Cover not available

Article published In: Languages in Contrast
Vol. 21:2 (2021) ► pp.163–185

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

“I guess anyone would do that wouldn’t they?”

How do native speakers of Norwegian and English hedge in informal conversations?

ORCiD logo with link | University of Oslo, Norway
Published online: 27 October 2020
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.19025.joh
Abstract
Hedging is a complex phenomenon with an indefinite number of potential realisations. The complexity and versatility of hedging strategies make them particularly interesting to study across languages. This contrastive study compares the realisations of the pragmatic function of hedging in everyday Norwegian and English conversations using data from four corpora of Norwegian and English informal spoken conversations (the Norwegian Speech Corpus, the Nordic Dialect Corpus, the BigBrother corpus, and the BNC2014). The results show that speakers of both languages mainly use pragmatic particles, adverbs, and first-/second-person pronouns + cognitive verbs [1/2 pers. + Cog. V] to express hedging. Furthermore, English speakers use significantly more [1/2 pers. + Cog. V] and modal verbs than Norwegian speakers, who use significantly more adjectives, prepositional phrases and clauses to hedge their utterances.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Previous research on hedging
  • 3.Data and methodology
  • 4.Form-based taxonomy of hedging strategies
  • 5.Results and discussion
    • 5.1General overview of cross-linguistic contrasts
    • 5.2Pragmatic particles
    • 5.3Adverbs
    • 5.4First-/second-person pronoun + cognitive verb [1/2 pers. + Cog. V]
  • 6.Concluding remarks
  • Notes
  • References
References (69)
References
Adolphs, S. and Carter, R. 2013. Spoken Corpus Linguistics: From Monomodal to Multimodal. New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aijmer, K. 1984. “Sort of” and “Kind of” in English Conversation. Studia Linguistica 381: 118–128. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aijmer, K. and Rühlemann, C. 2015. Corpus Pragmatics: A Handbook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aijmer, K. and Simon-Vandenbergen, A.-M. 2006. Introduction. In Pragmatic Markers in Contrast, K. Aijmer and A.-M. Simon-Vandenbergen (eds), 1–10. Oxford: Elsevier. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Andersen, G. 2010. A Contrastive Approach to Vague Nouns. In New Approaches to Hedigng, G. Kaltenböck, W. Mihatsch and S. Schneider (eds), 35–48. Bingley: Emerald Bingley. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Andvik, E. E. 1992. A Pragmatic Analysis of Norwegian Modal Particles. Arlington: The Summer Institute of Linguistics, University of Texas.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1994. Recourse to Consensus in Norwegian Modal Particles. PhD Thesis, University of Texas.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beeching, K. 2016. Pragmatic Markers in British English: Meaning in Social Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Berthelin, S. R. and Borthen, K. 2019. The Semantics and Pragmatics of Norwegian Sentence-Internal jo. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 42(1): 3–30. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. and Finegan, E. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
BigBrother-korpuset. Tekstlaboratoriet, ILN, Universitetet i Oslo. Available at [URL]
Blakemore, D. 1989. Denial and Contrast: A Relevance Theoretic Analysis of but. Linguistics and Philosophy 121: 15–37. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Borthen, K. 2018. Store spørsmål om små ord. Innledning til temanummer om pragmatiske partikler i norsk [Big Questions, Small Words. Introduction to a Special Issue on Pragmatic Particles in Norwegian]. Norsk Lingvistisk Tidsskrift 361: 225–247.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, P. and Levinson, S. C. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Buysse, L. 2017. The Pragmatic Marker you know in Learner Englishes. Journal of Pragmatics 1211: 40–57. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2018. “It Was a Bit Stressy as Well Actually”. The Pragmatic Markers actually and in fact in Spoken Learner English. Journal of Pragmatics 1561: 28–40. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Channell, J. 1994. Vague Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clemen, G. 1997. The Concept of Hedging: Origins, Approaches and Definitions. In Hedging and Discourse Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts, R. Markkanen and H. Schröder (eds), 235–248. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coates, J. 1987. Epistemic Modality and Spoken Discourse. Transactions of the Philological Society 851: 110–131. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Estling Vannestål, M. 2015. A University Grammar of English: With a Swedish Perspective. