(Non-)Determining the Original Speaker: Reportative Particles versus Verbs

Larraitz Zubeldia

doi:10.2478/v10015-012-0014-8

Authors

Larraitz Zubeldia ILCLI. University of the Basque Country

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.2478/v10015-012-0014-8

Keywords:

Basque, pragmatics, semantics, proposition

Abstract

This work argues that the Basque reportative particle omen contributes to the propositional contents of the utterance, and it is not an illocutionary force indicator, contrary to what seems to be suggested by the standard view on omen. The results of the application of the assent/dissent test for the case of omen show that subjects not only accept a rejection of the reported content (p), but also a rejection of the evidential content (pomen) itself. The results are similar to those of the verb esan ‘to say’. It is, then, proposed that the difference between these two elements can be explained by distinguishing between the contents of the utterances (with Korta & Perry 2007, 2011), regarding the (non-)articulation of the original speaker.

Author Biography

Larraitz Zubeldia, ILCLI. University of the Basque Country

Larraitz Zubeldia is a postdoctoral researcher at the Institute ILCLI (University of the Basque Country), within the postdoctoral program of the Basque Government. She obtained her PhD in Basque Philology, in 2010, with a dissertation on the semantics and pragmatics of the Basque particle omen.

References

Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. (2004). “Evidentiality. Problems and challenges”. In P. van Sterkenburg (Ed.), Linguistics today: facing a greater challenge (1-29). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Google Scholar

Beaver, David I. (2001). “Presuppositions and how to spot them”. In D. Beaver, Presupposition and assertion in dynamic semantics (7-30). Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Google Scholar

Etxepare, Ricardo (2010). “Omen bariazioan”. In B. Fernandez, P. Albizu & R. Etxepare (Eds.), Euskara eta euskarak: aldakortasun sintaktikoa aztergai (85-112). Bilbao: UPV-EHU.
Google Scholar

Euskaltzaindia (1987). Euskal gramatika. Lehen urratsak II. Bilbao.
Google Scholar

Faller, Martina T. (2002). Semantics and pragmatics of evidentials in Cuzco Quechua. PhD dissertation, Stanford University.
Google Scholar

Faller, Martina (2006). “Evidentiality below and above speech acts” (manuscript, preparing to print, in C. Paradis & L. Egberg, Functions of language on evidentiality). http://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/martina.t.faller/documents/EvidentialityAbove.Below.pdf [created in 12th May 2006]
Google Scholar

Garrett, Edward John (2001). Evidentiality and assertion in Tibetan. PhD dissertation, University of California.
Google Scholar

Green, Mitchell S. (2000). “Illocutionary force and semantic content”. Linguistics and philosophy, 23, 435-473.
Google Scholar

Grice, Paul (1967a). “Logic and conversation”. In D. Davidson & G. Harman (Eds.) (1975), The logic of grammar (64-75). Encino: Dickenson. Also published in P. Cole & J.L. Morgan (Eds.) (1975), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech acts (41-58). New York: Academic Press. Reprinted in P. Grice (1989), Studies in the way of words (22-40). Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.
Google Scholar

Grice, Paul (1967b). “Further notes on logic and conversation”. In P. Cole (Ed.) (1978), Syntax and semantics 9: Pragmatics (113-128). New York: Academic Press. Reprinted in P. Grice (1989), Studies in the way of words (41-57). Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.
Google Scholar

Ifantidou, Elly (2001). Evidentials and relevance. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. PhD thesis.
Google Scholar

Izvorski, Roumyana (1997). “The present perfect as an epistemic modal”. In A. Lawson (Ed.), SALT VII (222-239). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
Google Scholar

Jendraschek, Gerd (2003). La modalité épistémique en basque. Muenchen: Lincom Europa.
Google Scholar

Kaplan, David (1989). “Demonstratives”. In J. Almog, J. Perry & H. Wettstein (Eds.), Themes from Kaplan (481-563). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Korta, Kepa & John Perry (2007). “How to say things with words”. In S.L. Tsohatzidis (Ed.), John Searle's philosophy of language: force, meaning, and thought (169-189). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Korta, Kepa & John Perry (2011). Critical pragmatics: An inquiry into reference and communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Korta, Kepa & John Perry (2013). “Highlights of Critical Pragmatics: reference and the contents of the utterance”. Intercultural Pragmatics, 10 (1), 161-182.
Google Scholar

Korta, Kepa & Larraitz Zubeldia (2014). “The contribution of evidentials to utterance content: Evidence from the Basque reportative particle omen. Language, to appear.
Google Scholar

Kratzer, Angelika (1981). “The notional category of modality”. In H.-J. Eikmeyer & H. Reiser (Eds.), Words, worlds, and contexts: New approaches in word semantics (38- 74). New York: De Gruyter.
Google Scholar

