Article published In: The Rise and Development of Evidential and Epistemic Markers
Edited by Silvio Cruschina and Eva-Maria Remberger
[Journal of Historical Linguistics 7:1/2] 2017
► pp. 134–159
The rise and development of parenthetical needless to say
An assumed evidential strategy
Published online: 23 November 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.7.1-2.06bla
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.7.1-2.06bla
Abstract
The article traces the diachronic development of the assumed evidential needless to say. This parenthetical
expression allows the speaker to make certain assertions regarding the obviousness of what s/he is about to say, thus serving as
an evidential strategy that marks the information conveyed as being based on inference and/or assumed or general knowledge.
Parenthetical needless to say has its roots in the Early Modern English needless to-inf
construction (meaning ‘it is unnecessary to do something’), which originally licensed a wide range of infinitives. Over the course
of time, however, it became restricted to uses with utterance verbs, eventually giving rise to the grammaticalized evidential
expression needless to say. In fact, it is only in Late Modern English that the evidential pragmatic inferences
become conventionalized and that the first parenthetical uses of the construction are attested. In Present-day English,
parenthetical needless to say occurs primarily at the left periphery with forward scope.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Assumed evidentiality
- 3.Data sources
- 4.The rise and development of needless to say
- 4.1The early history of needless
- 4.2Early Modern English
- 4.3Late Modern English
- 4.4Present-day English
- 5.The grammaticalization of needless to say
- 6.Concluding remarks
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
Primary sources References
References (45)
Mark DaviesBYU-BNC: Brigham Young University-British National Corpus (Based on the British National Corpus from Oxford University Press), compiled by Mark Davies. 2004–. Available online at [URL].
CLMET: The Corpus of Late Modern English Texts, version 3.0Hendrik De Smet, Hans Jürgen Dillerand, & Jukka Tyrkkö, compiled by Hendrik De Smet, Hans Jürgen Dillerand, & Jukka Tyrkkö. Available online at [URL].
EEBOCorp: Early English Books Online Corpus 1.0Peter Petré, compiled by Peter Petré. 2013. Available online at [URL].
HANSARD: The Hansard CorpusMarc Alexander & Mark Davies 1803–2005, compiled by Marc Alexander & Mark Davies. 2015–. Available online at [URL].
FRANTEXT: Base textuelle FRANTEXT, ATILF – CNRS & Université de Lorraine. Available online at [URL].
MED: Middle English DictionaryKurath, Hans, Sherman M. Kuhn, et al.. Kurath, Hans, Sherman M. Kuhn, et al., eds. 1952–2001. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Available online at [URL].
OED: Oxford English Dictionary Online. Oxford University Press. Available online at [URL].
TILG: Tesouro informatizado da lingua galegaSantamarina, Antón. Santamarina, Antón, coord. Available online at [URL].
Adolphs, Svenja. 2007. Definitely Maybe: Modality clusters and politeness in spoken discourse. Phraseology and Culture in English ed. by Paul Skandera, 257–272. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi:
Biber, Douglas. 1988. Variation Across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:
Biber, Douglas. 1995. Dimensions of Register Variation: A cross-linguistic comparison. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:
Boye, Kasper & Peter Harder. 2009. Evidentiality: Linguistic categories and grammaticalization. Functions of language 16:1.9–43. doi:
Boye, Kasper & Peter Harder. 2012. A Usage-Based Theory of Grammatical Status and Grammaticalization. Language 88:1.1–44. doi:
Bybee, Joan L. 2003. Mechanisms of Change in Grammaticization: The role of frequency. The Handbook of Historical Linguistics ed. by Brian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda, 602–623. Oxford: Blackwell. doi:
Bybee, Joan L. 2007. Frequency of Use and the Organization of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:
Bybee, Joan L. & Rena Torres-Cacoullos. 2009. The Role of Prefabs in Grammaticization: How the particular and the general interact in language change. Formulaic Language: Distribution and historical change ed. by Roberta Corrigan, Edith A. Moravcsik, Hamid Ouali, & Kathleen Wheatley, 187–218. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:
Cruschina, Silvio. 2015. The Expression of Evidentiality and Epistemicity: Cases of grammaticalization in Italian and Sicilian. Probus 27:1.1–31. doi:
Cruschina, Silvio & Eva-Maria Remberger. 2008. Hearsay and Reported Speech: Evidentiality in Romance. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 331.95–116.
