Cover not available

Article published In: Functions of Language
Vol. 24:2 (2017) ► pp.166–195

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Patterns of (inter)subjectivity

Asymmetries for Glaswegian peripheral but

 | University of Augsburg
Published online: 10 November 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.24.2.02hof
Abstract
The prevalent hypothesis in research on pragmatic markers suggests that the left periphery of an utterance attracts predominantly subjective meanings, whereas the right periphery is the locus of intersubjective meanings. The goal of this paper is to test this hypothesis for but as used in a dataset of spoken Glaswegian English, a variety in which but may occur in both left- and right-peripheral positions. Considering that but derives its discursive meaning not per se, but from its embeddedness in particularized contexts, the methodological framework integrates the notion of (inter)subjectivity with the interactional-sociolinguistic concept of contextualization cue to identify (inter)subjective patterned co-occurrences for but. A fine-grained analysis of the patterns but forms with subjective and intersubjective cues in its local linguistic context shows that discourse patterns of left-peripheral but tend to foreground subjective meanings, while discourse patterns of right-peripheral but tend to foreground more intersubjective meanings, supporting the hypothesis of peripheral asymmetry.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Peripheries and (inter)subjectivity
  • 3.(Inter)subjective discourse patterns
  • 4.PM but in Glaswegian English
  • 5.(Inter)subjective patterns of Glaswegian but
    • 5.1Procedure
    • 5.2Results
    • 5.3Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (69)
References
. 2013. Understanding pragmatic markers: A variational pragmatic approach. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aitken, Adam J. 1979. Scottish speech: A historical view, with special reference to the Standard English of Scotland. In Adam J. Aitken & Tom McArthur (eds.), Languages of Scotland, 85–118. Edinburgh: Chambers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Altenberg, Bengt. 1986. Contrastive linking in spoken and written English. In Gunnel Tottie & Ingegerd Bäcklund (eds.), English in speech and writing: A symposium (Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Studia Anglistica Upsaliensia 60), 13–40. Uppsala: Academiae Ubsaliensis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ariel, Mira. 2008. Pragmatics and grammar. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barth-Weingarten, Dagmar & Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen. 2002. On the development of Final though: A case of grammaticalization? In Ilse Wischer & Gabriele Diewald (eds.), New reflections on Grammaticalization, 345–361. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beeching, Kate. 2007. A politeness-theoretic approach to pragmatico-semantic change. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 8(1). 69–108. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. Procatalepsis and the etymology of hedging and boosting particles. In Maj-Britt Mosegaard Hansen & Jacqueline Visconti (eds.), Current trends in diachronic semantics and pragmatics, 81–105. Bingley: Emerald. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beeching, Kate & Ulrich Detges (eds.). 2014. Discourse functions at the left and right periphery: Crosslinguistic investigations of language use and language change. Brill: Leiden. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Benveniste, Émile. 1966. Problèmes de linguistíque générale. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad & Edward Finegan. 1999. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blakemore, Diane. 1987. Semantic constraints on relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 1996. Pragmatic markers in English: Grammaticalization and discourse functions. Berlin: Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. & Suzanne Fleischmann. 1995. Modality in grammar and discourse: An introductory essay. In Joan L. Bybee & Suzanne Fleischmann (eds.), Modality in grammar and discourse, 1–14. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Sandra A. Thompson. 2000. Concessive patterns in conversation. In Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen & Bernd Kortmann (eds.), Cause, condition, concession, contrast: Cognitive and discourse perspectives, 381–410. Berlin: Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Degand, Liesbeth. 2014. So very fast very fast then: Discourse markers at left and right periphery in spoken French. In Kate Beeching & Ulrich Detges (eds.), 151–178. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Degand, Liesbeth & Benjamin Fagard. 2011. Alors between discourse and grammar: The role of syntactic position. Functions of Language 18(1). 29–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Detges, Ulrich & Richard Waltereit. 2011. Moi, je ne sais pas. Je ne sais pas, moi: French tonic pronouns in the left vs. right periphery. Paper presented at IPra, Manchester. (July, 2011.)
Dik, Simon. 1997. The Theory of Functional Grammar, 21 vols.. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
El Zarka, Dina. 2013. Egyptian Arabic independent pronouns in the left and right periphery: Reference point and repair constructions with subjective and intersubjective meanings. Paper presented at IPra, New Delhi. (September, 2013.)
Fischer, Kerstin & Maria Alm. 2013. A radical construction grammar perspective on the modal particle-discourse particle distinction. In Liesbeth Degand, Bert Cornillie & Paola Pietrandrea (eds.), Discourse markers and modal particles: categorization and description, 47–88. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fritz, Clemens W. A. 2007. From English in Australia to Australian English: 1788–1900. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gumperz, John J. 1982. Discourse strategies. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1992. Contextualization and understanding. In Alessandro Duranti & Charles Goodwin (eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon, 229–252. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haselow, Alexander. 2012. Subjectivity, intersubjectivity and the negotiation of common ground in spoken discourse: Final particles in English. Language and Communication 32(3). 182–204. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. Arguing for a wide conception of grammar: The case of final particles in spoken discourse. Folia Linguistica 47(2). 