John Benjamins Publishing Company
How can I lie if I am telling the truth?
Abstract
The major part of my contribution will concentrate on the close relation between epistemic modality and evidentiality and the notions of truth value, indirect speech acts and conversational implicature (cf. Kosta 2005; Kosta 2011b). It is well attested in the literature that the epistemic modal adverb Russian očevidno, Czech očividně, German offensichtlich, Italian ovviamente can have different interpretation depending on the conversation situation, truth values and scope relations (cf. Kosta 2011a; von Fintel and Gillies 2010; Kratzer 2010). Even a bona fide “epistemic” modal can have two interpretations: a ‘strong’ interpretation, which – at least with necessity modals – commits the speaker to the truth of the proposition the modal scopes over (von Fintel and Gillies 2010), and a ‘weak’ interpretation, which is relativized to the content of some source of information that may or may not be faithful to reality. In order to be able to decide whether epistemic particles and modals are strong or weak we have to differentiate between different sources of conversational backgrounds. Following the findings in the research of notional category of modals in Kratzer (2010), the proposed analysis of modals allows for one modal parameter to be fixed by the context of use. It implies that that parameter is responsible for the variety of interpretations modals can receive.
Abstract
The major part of my contribution will concentrate on the close relation between epistemic modality and evidentiality and the notions of truth value, indirect speech acts and conversational implicature (cf. Kosta 2005; Kosta 2011b). It is well attested in the literature that the epistemic modal adverb Russian očevidno, Czech očividně, German offensichtlich, Italian ovviamente can have different interpretation depending on the conversation situation, truth values and scope relations (cf. Kosta 2011a; von Fintel and Gillies 2010; Kratzer 2010). Even a bona fide “epistemic” modal can have two interpretations: a ‘strong’ interpretation, which – at least with necessity modals – commits the speaker to the truth of the proposition the modal scopes over (von Fintel and Gillies 2010), and a ‘weak’ interpretation, which is relativized to the content of some source of information that may or may not be faithful to reality. In order to be able to decide whether epistemic particles and modals are strong or weak we have to differentiate between different sources of conversational backgrounds. Following the findings in the research of notional category of modals in Kratzer (2010), the proposed analysis of modals allows for one modal parameter to be fixed by the context of use. It implies that that parameter is responsible for the variety of interpretations modals can receive.
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Contributors ix
- Introduction and overview 1
-
Part I. Multimodal, grammatical and paralinguistic resources in talk-in-interaction
- Talking out of turn 17
- Reanimating responsibility 35
- Eye behavior in Russian spoken interaction and its correlation with affirmation and negation 63
- Hesitation markers in transitions within (story)telling sequences of Russian television shows 85
-
Part II. Statistical analysis of Russian talk-in-interaction
- Russian everyday utterances 105
- Speech rate as reflection of speaker’s social characteristics 117
-
Part III. Displaying and negotiating epistemic and evidential status and evaluation in interaction
- How evaluation is transferred in oral discourse in Russian 133
- ‘This is how I see it’ 147
- How can I lie if I am telling the truth? 167
-
Part IV. Facework and contextualization in interaction – From (im)politeness to humor
- Irony in the face(s) of politeness 187
- Parliamentary communication 213
- Impoliteness and mock-impoliteness 237
- Humor as staging an utterance 257
-
Part V. Language alternation in face-to-face interaction of bilingual families
- Bilingual language use in the family environment 281
- Russian language maintenance through bedtime story reading? 295
- Index 317
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Contributors ix
- Introduction and overview 1
-
Part I. Multimodal, grammatical and paralinguistic resources in talk-in-interaction
- Talking out of turn 17
- Reanimating responsibility 35
- Eye behavior in Russian spoken interaction and its correlation with affirmation and negation 63
- Hesitation markers in transitions within (story)telling sequences of Russian television shows 85
-
Part II. Statistical analysis of Russian talk-in-interaction
- Russian everyday utterances 105
- Speech rate as reflection of speaker’s social characteristics 117
-
Part III. Displaying and negotiating epistemic and evidential status and evaluation in interaction
- How evaluation is transferred in oral discourse in Russian 133
- ‘This is how I see it’ 147
- How can I lie if I am telling the truth? 167
-
Part IV. Facework and contextualization in interaction – From (im)politeness to humor
- Irony in the face(s) of politeness 187
- Parliamentary communication 213
- Impoliteness and mock-impoliteness 237
- Humor as staging an utterance 257
-
Part V. Language alternation in face-to-face interaction of bilingual families
- Bilingual language use in the family environment 281
- Russian language maintenance through bedtime story reading? 295
- Index 317
