The semantics of particles: advantages of a contrastive and panchronic approach: a study of the polysemy of French déjà and Italian già

Abstract

In this article, we propose a contrastive, panchronic method of semanticpragmatic analysis, which we find particularly useful for uncovering the subtle distinctions of meaning and use that are characteristic of particle(-like expression)s in many languages. By way of illustration, we o¤er an indepth analysis of the synchronic uses and diachronic development of two cognate particles from two Romance languages, namely French déjà and Italian già, equivalent in some of their most salient uses to English already. Synchronically, we have identified fifteen di¤erent uses of déjà and già, of which eight are shared between the two particles. We argue that both the gradual diachronic expansion of the range of uses of both items, and the small, but nevertheless clear, di¤erences of use among the two that we observe in synchrony, support an analysis in terms of polysemy, as opposed to monosemy. What we propose is in the first instance a synchronic description of the two particles. The diachronic facts adduced are principally used to support our contention that déjà and già are polysemous, and as an additional tool for identifying which uses should be regarded as separate senses.

Pragmatic use of temporal adverbs in L1 and L2 French

“…Our analysis of the textual uses of these highly polysemous adverbs is based on the categories proposed by Hybertie (1996), Hansen (1998Hansen ( , 2004Hansen ( , 2008, Hansen and Strudsholm (2008), and Buchi (2007aBuchi ( , 2007b. The categories found in the InterFra corpus are also presented in Hancock and Sanell (2010).…”

“…(3) J'aime bien ce film : déjà, c'est original, et puis il a de très belles photos (Hansen & Strudsholm 2008).…”

Left and right peripheries

“…L'analyse contrastive des particules discursives a surtout été réalisée jusqu'à présent au niveau sémantico-pragmatique (pour une synthèse, v. Aijmer, 2020). Parmi ces études, plusieurs soulignent l'équivalence très partielle des polysémies de lexèmes apparentés par leur étymologie ou leur fonction (Hasselgärd, 2006 ;Hansen & Strudsholm, 2008 ;Defour et al, 2010 ;Lauwers et al, 2010). Récemment des études se sont centrées sur le rôle des positions périphériques et les éventuelles correspondances entre les langues en contraste (sur alors et then, Beeching, 2016 ;sur then et då, Aijmer, 2018).…”

JUST Revisited: Panchronic and Contrastive Insights

“…This convergence may account for a condensation of uses in English which allows further developments not found in other languages. Nowadays, the debate on why cognate markers seem to develop in different ways in different languages is at the core of grammaticalization research (Aijmer & Simon-Vandenbergen, 2003, 2006Aijmer, Foolen & Simon-Vandenbergen, 2006;Defour, D'Hondt, Simon-Vandenbergen & Willems, forthcoming;Dostie, 2005;Lauwers, Vanderbauwhede & Verleyen, 2010;Lorenz, 2002;Mosegaard Hansen & Strudsholm, 2008;Schwenter & Traugott, 2000;Simon-Vandenbergen & Willems, forthcoming;Swan & Westvik, 1997), but much research is needed before conclusive reasons can be advanced.…”