375–424. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Izutsu, Mitsuko N. & Katsunobu Izutsu. 2014. Truncation and backshift: Two pathways to sentence-final coordinating conjunctions. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 15(1). 62–92. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H. & Yael Ziv. 1998. Introduction. In Andreas H. Jucker & Jael Ziv (eds.), Discourse markers: Descriptions and theory, 1–12. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaltenböck, Gunther. 2009. English comment clauses: Position, prosody, and scope. Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik 34(1). 49–75.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaltenböck, Gunther, Bernd Heine & Tanja Kuteva. 2011. On thetical grammar. Studies in Language 35(4). 852–897. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koivisto, Aino. 2012. Discourse patterns for turn-final conjunctions. Journal of Pragmatics 44(10). 1254–1272. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krug, Manfred G. 2015. Maltese English. In Edgar Schneider, Daniel Schreier, Peter Trudgill & Jeffrey P. Williams (eds.), Further studies in the lesser-known varieties of English, 11–50. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 1985. Observations and speculations on subjectivity. In John Haiman (ed.), Iconicity in Syntax, 109–150. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lenk, Uta. 1998. Discourse markers and global coherence in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 30(2). 245–257. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
López-Couso, María José. 2010. Subjectification and intersubjectification. In Andreas H. Jucker & Irma Taavitsainen (eds.), Historical pragmatics, 127–164. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martin, James R. & Peter R. R. White. 2005. The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. London: Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moore, Bruce. 2008. Speaking our language: The story of Australian English. South Melbourne, Vic.: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mulder, Jean & Sandra A. Thompson. 2006. The grammaticization of but as a final particle in English conversation. In Keith Allen (ed.), Selected Papers from the 2005 Conference of the Australian Linguistic Society. [URL].
. 2008. The grammaticization of but as a final particle in English conversation. In Ritva Laury (ed.), Crosslinguistic studies of clause combining, 179–204. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mulder, Jean, Sandra A. Thompson & Cara Penry Williams. 2009. Final but in Australian English conversation. In Pam Peters, Peter Collins & Adam Smith (eds.), Comparative studies in Australian and New Zealand English, 337–358. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Narrog, Heiko. 2012. Modality, subjectivity, and semantic change: A cross-linguistic perspective. Oxford: OUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Norrick, Neal R. 2001. Discourse markers in oral narrative. Journal of Pragmatics 33(6). 849–878. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2009. Conjunctions in final position in everyday talk. In Bruce Fraser, Ken Turner & Jacob Mey (eds.), Language in life and a life in language: Jacob Mey – a festschrift, 319–328. Bingley: Emerald. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nuyts, Jan. 2001. Subjectivity as an evidential dimension in epistemic modal expressions. Journal of Pragmatics 33(3). 383–400. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. Notions of (inter)subjectivity. English Text Construction 5(1). 53–76. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Onodera, Noriko O. 2004. Japanese Discourse Markers. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2007. Interplay of (inter)subjectivity and social norm. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 8(2). 239–267. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Palmer, John F. 2001. Mood and modality, 2nd edn. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pichler, Heike. 2013a. Discourse function and clause periphery, innit? Paper presented at IPra, New Delhi. (September, 2013.)
Polanyi, Livia & Remko Scha. 1983. On the recursive structure of discourse. In Konrad Ehlich & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), On connectedness in sentence, discourse and text: Proceedings of the Tilburg conference held on 25 and 26 January 1982, 141–178. Tilburg: Tilburg University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Ian Svartvik. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah. 1987. Discourse markers. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shinzato, Rumiko. 2006. Subjectivity, intersubjectivity, and grammaticalization. In Satoko Suzuki (ed.), Emotive communication in Japanese, 15–33. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stuart-Smith, Jane. 2011–2014. Fine phonetic variation and sound change: A real-time study of Glaswegian. Research grant RPG-142 funded by the Leverhulme Trust. [URL].
Tottie, Gunnel & Sebastian Hoffmann. 2006. Tag questions in British and American English. Journal of English Linguistics 34(4). 283–311. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2003. From subjectification to intersubjectification. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), Motives for language change, 124–142. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. (Inter)subjectivity and (inter)subjectification: A reassessment. In Kristin Davidse, Lieven Vandelanotte & Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), Subjectification, intersubjectification and grammaticalization, 29–74. Berlin: Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. Intersubjectification and clause periphery. English Text Construction 5(1). 7–28. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Richard B. Dasher. 2002. Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 1986. Dialects in contact. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van der Wouden, Ton & Ad Foolen. 2011. Dutch particles in the right periphery. [URL]. (April 16, 2013.)
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Izutsu, Mitsuko Narita & Katsunobu Izutsu
2022. American and Irish English speakers’ perceptions of the final particles so and but. World Englishes 41:2 ► pp. 207 ff. DOI logo
Cuenca, Maria Josep
2020. Defective Connective Constructions: Some Cases in Catalan and Spanish. Corpus Pragmatics 4:4 ► pp. 423 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue