Discourse marker = discourse particle = thetical = modal particle? A futile comparison
Abstract
Data regarding three claims concerning the syntax of modal particles will be presented. The first claim is that modal particles (MPs) are a category of particles that is different from other discourse markers, and that they are found only in German, a few Germanic languages and possibly in Russian, but not in Romance languages and in English. The second claim states that MPs as illocutive operators are free grammatical morphemes. If this claim is correct, it debunks the attempts of entire generations of researchers to identify the word class of MPs and put them on a par with lexical discourse markers. The third claim further develops Hohle’s (1982), Jacobs’ (1992), and Klein’s (1998) arguments for a decomposition of Fin(iteness): i.e. that Fin should be understood to involve two independent components - agreement and truth valuation. The mediating empirical components are emphasized assertion and polarity accent (verum focus [VF]). An important conclusion will be that MPs and VF are intimately related before a semantic and pragmatic background.
Abstract
Data regarding three claims concerning the syntax of modal particles will be presented. The first claim is that modal particles (MPs) are a category of particles that is different from other discourse markers, and that they are found only in German, a few Germanic languages and possibly in Russian, but not in Romance languages and in English. The second claim states that MPs as illocutive operators are free grammatical morphemes. If this claim is correct, it debunks the attempts of entire generations of researchers to identify the word class of MPs and put them on a par with lexical discourse markers. The third claim further develops Hohle’s (1982), Jacobs’ (1992), and Klein’s (1998) arguments for a decomposition of Fin(iteness): i.e. that Fin should be understood to involve two independent components - agreement and truth valuation. The mediating empirical components are emphasized assertion and polarity accent (verum focus [VF]). An important conclusion will be that MPs and VF are intimately related before a semantic and pragmatic background.
Chapters in this book
- Frontmatter i
- Contents v
- The status quo of research on discourse particles in syntax and semantics 1
- The syntax and semantics of discourse particles 15
- What you see is what you get: Chinese sentence-final particles as head-final complementizers 49
- The syntax of Swedish modal particles 78
- Discourse particles and hvað-exclamatives 100
- Root infinitivals and modal particles. An interim report 115
- Modal particles ≠ modal particles (= modal particles) 144
- Discourse particles “embedded”: German ja in adjectival phrases 173
- Combining ja and doch: A case of discourse structural iconicity 203
- Discourse marker = discourse particle = thetical = modal particle? A futile comparison 241
- Stressed and unstressed particles in Old Indic 281
- On the status and the interpretation of the left-peripheral sentence particles inu and ia in Old High German 304
- Index 332
Chapters in this book
- Frontmatter i
- Contents v
- The status quo of research on discourse particles in syntax and semantics 1
- The syntax and semantics of discourse particles 15
- What you see is what you get: Chinese sentence-final particles as head-final complementizers 49
- The syntax of Swedish modal particles 78
- Discourse particles and hvað-exclamatives 100
- Root infinitivals and modal particles. An interim report 115
- Modal particles ≠ modal particles (= modal particles) 144
- Discourse particles “embedded”: German ja in adjectival phrases 173
- Combining ja and doch: A case of discourse structural iconicity 203
- Discourse marker = discourse particle = thetical = modal particle? A futile comparison 241
- Stressed and unstressed particles in Old Indic 281
- On the status and the interpretation of the left-peripheral sentence particles inu and ia in Old High German 304
- Index 332
