Foregrounding evidentiality in (English) academic discourse: Patterned co-occurrences of the sensory perception verbs seem and appear

Fetzer, Anita

doi:10.1515/ip-2014-0016

Cited by 15 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, Marín-Arrese (2015, 217) claims that must should be categorised as an epistemic modal, though "with evidential nuances derived from its conclusional force". The present study aligns with the view that the explicitness of contextual evidence may serve as a sign of evidential meaning and status of the marker (Mortelmans 2000;Wiemer & Kampf 2012;Fetzer 2014). The distinction between modal and evidential markers based on "evaluation" and "assertion" of evidence seems to be quite complex.…”

Section: The Category Of Epistemicity and Previous Accounts Of Likelysupporting

confidence: 86%

“…In (23) and (24), there is explicit reference to evidence that justifies the proposition. As shown in Fetzer (2014), the co-occurrence of the verbs seem, appear, must and may with the noun evidence highlights their evidential contexts of use. In (23)- (26), the evidence is both asserted and evaluated and thus this use of likely and tikėtina 'believable, likely' can be treated as evidential epistemic.…”

Section: Modifiersmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…In terms of evidential epistemic meaning overlap, the most widely discussed markers are the verbs must (van der Auwera & Plungian 1998;Mortelmans 2000;Ramat & Topadze 2007;Squartini 2008;de Haan 2009;Cornillie 2009;Šinkūnienė & Van Olmen 2012;Fetzer 2014;Marín-Arrese 2015) and seem and their cognates in other Germanic and Romance languages (Johansson 2001;de Haan 2007;Aijmer 2009;Usonienė & Šinkūnienė 2013). Close contextual analysis of these verbs reveals that either their evidential or epistemic meaning component is foregrounded depending on the context.…”

Section: The Category Of Epistemicity and Previous Accounts Of Likelymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Epistemic qualifications of the English marker likely and its equivalents in Lithuanian

Ruskan¹

2017

KLB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study focuses on the epistemic qualifications realised by the English adjective and adverb likely and its equivalents in Lithuanian panašu 'likely, it seems' and tikėtina 'believable, likely', which derive from the semantic domain of comparison and belief. The aim of the study is to identify the functional similarities and differences of the markers in terms of their frequency, syntactic features (Complement-Taking-Predicates (CTPs), adverbials), functions, collocational profile and type of discourse (academic, newspaper). The English and Lithuanian data were drawn from the monolingual corpora, namely the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA), Corpus of the Contemporary Lithuanian Language (CCLL), Corpus of Academic Lithuanian (CorALit) and the bidirectional parallel corpus ParaCorp ENàLTàEN . The quantitative and qualitative findings reveal that the closest cross-linguistic CTP and adverbial equivalents are likely and tikėtina 'believable, likely' because they are most frequent in formal registers (academic, newspaper discourse) and display similar collocational profiles and contexts of use. In contexts with explicit evidence and argumentation, they may acquire evidential functions. Although the CTP and adverbial panašu 'likely, it seems' shares similarities with likely and tikėtina 'believable, likely' in expressing the author's degree of probability, it shows a different semantic profile from the latter due to its conceptual link with the original meaning of similarity and appearances. The study shows how markers that derive from the semantic domain of comparison vary in functional distribution in present-day English and Lithuanian and introduces their functional equivalents deriving from a different semantic domain.

show abstract

Section: The Category Of Epistemicity and Previous Accounts Of Likelysupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Modifiersmentioning

confidence: 88%

Section: The Category Of Epistemicity and Previous Accounts Of Likelymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Epistemic qualifications of the English marker likely and its equivalents in Lithuanian

Ruskan¹

2017

KLB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the other hand, Chafe (1986: 262-271) and some recent research (Koutsantoni 2005, Bednarek 2006, Fetzer 2014) support the broad view, which not only refers to the source of the knowledge or information but also evaluates the degree of certainty in the proposition. The discourse reveals to what extent the proposition by the speaker/writer is confi dent and reliable.…”

Section: Evidentialitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Contrastive Interlanguage Analysis of Evidentiality in PHD Dissertations

