Deverbal pragmatic markers from Latin to Italian (Lat. quaeso and It. prego): The cyclic nature of functional developments

Ghezzi, Chiara; Molinelli, Piera

doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199681600.003.0005

Cited by 15 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is worth noting that the case studies described in these three papers all involve markers whose source meanings are temporal in nature, just like the three previously described by Hansen (2014Hansen ( , 2018c. Although some cases not involving temporality have been described in the literature (Ghezzi & Molinelli 2014, Fedriani & Ghezzi 2014, and Cuenca 1992 -the latter two without explicitly adducing cyclicity as an explanatory concept), this suggests that temporality may be a semantic domain that is particularly prone to trigger cyclic developments.…”

Section: The Papers In This Issuementioning

confidence: 62%

“…1.2 Semantic-pragmatic cycles Most recently, researchers have discovered the existence of semantic-pragmatic cycles, or cycles of pragmaticalization (Ghezzi & Molinelli 2014, Hansen 2014, 2018a, that is, cycles of change affecting linguistic items that express more subjective, context-dependent and non-truth-conditional meanings, such as the speaker's stance, or how the utterance fits into the surrounding discourse, contributes to the common ground etc., i.e. items that function at what Hansen (2008: 16) calls the "context level" of discourse.…”

Section: (Morpho)syntactic Cyclesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The cases of ainz/plutôt and NUNC/or/maintenant are thus examples of onomasiological cycles. An onomasiological cycle in a different domain is illustrated by Ghezzi and Molinelli's (2014) analysis of the related pairs of expressions ROGO and QUAESO in Latin vs Italian chiedo and prego. ROGO and QUAESO both share the content-level source meaning 'I ask/request', and both subsequently developed a context-level function as politeness markers, but for QUAESO this change reached a more advanced stage than in the case of ROGO.…”

Section: (Morpho)syntactic Cyclesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Introduction

Hansen

2020

JHP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Section 1 of my introduction to this Special Issue, I define the concept of semantic–pragmatic cycles, a relatively recently discovered phenomenon, drawing a distinction between two sub-types: onomasiological and semasiological cycles. Semantic–pragmatic cycles are contrasted with the more widely known (morpho-)syntactic cycles such as the Negative Cycle (or Jespersen Cycle), and I discuss possible connections between these two types of cycles. Finally, I raise some questions for further research. In Section 2, I outline the empirical and/or theoretical contribution of each of the six papers that follow – considering, in particular, how they contribute to elucidating the role of pragmatics in cyclic change.

show abstract

Section: The Papers In This Issuementioning

confidence: 62%

Section: (Morpho)syntactic Cyclesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: (Morpho)syntactic Cyclesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Introduction

Hansen

2020

JHP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such markers are typically used in directive acts with benefit to the speaker only, and thus perform a politeness function similar to that of English please. Also in Old Italian we have politeness expressions clearly derived from Latin, namely ti piaccia/piacesse 'may it please you', in the present or imperfect subjunctive (Meszler & Samu 2010: 782, whence (30) (Novellino,11, Such forms, however, never fully pragmaticalized in the history of Italian (note also that li piacesse is syntactically integrated in (30), since it is followed by an implicit completive introduced by di 'that'), where other markers such as per favore and prego 'please' developed instead, the latter from the Latin verb precor 'to pray' (see Ghezzi & Molinelli 2014.…”

Section: Si Placet Vs Ei Bo Ulei: a Pragmatic Calque?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Conditional clauses as polite modifiers in Latin:si placetbetween pragmaticalization and language contact

Fedriani

2021

Trans of the Philol Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article investigates the Latin conditional clause si placet 'if (it) pleases (you)', also considering other functional equivalents such as, among others, si non piget 'if (you) don't mind' and si tibi molestum/grave non est 'if (it) doesn't bother/annoy (you)', which all function as polite modifiers of requests and proposals. It first provides a theoretical assessment of si placet and examines its pragmatic functions in the history of Latin. By considering its distribution across authors and genres, it then suggests patterns of use and argues for a case of contact-induced pragmaticalization. It is shown that the use of si placet as a conditional form expressing politeness is mostly attested in Cicero's dialogues, which are largely inspired by Plato's model, where similar forms such as ei bo ulei, e an bo ul ei 'if you please, if you like' are often found in the very same contexts where si placet occurs in Cicero. It is therefore suggested that this correspondence may be interpreted as the outcome of a pragmatic calque within the relevant discourse tradition of philosophical dialogue, where genre-based conventions were probably replicated through literary imitation.

show abstract

“…Algunos se fundan en predicados de percepción sensible o intelectual, formulados en imperativo, que dan lugar a actos directivos que recaen precisamente sobre el contacto: mira, oye, ¿sabes? (Pons Bordería 1998: 215;Iliescu 2014); otros, como el italiano prego, son verbos realizativos con una función parecida (Ghezzi, Molinelli 2014). Todos estos marcadores se utilizan configurando actos de habla que implican al interlocutor lo que conlleva, como indican Traugott y Dasher (2002: 19-23), un proceso de intersubjetivización, pero en todos ellos su significado léxico sigue parcialmente vigente, aunque no suponga ya estrictamente un sentido conceptual.…”

Section: Emilio Ridruejounclassified

Habilitación y obsolescencia de marcadores discursivos

Ridruejo

2019

10.14746/strop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The starting hypothesis of the article is that the discursive operators of Spanish have not been enabled by grammaticalization processes identical to those of other grammatical components (such as verbal or nominal morphemes or prepositions and conjunctions), since there has been no reduction in the functional scope nor a total bleaching, so that its link with the original lexical items has not disappeared. The consequence is that markers are not integrated into paradigms as closed as grammatical paradigms and both their obsolescence and their renewal, therefore, follow similar patterns to what happens in the evolution of the lexicon. This hypothesis is tried to verify in the article by means of the examination of some discursive markers that, having been used diachronically in Spanish, have been abandoned ina relatively short time.

show abstract

Deverbal pragmatic markers from Latin to Italian (Lat. quaeso and It. prego): The cyclic nature of functional developments

Cited by 15 publications

References 0 publications

Introduction

Introduction

Conditional clauses as polite modifiers in Latin:si placetbetween pragmaticalization and language contact

Habilitación y obsolescencia de marcadores discursivos

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About