Some observations concerning mental verbs and speech act verbs  

Oleh:

Shinzato, Rumiko

Jenis: Article from Journal - ilmiah internasional
Dalam koleksi: Journal of Pragmatics: An Interdiciplinary Journal of Language Studies vol. 36 no. 5 (May 2004), page 861-882.
Topik: Mental verbs; Speech act verbs; Internal reality; Private vs. public domain
Fulltext: Shinzato_Rumiko.pdf (367.91KB)

Isi artikel

By adding further linguistic evidence (e.g., semantic, semiotic and functional similarities) to the studies of Leech (Leech, Geoffrey N., 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. Longman, London) and Nakau (Nakau, Minoru, 1994. Principles of Cognitive Semantics. Taishukan Shoten, Tokyo) on the relationship between mental and speech act verbs, this paper argues that mental verbs (e.g., think) and speech act verbs (e.g., say) essentially depict the same phenomenon, which Dahl (Dahl, O¨ sten, 1997. Egocentricity in Discourse and Syntax. Available from calls ‘internal reality’. The difference is that mental verbs depict the ‘internal reality’ still in the private domain, while speech act verbs refer to the same phenomena made public (i.e., externally manifested). This paper points out that this dichotomy relates to well-known epistemological dichotomies such as ‘ego vs. nonego’ (Akatsuka, Noriko McCawley, 1978. Another look at no, koto, and to: epistemology and complementizer choice in Japanese. In: Hinds, John, Irwin, Howard (Eds.), Problems in Japanese Syntax and Semantics. Kaitakusha, Tokyo, pp. 178–212), ‘experiencing self vs. observing self’ (Lyons, John, 1982. Deixis and subjectivity: loquor, ergo sum? In: Jarvella, R.J., Klein, W. (Eds.), Speech, Place, and Action. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, New York, pp. 101–124; Lyons, John, 1989. Semantic ascent: a neglected aspect of syntactic typology. In: Arnold, G.D. et al., (Eds.), Essays on Grammatical Theory and Universal Grammar. Oxford University Press, London, pp. 153–186), ‘S-perspective vs. O-perspective’ (Iwasaki, Shoichi, 1993. Subjectivity in Grammar and Discourse. John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam) and ‘private vs. public’ (see Dahl, 1997 above). It then argues that such a dichotomy also serves to differentiate self- vs. other- addressed questions, and wish vs. command. That is, the same dichotomy cuts across the three major sentence types (statement, question, and command). Therefore, it is possible to use this dichotomy as a new principle for organizing sentence typology. In addition, this paper notes that this epistemological dichotomy is reflected in the grammaticalization of the verb ‘say’ and the semantic extension of the two Old Japanese question particles ka and ya.

Opini Anda

Klik untuk menuliskan opini Anda tentang koleksi ini!

Kembali