Cover not available
Part of
Exploring Intensification: Synchronic, diachronic and cross-linguistic perspectives
Edited by Maria Napoli and Miriam Ravetto
[Studies in Language Companion Series 189] 2017
► pp. 231–250

Chapter 11
A pragmatic view on intensification

Expansions in German and Italian

| Istituto Italiano di Studi Germanici (Roma)
The aim of this paper is to show that Expansionen (‘expansions’), a category belonging to the grammar of spoken German, in addition to other functions described in previous studies (Salzmann 2017), can serve as intensifiers both in German and Italian. For this purpose, I will first define the concept of expansion and afterwards establish a definition of intensification that can be applied to the analysis of expansions. Intensification is considered as a phenomenon with both semantic and pragmatic aspects, which can be analysed at all levels of the speech act (locution, illocution and perlocution). The central part of this article is dedicated to the interpretation of various examples from a bilingual corpus of academic talks held at conferences.
Keywords: expansions, intensification, illocutionary force modification, semantic upgrading, pragmatic upgrading
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Expansions
  • 3.Intensification: An overview
    • 3.1Defining intensification
    • 3.2Intensification between semantics and pragmatics
    • 3.3Résumé
  • 4.Expansions with an intensifying function
    • 4.1Adjectives with an intensifying semantics
    • 4.2Adverbs of validity
    • 4.3Coordinating structures
    • 4.4Dialogue particles
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 30 September 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.189.12sal
References (24)
References
Athanasiadou, Angeliki. 2007. On the subjectivity of intensifiers. Language Sciences 29(4): 554–565. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Auer, Peter. 2009. On-line syntax. Thoughts on the temporality of spoken language. Language Sciences 31: 1–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1992. The neverending sentence. Rightward expansion in spoken language. In Studies in Spoken Languages. English, German, Finno-Ugric, Miklós Kontra & Tamás Váradi (eds), 41–59. Budapest: Linguistics Institute, Hungarian Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
. 1991. Vom Ende deutscher Sätze. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik 19: 139–157. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Austin, John L. 1975. How to do Things with Words. Oxford: Clarendon Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bazzanella, Carla. 2001. Segnali discorsivi. In Grande grammatica Italiana di consultazione, III: Tipi di frase, deissi, formazione delle parole, Lorenzo Renzi, Giampaolo Salvi & Anna Cardinaletti (eds), 225–257. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Bazzanella, Carla, Caffi, Claudia and Sbisà, Marina. 1991. Scalar dimensions of illocutionary force. In Speech acts. Fiction or reality?, Igor Z. Zagar (ed.), 63–76. Ljubljana: IPRA Distribution Center for Jugoslavia.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1972. Degree Words. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cimaglia, Riccardo. 2010. Intensificatori. Enciclopedia dell’italiano. <[URL]> (19 June 2017).
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Ono, Tsuyoshi. 2007. ‘Incrementing’ in conversation. A comparison of practices in English, German and Japanese. Pragmatics 17(4): 513–552. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cresti, Emanuela. 2000. Corpus di italiano parlato. Firenze: La Crusca.Google Scholar
Dressler, Wolfgang U. & Merlini Barbaresi, Lavinia. 1994. Morphopragmatics. Diminutives and Intensifiers in Italian, German and other languages. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duden. 20169. Die Grammatik, Berlin: Dudenverlag.Google Scholar
Ehlich, Konrad. 1993. Deutsch als fremde Wissenschaftssprache. Jahrbuch Deutsch als Fremdsprache 19: 13–42. Munich: Iudicium.Google Scholar
Ghesquière, Lobke & Davidse, Kristin. 2011. The development of intensification scales in noun-intensifying uses of adjectives. Sources, paths and mechanisms of change. English Language and Linguistics 1(2): 251–277. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday life. New York NY: Doubleday and Company.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Christopher & McNally, Louise. 2005. Scale structure and the semantic typology of gradable predicates. Language 81(2): 345–381. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salzmann, Katharina. 2017. Expansionen in der deutschen und italienischen Wissenschaftssprache. Kontrastive Korpusanalyse und sprachdidaktische Überlegungen. Berlin: Erich Schmidt.
Searle, John. 1969. Speech Acts. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selting, Margret, Auer, Peter, Barth-Weingarten, Dagmar et al. 2009. Gesprächsanalytisches Transkriptionssystem 2 (GAT 2). Gesprächsforschung – Online Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion 10: 353–402. <[URL].> (19 June 2017).
Schegloff, Emanuel. 1996. Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In Interaction and Grammar, Elinor Ochs, Emanuel Schgeloff & Sandra Thompson (eds), 52–133. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Os, Charles. 1989. Aspekte der Intensivierung im Deutschen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Vorreiter, Susanne. 2003. Turn-continuations. Towards a Cross-Linguistic Classification. InLiSt 39. <[URL]> (19 June 2017).
Weinrich, Harald. 20053. Textgrammatik der deutschen Sprache. Hildesheim: Georg Holms.Google Scholar