Yıldız

Turan

2021

D&I

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study investigates evidentiality in its broadest sense (Chafe 1986) in PhD dissertations as a genre of academic writing. For this purpose, Chafe’s taxonomy (1986), revised by Ifantidou (2001), has been used as a framework in order to analyze three different groups of datasets, including one group of native speakers of English and two groups of non-native speakers: a group of Turkish speakers of English and the other non-native speakers with diff erent L1 backgrounds. The texts of these three groups are examined in order to fi nd out whether the native language of the participants is a factor in the choice of evidential markers. The results show that the native speakers of English use evidential markers more frequently compared to the non-native authors. In terms of the Native Language/Interlanguage comparison in Contrastive Interlanguage Analysis (Granger 1996, 1998), the overall use of evidentiality reveals that non-native authors do not show native-like features in the use of evidentiality. In terms of the Interlanguage/Interlanguage comparison, Turkish authors of academic texts diff er from the authors with various native language backgrounds in terms of the use of evidentiality.

show abstract

“…The paper will examine the frequency of the adverbials, their position, scope, functions, co-occurrence with argumentative markers and the type of discourse they occur in. As Lampert and Lampert (2010), Wiemer and Kampf (2012), Usonienė (2013) and Fetzer (2014) have all demonstrated, the functional identification of evidential markers in European languages is to a large extent context dependent.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

Evidential adverbials in Lithuanian: a corpus-based study

Ruskan¹

2015

Klbt

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study examines the functional distribution of the adverbials akivaizdžiai 'evidently', aiškiai 'clearly', ryškiai 'visibly/clearly', tariamai 'allegedly/supposedly' and aišku 'clearly/of course' in Lithuanian fiction and academic discourse. The aim of the study is to identify the evidential and/or pragmatic functions of perception and communication-based adverbials which can be traced synchronically to different syntactic environment (a predication manner adverbial and a CTP clause). The paper examines the frequency of these adverbials, their position, scope, functions, cooccurrence with argumentative markers, word class (adverb or non-agreeing adjective) and the type of discourse they occur in. The research is conducted by applying a corpusbased methodology and the data are obtained from the Corpus of the Contemporary Lithuanian Language, namely from the subcorpus of fiction, and the Corpus of Academic Lithuanian.The perception-based adverbials akivaizdžiai 'evidently', aiškiai 'clearly', ryškiai 'clearly/visibly' and aišku 'clearly/of course' denote inferences drawn from perceptual and conceptual evidence and contribute to persuasive authorial argumentation, while the communication-based adverbial tariamai 'allegedly/supposedly' functions as a hearsay marker. The latter may also be used as an epistemic marker which refers to unreal or imagined situations. In contexts of common knowledge, the adverbial aišku 'clearly/of course' acquires interactional and textual functions and thus reveals traces of pragmaticalisation. In academic discourse, it signals interaction with the addressee and links units of discourse, while in fiction it functions as a speech act modifier in a variety of emotive contexts. The pragmaticalisation of aišku 'clearly/of course' is also marked by its high frequency, positional mobility (initial, medial, final) and scopal variability (clausal, phrasal). Alongside its discrete evidential and pragmatic functions, the adverbial aišku 'clearly/of course' displays the merger of the two functions. The 105 adverbials akivaizdžiai 'evidently', aiškiai 'clearly', ryškiai 'visibly/clearly' and tariamai 'allegedly/supposedly' do not acquire a pragmatic function, which is indicated by their frequency and position. The results of the present study corroborate the findings of previous studies that common sources of evidential adverbials and pragmatic markers in Lithuanian are verb-based, adjective-based and noun-based CTP clauses.

show abstract

Foregrounding evidentiality in (English) academic discourse: Patterned co-occurrences of the sensory perception verbs seem and appear

Cited by 15 publications

References 10 publications

Epistemic qualifications of the English marker likely and its equivalents in Lithuanian

Epistemic qualifications of the English marker likely and its equivalents in Lithuanian

Contrastive Interlanguage Analysis of Evidentiality in PHD Dissertations

Evidential adverbials in Lithuanian: a corpus-based study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About