Cover not available

Article published In:
[Journal of Historical Pragmatics 16:1] 2015
► pp. 109–141

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

Spelling out the obvious

Latin quidem and the expression of presuppositional polarity

 | Ghent University
Published online: 3 April 2015
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.16.1.05dan
In Danckaert (2014), the Latin particle quidem was analysed as a marker of emphatic affirmative polarity. Building on this proposal, this paper elaborates on the pragmatic properties of this element. I argue that quidem is not a neutral but a so-called “presuppositional” polarity marker, which confirms a proposition which (i) is already part of the common ground but (ii) was not overtly spelled out in the (immediately) preceding context. In more formal terms, I propose that quidem gives rise to the conventional implicature that the speaker assumes that the content of his message might already be known to the addressee, or that it conveys information that the latter expects to hear or read. Quidem can be regarded as a “lexical marker of common ground”, in the sense of Fetzer and Fischer (2007).
References (58)
Adams, James. 1994. Wackernagel’s Law and the Placement of the Copula esse in Classical Latin. Cambridge: Philological Society.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ariel, Mira. 1990. Accessing Noun-Phrase Antecedents. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bassarak, Armin. 1987. “Parenthesen als illokutive Handlungen”. In Wolfgang Motsch (ed.), Satz, Text, sprachliche Handlungen, 163–78. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Birner, Betty. 1997. “The Linguistic Realization of Inferrable Information”. Language and Communication 171: 133–47. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006a. “Semantic and Pragmatic Contributions to Information Status”. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 381: 14–32. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006b. “Inferential Relations and Noncanonical Word Order”. In Betty Birner and Gregory Ward (eds), Drawing the Boundaries of Meaning: Neo-Gricean Studies in Pragmatics and Semantics in Honor of Laurence R. Horn, 31–51. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bolkestein, Machtelt. 1991. “Causally Related Predications and the Choice between Parataxis and Hypotaxis in Latin”. In Robert Coleman (ed.), New Studies in Latin Linguistics, 427–51. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1991 [1976]. “Mica: note di sintassi e pragmatica”. Teoria linguistica e sintassi italiana, 311–23. Bologna: Il Mulino (originally published in Annali della Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia, Università di Padova 1: 101–112).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. “ Quidem as a Marker of Emphatic Polarity”. Transactions of the Philological Society 1121: 97–138. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. In preparation. “ quidem and contrastivity”. Manuscript. Ghent University.
Declerck, Renaat and Susan Reed. 2001. Conditionals: A Comprehensive Empirical Analysis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dehé, Nicole and Yordanka Kavalova (eds). 2007. Parentheticals. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew. 1996. “Focus, Pragmatic Presupposition and Activated Propositions”. Journal of Pragmatics 261: 475–523. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ducrot, Oswald. 1973. La preuve et le dire. Paris: Maison Mame.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fetzer, Anita and Kerstin Fischer. 2007. “Introduction”. In Anita Fetzer and Kerstin Fischer (eds), Lexical Markers of Common Grounds, 1–13. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fugier, Huguette. 1989. “ Quod, quia, quoniam et leurs effets textuels chez Cicéron”. In Gualtiero Calboli (ed.), Subordination and Other Topics in Latin, 91–119. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 1978. “Negation in Language: Pragmatics, Function, Ontology”. In Peter Cole (ed.), Pragmatics, 69–112. New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glare, Paul (ed.). 1968. Oxford Latin Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grice, Herbert. 1975. “Logic and Conversation”. In Peter Cole and Jerry Morgan (eds), Speech Acts, 41–58. New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 2010. “The Internal Syntax of Adverbial Clauses”. Lingua 1201: 628–48. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael and Ruqaiya Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hernanz, M. Lluïsa. 2007. “From Polarity to Modality: Some (A)symmetries between bien and sí in Spanish”. In Luis Eguren and Olga Fernández Soriano (eds), Coreference, Modality and Focus, 133–69. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. “Assertive bien in Spanish and the Left Periphery”. In Paola Benincà and Nicola Munaro (eds), Mapping the Left Periphery, 19–62. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence. 2001. A Natural History of Negation. 2nd edn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jacobs, Joachim. 1997. “I-Topikalisierung”. Linguistische Berichte 1691: 91–133.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnston, Michael. 1994. The Syntax and Semantics of Adverbial Adjuncts. PhD thesis. University of California at Santa Cruz.
