of Canadian ‘eh’ and its kin. Paper presented at
NWAV 44
, University of Toronto (October 2015).
Woods, Howard B. 1980. The Ottawa Survey of Canadian English. Kingston: Strathy Language Unit, Queen’s University.
Cited by (37)
Cited by 37 other publications
Biasio, Marco & Dario Del Fante
2024. Once known, always known. Turn-final sai in North-East regional Italian. Folia Linguistica
2024. Pronouns beyond phi-features: the speaker–addressee relation in Japanese pronouns and its implications for formal pronouns. Journal of Linguistics► pp. 1 ff.
2023. Social evolution and commitment: Bridging the gap between formal linguistic theories and language evolution research. Biolinguistics 17
Menza, Salvatore & Valentina Bianchi
2023. Cooperativity Markers in the Left Periphery. Evidence from Sicilian and from Lombard Italian. Probus 35:1 ► pp. 99 ff.
Clausen, Yulia & Tatjana Scheffler
2022. A corpus-based analysis of meaning variations in German tag questions Evidence from spoken and written conversational corpora. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 18:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
2020. How Canadian was eh? A baseline investigation of usage and ideology. Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique 65:4 ► pp. 583 ff.
2022. Copyright Page. In The Grammar of the Utterance, ► pp. iv ff.
[no author supplied]
2022. List of Abbreviations. In The Grammar of the Utterance, ► pp. xi ff.
[no author supplied]
2022. General Preface. In The Grammar of the Utterance, ► pp. vii ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 december 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.