Kratzer, Angelika (1991). “Modality”. In A. Von Stechow & D. Wunderlich (Eds.), An internacional handbook of contemporary research (639-650). Berlin: de Gruyter.
Google Scholar

Matthewson, Lisa, Henry Davis & Hotze Rullmann (2007). “Evidentials as epistemic modals: Evidence from St’át’imcets”. In J. Van Craenenbroeck (Ed.), Linguistics variation yearbook 2007 (201-254). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Google Scholar

Matthewson, Lisa (2013). “Evidence about evidentials: Where fieldwork meets theory”. In B. Stolterfoht & S. Featherston (Eds.), Proceedings of linguistic evidence. Berlin: De Gruyter. To appear. http://www.linguistics.ubc.ca/sites/default/files/LingEvidpaperMatthewson.pdf [created on 9th April 2011].
Google Scholar

McCready, Eric & Norry Ogata (2007). “Evidentiality, modality and probability”. Linguistics and Philosophy, 30, 147-206.
Google Scholar

Mitxelena, Luis (1987). Orotariko euskal hiztegia. Bilbao: Euskaltzaindia.
Google Scholar

Murray, Sara (2010). Evidentiality and the structure of speech acts. Ph.D. dissertation, Rutgers.
Google Scholar

Noveck, Ira (2001). “Where children are more logical than adults: experimental investigations of scalar implicature”. Cognition, 78, 165-188.
Google Scholar

Perry, John (2001/2012). Reference and reflexivity. Stanford, California: CSLI Publications.
Google Scholar

Peterson, Tyler (2010). Epistemic modality and evidentiality in Gitksan at the Semantics- Pragmatics interface. PhD dissertation, The University of British Columbia.
Google Scholar

Potts, Christopher (2007). “Conventional implicatures, a distinguished class of meaning”. In G. Ramchand & C. Reiss (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic interfaces (475-501). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Recanati, François (1989). “The pragmatics of what is said”. Mind and Language, 4, 295-329. Reprinted in S. Davis (Ed.) (1991), Pragmatics: a reader (97-120). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Recanati, François (1993). “Availability and the scope principle”. In F. Recanati (Ed.), Direct reference: from language to thought (269-274). Oxford & Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers.
Google Scholar

Sarasola, Ibon (1996). Euskal hiztegia. Donostia: Kutxa Gizarte- eta Kultur Fundazioa (2nd edition in 2007, Donostia: Elkar).
Google Scholar

Sauerland, Uli & Mathias Schenner (2007). “Shifting evidentials in Bulgarian”. In E. Puig-Waldm ller (Ed.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 11 (525-539). Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
Google Scholar

Schenner, Mathias (2008). “Double face evidentials in German: reportative ‘sollen’ and ‘wollen’ in embedded contexts”. In A. Grønn (Ed.), Proceedings of SuB12 (552- 566). Oslo: University of Oslo.
Google Scholar

Schenner, Mathias (2009). “Semantics of evidentials: German reportative modals”. In S. Blaho, C. Constantinescu & B. Le Bruyn (Eds.), Proceedings of ConSOLE XVI (179- 198), Paris. http://media.leidenuniv.nl/legacy/console16-schenner.pdf
Google Scholar

Searle, John R. (1969). Speech acts. An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Soames, Scott (1989). “Presupposition”. In D. Gabbay & F. Guenthner (Eds.), Handbook of philosophical logic. Vol. IV. Topics in the philosophy of language (552- 616). Dordrecht: Reidel.
Google Scholar

Sperber, Dan & Deirdre Wilson (1986/1995). Relevance. Communication & cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
Google Scholar

Waldie, Ryan; Tyler Peterson; Hotze Rullmann & Scott Mackie (2009). “Evidentials as epistemic modals or speech act operators: testing the tests”. Paper presented at the Workshop on the Structure and Constituency of Languages of the Americas 14, Purdue University.
Google Scholar

Wilson, Deirdre (2011). “The conceptual-procedural distinction: past, present and future”. In V. Escandell-Vidal, M. Leonetti & A. Ahern (Eds.), Procedural meaning: problems and perspectives (Current research in the Semantics/Pragmatics interface, Volume 25) (3-31). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Google Scholar

Zubeldia, Larraitz (2010). ‘Omen’ partikularen azterketa semantikoa eta pragmatikoa. PhD dissertation. UPV-EHU.
Google Scholar

Azurmendi, Joxe (2006). Espainiaren arimaz. Donostia: Elkar.
Google Scholar

Oral corpus. Data collected by the recordings made along with my colleague Asier Aizpurua, in 2001.
Google Scholar

Perurena, Patziku (2004). Harrizko pareta erdiurratuak. Bilbo: Euskaltzaindia.
Google Scholar

Quiroga, Horacio (2009). Eguzki kolpea. Irun; Donostia: Alberdania-Elkar (translator: Jesus Mari Mendizabal).
Google Scholar