Kaiser, Elsi. 2004. “Negation and the Left Periphery in Finnish”. Lingua 1161: 314–50. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika. 1999. “Beyond ‘Oops’ and ‘Ouch’: How Descriptive and Expressive Meaning Interact.” Paper presented at the Cornell Conference on Theories of Context Dependency. Available online at: [URL])
Kroon, Caroline. 1995. Discourse Particles in Latin: A Study of nam, enim, autem, vero and at. Amsterdam: Gieben. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. “Latin quidem and the Structure of the Move”. In Henk Aertsen, Mike Hannay and Rod Lyall (eds), Words in their Places: A Festschrift for J. Lachlann Mackenzie, 199–209. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. “The Relationship between Grammar and Discourse: Evidence from the Latin Particle quidem ”. In Gualtiero Calboli (ed.), Papers on Grammar IX1, 577–90. Roma: Herder.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. “Latin Linguistics between Grammar and Discourse: Units of Analysis, Levels of Analysis”. In Elisabeth Rieken and Paul Widmer (eds), Pragmatische Kategorien: Form, Funktion und Diachronie, 143–58. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. “Latin Particles and the Grammar of Discourse”. In James Clackson (ed.), A Companion to the Latin Language, 176–95. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mellet, Sylvie. 1995. “ Quando, quia, quod, quoniam: analyse énonciative et syntaxique des conjonctions de cause en latin”. In Dominique Longrée (ed.), De usu: études de syntaxe latine offertes en hommage à Marius Lavency, 211–28. Louvain-la-Neuve: Peeters.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Merchant, Jason. 2003. “Remarks on Stripping”. Ms. University of Chicago. Available online at: [URL]
Pasch, Renate. 1987. “Illokutionsstrukturtypen und Typen der Verknüpfung von Inhalten illokutiver Handlungen”. In Wolfgang Motsch (ed.), Satz, Text, sprachliche Handlungen, 119–61. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pinkster, Harm. 1972. On Latin Adverbs. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1990. Latin Syntax and Semantics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. “De Latijnse voegwoorden quia en quoniam (en Nederlands aangezien)”. In Egbert Beijk, Lut Colman, Marianne Göbel, Frans Heyvaert, Tanneke Schoonheim, Rob Tempelaars and Vivien Waszink (eds), Fons Verborum: feestbundel Fons Moerdijk, 313–20. Leiden: INL.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. “The Use of quia and quoniam in Cicero, Seneca, and Tertullian”. In D. Richard Page and Aaron D. Rubin (eds), Studies in Classical Linguistics in Honor of Philip Baldi, 81–95. Leiden: Brill. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Potts, Christopher. 2002. “The Lexical Semantics of Parenthetical-as and Appositive-which ”. Syntax 51: 55–88. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. The Logic of Conventional Implicatures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prince, Ellen. 1981. “Towards a Taxonomy of Given-New Information”. In Peter Cole (ed.), Radical Pragmatics, 223–56. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1986. “On the Syntactic Marking of Presupposed Open Propositions”. Chicago Linguistic Society 221: 208–22.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1992. “The ZPG Letter: Subjects, Definiteness and Information-Status”. In William Mann and Sandra Thompson (eds), Discourse Description: Diverse Linguistic Analyses of a Fund-raising Text, 295–325. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech and Jan Svartvik. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rosén, Hannah. 2008. “Latin Epitaxis in Historical and Typological View”. In Gualtiero Calboli (ed.), Papers on Grammar X1, 205–242. Roma: Herder.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schwenter, Scott. 2003. “ No and tampoco: A Pragmatic Distinction in Spanish Negation”. Journal of Pragmatics 351: 999–1030. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. “The Pragmatics of Negation in Brazilian Portuguese”. Lingua 1151: 1427–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Solodow, Joseph. 1978. The Latin Particle quidem. Boulder: Johnson Co.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thim-Mabrey, Christiane. 1982. “Zur Syntax der kausalen Konjunktionen weil, da und denn ”. Sprachwissenschaft 71: 197–219.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verstraete, Jean-Christophe. 2007. Rethinking the Coordinate–Subordinate Dichotomy: Interpersonal Grammar and the Analysis of Adverbial Clauses in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Winkler, Susanne. 2005. Ellipsis and Focus in Generative Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zanuttini, Raffaella. 1997. Negation and Clausal Structure: A Comparative Study of Romance Languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zimmerman, Malte. 2011. “Discourse Particles”. In Klaus von Heusinger, Claudia Maienborn and Paul Portner (eds), Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, vol. 21, 2012–38. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue