Cover not available
Part of
Pragmatic Markers, Discourse Markers and Modal Particles: New perspectives
Edited by Chiara Fedriani and Andrea Sansó
[Studies in Language Companion Series 186] 2017
► pp. 399–413

Chapter 14
A pragmatic approach to Joseph Wright’s English Dialect Dictionary

Discourse markers in focus

 | University of Innsbruck
Joseph Wright’s English Dialect Dictionary (EDD; 1898–1905) represents a landmark publication in Late Modern English dialectology. This article explores the potential of the EDD and its digital version (EDD Online) for historical pragmatic research and discusses essential theoretical and methodological considerations that arise from taking a pragmatic approach towards this complex historical document of non-standard English varieties. Besides traditional lexicographic information, the EDD also contains evidence of a great variety of different dialectal documents that are written to mimic spoken language. Three exemplary discourse markers (DM) – aweel, lor-a-massy and arrah – will be introduced and analysed from a pragmatic perspective.
Keywords: historical pragmatics, dialectology, discourse markers, non-standard English varieties, English Dialect Dictionary
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Definition and methodology
  • 3.Case studies
    • 3.1Aweel
    • 3.2Lor-a-massy
    • 3.3Arrah
  • 4.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 13 November 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.186.15giu
References (27)
References
Aijmer, Karin. 2013. Understanding Pragmatic Markers. Edinburgh: EUP.Google Scholar
Amador Moreno, Carolina P. 2005. Discourse markers in Irish English: An example from literature. In The Pragmatics of Irish English, Anne Barron & Klaus P. Schneider (eds), 73–100. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baring-Gould, Sabine. 1893. Mrs. Curgenven of Curgenven. Archive.org. <[URL]> (5 March 2015).
Blake, Norman. 1981. Non-Standard Language in English Literature. London: André Deutsch.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 1990. The development of discourse markers in English. In Historical Linguistics and Philology, Jacek Fisiak (ed.), 45–71. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008. The Comment Clause in English. Syntactic Origins and Pragmatic Development. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010. Discourse markers. In Historical Pragmatics, Andreas H. Jucker & Irma Taavitsainen (eds), 285–314. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Carleton, William. 1843. Traits and stories of the Irish peasantry. Archive.org. <[URL]> (30 October 2015).
Culpeper, Jonathan & Kytö, Merja. 2010. Early Modern English Dialogues. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Defour, Tine. 2008. The speaker’s voice. A diachronic study on the use of well and now as pragmatic markers. English Text Construction 1(1): 62–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
English Dialect Dictionary Online. <[URL]> (5 November 2015).
Heuberger, Reinhard. 2010. Retrieving pragmatic information in Joseph Wright’s English Dialect Dictionary Online: Methods, benefits, problems. In Joseph Wright’s English Dialect Dictionary and Beyond, Manfred Markus, Clive Upton & Reinhard Heuberger (eds), 153–166. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Jacobs, Andreas & Jucker, Andreas. 1995. The historical perspective in pragmatics. In Historical Pragmatics. Pragmatic Developments in the History of English [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 35] Andreas H. Jucker (ed.), 3–36. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H. 1997. The discourse marker well in the history of English. English Language and Linguistics 1(1): 91–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010. Trends and developments in historical pragmatics. In Historical Pragmatics, Andreas H. Jucker & Irma Taavitsainen (eds), 3–30. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kallen, Jeffrey L. 2006. Arrah, like, you know: The dynamics of discourse marking in ICE-Ireland. Sociolinguistics Symposium 16, Limerick, 6–8 July 2006 <[URL]> (5 November 2015).
Koch, Peter & Oesterreicher, Wulf. 1985. Sprache der Nähe – Sprache der Distanz. Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit im Spannungsfeld von Sprachtheorie und Sprachgeschichte. Romanistisches Jahrbuch 36: 15–43.Google Scholar
Markus, Manfred. 2008. Joseph Wright's English Dialect Dictionary Computerised: A Platform for a New Historical English Dialect Geography. In Historical Englishes in Varieties of Texts and Contexts. The Global COE Programme, International Conference 2007, Masachiyo Amano, Michiko Ogura & Masayuki Ohkado (eds), 335–353. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
. 2015. Spoken features of interjections in English dialect (Based on Joseph Wright’s English Dialect Dictionary) . In Developments in English. Expanding Electronic Evidence, Irma Taavitsainen, Merja Kytö, Claudia Claridge & Jeremy Smith (eds), 116–134. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Markus, Manfred, Upton, Clive & Heuberger, Reinhard. 2010. Joseph Wright’s English Dialect Dictionary and Beyond. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Hansen, Maj-Britt Mosegaard & Rossari, Corinne. 2005. The evolution of pragmatic markers. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 6(2): 177–187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nicholson, John. 1843. Historical and traditional tales in prose and verse. Archive.org. <[URL]> (6 March 2015).
Schneider, Klaus P. & Barron, Anne. 2008. Variational Pragmatics. A Focus on Regional Varieties in Pluricentric Languages [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 178]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schourup, Lawrence. 1999. Discourse markers. Lingua 107: 227–265. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scott, Walter. 1893. Rob Roy. Project Gutenberg. <[URL]> (6 March 2015).
Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd edn., s.v. “arrah, aweel, lor’.”
Wright, Joseph. 1898–1905. The English Dialect Dictionary, 6 Vols. Oxford: Henry Frowde.Google Scholar