Davidse, Kristin, Lieven Vandelanotte, & Hubert Cuyckens, eds. 2010. Subjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi:
Degand, Liesbeth. 2014.
So very fast very fast then. Discourse Markers at Left and Right Periphery in Spoken French. Discourse Functions at the Left and Right Periphery: Crosslinguistic investigations of language use and language change ed. by Kate Beeching & Ulrich Detges, 151–178. Leiden: Brill. doi:
Dehé, Nicole & Yordanka Kavalova. 2007. Parentheticals: An introduction. Parentheticals ed. by Nicole Dehé & Yordanka Kavalova, 1–22. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:
De Smet, Hendrik. 2014. Does Innovation Need Reanalysis? Usage-Based Approaches to Language Change ed. by Evie Coussé & Ferdinand Von Mengden, 23–48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:
Diewald, Gabriele & Elena Smirnova. 2010. Evidentiality in German: Linguistic realization and regularities in grammaticalization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi:
Faller, Martina T. 2002. Semantics and Pragmatics of Evidentials in Cuzco Quechua. Stanford University PhD Thesis.
Fischer, Olga, Ans van Kemenade, Willem Koopman, & Wim van der Wurff. 2001. The History of the ‘easy-to-please’ Construction. The Syntax of Early English, 256–283. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:
Heine, Bernd. 2013. On Discourse Markers: Grammaticalization, pragmaticalization, or something else? Linguistics 51:6.1205–1247. doi:
Hopper, Paul J. 1991. On Some Principles of Grammaticization. Approaches to Grammaticalization Vol. 11 ed. by Elizabeth C. Traugott & Bernd Heine, 17–36. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:
Hopper, Paul J. & Elizabeth C. Traugott. 2003. Grammaticalization. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:
Kaltenböck, Gunther, Bernd Heine, & Tania Kuteva. 2011. On Thetical Grammar. Studies in Language 35:4.852–897. doi:
Kaltenböck, Gunther & Bernd Heine. 2014. Sentence Grammar vs. Thetical Grammar: Two competing domains. Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage ed. by Brian MacWhinney, Andrej Malchukov, & Edith Moravcsik, 348–363. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:
Light, Steven Andrew & Kathryn R. L. Rand. 2005. Indian Gaming and Tribal Sovereignty: The casino compromise. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
López-Couso, María José. 2010. Subjectification and Intersubjectification. Historical Pragmatics ed. by Andreas H. Jucker & Irma Taavitsainen, 127–163. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi:
López-Couso, María José & Belén Méndez-Naya. 2015. Evidential/Epistemic Markers of the Type Verb + Complementizer: Some parallels from English and Romance. New Directions in Grammaticalization Research ed. by Andrew D. M. Smith, Graeme Trousdale, & Richard Waltereit, 93–120. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:
Noonan, Michael. 2007 [1985]. Complementation. Language Typology and Syntactic Description Vol. 21 ed. by Timothy Shopen, 52–150. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:
Schenner, Mathias. 2010. Embedded Evidentials in German. Linguistic Realization of Evidentiality in European Languages ed. by Gabriele Diewald & Elena Smirnova, 157–185. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi:
Schrickx, Josine. 2014. Latin Commitment-Markers: Scilicet and videlicet
. Certainty-Uncertainty – and the Attitudinal Space in Between ed. by Sibilla Cantarini, Werner Abraham, & Elisabeth Leiss, 285–296. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:
Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie & Karin Aijmer. 2007. The Semantic Field of Modal Certainty: A corpus-based study of English adverbs. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi:
Squartini, Mario. 2001. The Internal Structure of Evidentiality in Romance. Studies in Language 25:2.297–334. doi:
Traugott, Elizabeth C. 1989. On the Rise of Epistemic Meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language 57:1.33–65. doi:
Traugott, Elizabeth C. 2003. From Subjectification to Intersubjectification. Motives for Language Change ed. by Raymond Hickey, 124–139. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:
Traugott, Elizabeth C. 2010. (Inter)subjectivity and (Inter)subjectification: A reassessment. In Kristin Davidse, Lieven Vandelanotte & Hubert Cuyckens, 29–70. doi:
Traugott, Elizabeth C. 2012. Intersubjectification and Clause Periphery. English Text Construction 5:1.7–28. doi:
Willett, Thomas. 1988. A Cross-Linguistic Survey of the Grammaticization of Evidentiality. Studies in Language 12:1.51–97. doi:
