Evidentials and (relayed) speech acts: hearsay as quotation
Evidentials and (relayed) speech acts: hearsay as quotation
复制标题
证据和（转述的）言语行为：道听途说作为引用
DOI：
10.3765/salt.v25i0.3969
复制
发表时间：
2017
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Natasha Korotkova
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Natasha Korotkova
本文研究的是传闻证据词的引证用法，它指的是由第三方做出的言语行为。在类型学文献中偶尔会提到，引证用法最初是由Faller 2002年给出的一种正式的语义解释，此后很少受到关注。本文的研究目的就是为了让人们关注这些问题。文献中正在进行的一场辩论是关于证据的语义地位和证据在其他类别中的位置(见Matthewson 2012及其参考文献)。对于Faller(2002,2007)，引用用法是诊断言外证据的经验测试之一，这些测试涉及言语行为的结构。在本文中，我在克里夫卡(2014)的框架内重新实现了Faller的原始建议，该框架提供了一个明确的句法-语用接口。然后，我指出，在目前文献中提供的论据中，引用读物可能是支持言外之言存在的唯一论据。然而，这类读数的现状还需要进一步研究。最后，我将在所报道的言语策略的更广泛的背景下讨论引语用法。
This paper is devoted to what I will call quotative uses of hearsay evidentials, wherein they report a speech act made by a third party. Occasionally mentioned in the typological literature, quotative uses were first given a formal semantic account by Faller 2002 and have received little attention since. The goal of this paper is to put the spotlight on them. An ongoing debate in the literature is on the semantic status of evidentials and the place of evidentiality among other categories (see Matthewson 2012 and references therein). For Faller (2002, 2007), quotative uses are among the empirical tests that diagnose illocutionary evidentials, ones that deal with the structure of speech acts. In this paper, I re-implement Faller's original proposal within Krifka's (2014) framework that provides an explicit syntax-pragmatics interface. I then show that quotative readings may be the only argument, out of the currently provided in the literature, in favor of the existence of illocutionary evidentials. However, the status of such readings requires further research. I conclude by discussing quotative uses within a broader context of reported speech strategies.
《文部科学省科学研究补助金报告：鲑鱼科的生殖生物学研究》（1986年）
DOI：
--
发表时间：
--
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
通讯作者：
--