Chapter 2. On the dynamicity of evidential scales
-
María Estellés
Abstract
Based on examples from academic papers and parliamentary debates in Spain, the present paper studies a particular phenomenon within evidentiality, which is called ‘pragmatic indirectness’ in this work. This phenomenon involves examples in which evidentiality is expressed formally in a certain way (for instance, it is presented as reporting someone else’s words), but where the meaning conveys a different kind of evidentiality (for example, it is actually obtained through a process of reasoning). The existence of this phenomenon can be explained by the facts that
-
Evidentials are organised according to scales: some evidentials are considered more preferable than are others, as the degrees of preference are changeable and determined contextually; and
-
Speakers accommodate their discourse to these scales (more or less) strategically, depending on their intentions and goals, as well as on the expectations raised by the context; and they do so by
-
Choosing the evidence best ranked in a particular context and, if not available,
-
By concealing the (less preferable) evidence they have available in the guise of evidentials located higher in the ranking.
-
Special attention will be paid to the role of discursive genres in the use and values of pragmatic indirectness in evidentiality.
Abstract
Based on examples from academic papers and parliamentary debates in Spain, the present paper studies a particular phenomenon within evidentiality, which is called ‘pragmatic indirectness’ in this work. This phenomenon involves examples in which evidentiality is expressed formally in a certain way (for instance, it is presented as reporting someone else’s words), but where the meaning conveys a different kind of evidentiality (for example, it is actually obtained through a process of reasoning). The existence of this phenomenon can be explained by the facts that
-
Evidentials are organised according to scales: some evidentials are considered more preferable than are others, as the degrees of preference are changeable and determined contextually; and
-
Speakers accommodate their discourse to these scales (more or less) strategically, depending on their intentions and goals, as well as on the expectations raised by the context; and they do so by
-
Choosing the evidence best ranked in a particular context and, if not available,
-
By concealing the (less preferable) evidence they have available in the guise of evidentials located higher in the ranking.
-
Special attention will be paid to the role of discursive genres in the use and values of pragmatic indirectness in evidentiality.
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Chapter 1. Evidentiality in discourse 1
- Chapter 2. On the dynamicity of evidential scales 25
- Chapter 3. Exploring evidentiality in Spanish Biology articles (1850–1920) 49
- Chapter 4. Performing the self in illness narratives 73
- Chapter 5. Evidentiality, deonticity and intensification in Internet forum language 107
- Chapter 6. Prosody, genres and evidentiality in Spanish 125
- Chapter 7. ‘No sé’ 147
- Chapter 8. The Spanish quotative según across written genres 173
- Chapter 9. según along time 205
- Chapter 10. Tenses in interaction 223
- Index 251
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Chapter 1. Evidentiality in discourse 1
- Chapter 2. On the dynamicity of evidential scales 25
- Chapter 3. Exploring evidentiality in Spanish Biology articles (1850–1920) 49
- Chapter 4. Performing the self in illness narratives 73
- Chapter 5. Evidentiality, deonticity and intensification in Internet forum language 107
- Chapter 6. Prosody, genres and evidentiality in Spanish 125
- Chapter 7. ‘No sé’ 147
- Chapter 8. The Spanish quotative según across written genres 173
- Chapter 9. según along time 205
- Chapter 10. Tenses in interaction 223
- Index 251
