Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
This article is aimed at making a cross-linguistic analysis of evidentials and their meaning in German and Kazakh argumentative discourse. It provides an overview of similarities and differences of expression of evidentials in two typologically different languages. The comparative analysis of the argumentation in the cognitive-intercultural aspect using the example of typologically different languages makes it possible to find out the peculiarities of expressive means of this category in the discourse. In the present paper, we made an attempt to define the types of grammatical means of evidentials that determine the source of information since they contribute greatly to the development of cognitive-pragmatic functions in the discourse. Evidentiality expresses a source of information and reflects the subjective opinion of the speaker, the degree of the speaker"s knowledge of the objective situation and his/her beliefs, assumptions, and attitudes to objective reality in the argumentative discourse. The conducted linguistic analysis in two typologically different languages helped to identify two basic types of information that determine the subjective character of argumentative discoursereliable and indirect information. Argumentation is based on reliable information known to the subject due to his/her personal experience or observations. On the indirect information, the subject cannot pass a reliable judgment without making certain logical conclusions. The cross-linguistic analysis of evidentials and their meaning in German and Kazakh argumentative discourse showed that the speaker"s degree of awareness and nature of knowledge, and the degree of subjective confidence in the reliability of the things said are reflected in the semantics of modal words.
This article is aimed at making a cross-linguistic analysis of evidentials and their meaning in German and Kazakh argumentative discourse. It provides an overview of similarities and differences of expression of evidentials in two typologically different languages. The comparative analysis of the argumentation in the cognitive-intercultural aspect using the example of typologically different languages makes it possible to find out the peculiarities of expressive means of this category in the discourse. In the present paper, we made an attempt to define the types of grammatical means of evidentials that determine the source of information since they contribute greatly to the development of cognitive-pragmatic functions in the discourse. Evidentiality expresses a source of information and reflects the subjective opinion of the speaker, the degree of the speaker"s knowledge of the objective situation and his/her beliefs, assumptions, and attitudes to objective reality in the argumentative discourse. The conducted linguistic analysis in two typologically different languages helped to identify two basic types of information that determine the subjective character of argumentative discoursereliable and indirect information. Argumentation is based on reliable information known to the subject due to his/her personal experience or observations. On the indirect information, the subject cannot pass a reliable judgment without making certain logical conclusions. The cross-linguistic analysis of evidentials and their meaning in German and Kazakh argumentative discourse showed that the speaker"s degree of awareness and nature of knowledge, and the degree of subjective confidence in the reliability of the things said are reflected in the semantics of modal words.
This paper reveals how journalists’ age influences the linguistic representation of causal relations in English news magazine articles. Treating cause in a broad sense covering adverbials and clauses of reason, concession, purpose and result, the study finds that causal relations are scarce in the texts of young reporters. Unlike them, middle-aged authors’ articles demonstrate a 17-per-cent-higher frequency of adverbials and clauses of reason, and older journalists’ texts show a 12-per-cent rise in concessive clauses with the temporal concessive, comparative concessive, alternative concessive, conditional concessive and generalizing concessive relations. To account for these findings, I apply Talmy’s (1985) force dynamics theory viewing cause as an interaction of entities concerning force and energy where one causes another. Given this theory, middle-aged journalists verbalise causal relations grounded in what I call energy transfer model with one moving entity causing another to move, and energy loss model where inactivity of one entity is due to blocking of the other entity. In older authors’ articles, causal relations are represented by concessive clauses introduced by a range of conjunctions specifying concessive meaning: temporal concessive, comparative concessive, alternative concessive, conditional concessive and generalizing concessive.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.