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Faarlund, J. T., Lie, S. and Vannebo, K. I. 1997. Norsk Referansegrammatikk. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Farr, F. and O’Keeffe, A. 2002. Would as a Hedging Device in an Irish Context: An Intra-Varietal Comparison of Institutionalised Spoken Interaction. In Using Corpora to Explore Linguistic Variation, R. Reppen, S. M. Fitzmaurice and D. Biber (eds), 25–48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fraser, B. 1980. Conversational Mitigation. Journal of Pragmatics 41: 341–350. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1996. Pragmatic Markers. Pragmatics Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) 61: 167–190. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2010. Pragmatic Competence: The Case of Hedging. In New Approaches to Hedging, G. Kaltenböck, W. Mihatsch and S. Schneider (eds), 15–34. Bingley: Emerald Bingley. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fretheim, T. 1979. Demperen “nesten” En pragmatisk studie. Maal og Minne 3–41: 182–219.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1981. “Ego”-dempere og “alter”-dempere. Maal og Minne: 86–100.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hardjanto, T. 2016. Hedging through the Use of Modal Auxiliaries in English Academic Discourse. Humaniora 281: 37–50. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hasund, I. K. 2003. The Discourse Markers like in English and liksom in Norwegian Teenage Language: A Corpus-Based, Cross-Linguistic Study. PhD Thesis, University of Bergen/Agder University College.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hasund, I. K., Opsahl, T. and Svennevig, J. 2012. By three Means: The Pragmatic Functions of three Norwegian Quotatives. In Quotatives: Cross-Linguistic and Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives, I. Buchstaller and I. van Alphen (eds), 37–67. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hunston, S. 2002. Corpora in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyland, K. 1996. Writing without Conviction? Hedging in Science Research Articles. Applied Linguistics 171: 433–454. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johannessen, J. B., Priestley, J., Hagen, K., Åfarli, T. A. and Vangsnes, Ø. A. 2009. The Nordic Dialect Corpus – An Advanced Research Tool. Proceedings of the 17th Nordic Conference of Computational Linguistics (NODALIDA 2009). Odense, Denmark, 14–16 May 2009. 283–286.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johansen, S. H. 2019. Exploring the Use of Probes in a Corpus Pragmatic Study of Hedging Strategies. Nordic Journal of English Studies 18(1): 121–148. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jucker, A. H., and Ziv, Y. 1998. Discourse Markers: Descriptions and Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaltenböck, G., Mihatsch, W. and Schneider, S. 2010. New Approaches to Hedging. Bingley: Emerald Bingley. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kimps, D., Davidse, K. and Cornillie, B. 2014. A Speech Function Analysis of Tag Questions in British English Spontaneous Dialogue. Journal of Pragmatics 661: 64–85. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kozubíková Šandová, J. 2017. “…And Our Study Might Therefore Have Been Slightly Underpowered”: A Cross-Linguistic Analysis of Hedging in English and Czech Medical Research Articles. Acta Universitatis Carolinae Philologica: 115–130. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kranich, S. 2011. To Hedge or not to Hedge: The Use of Epistemic Modal Expressions in Popular Science in English Texts, English–German Translations, and German Original Texts. Text & Talk: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse & Communication Studies 31(1): 77–99. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. 1972. Hedges: A Study in Meaning Criteria and the Logic of Fuzzy Concepts. In Papers from the Eighth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, P. M. Peranteau, J. N. Levi and G. C. Phares (eds), 183–228. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lind, M. 1994. Pragmatiske partikler i diskursanalytisk perspektiv: jo, altså, vel, nå og da i et norsk talemålsmateriale. Master’s Dissertation, University of Oslo.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Love, R., Dembry, C., Hardie, A., Brezina, V. and McEnery, T. 2017. The Spoken BNC2014. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 221: 319–344. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lukka, M. R. and Markkanen, R. 1997. Impersonalization as a Form of Hedging. In Hedging and Discourse: Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts, R. Markkanen and H. Schröder (eds), 168–187. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Magliacane, A. and Howard, M. 2019. The Role of Learner Status in the Acquisition of Pragmatic Markers during Study Abroad: The Use of Like in L2 English. Journal of Pragmatics 1461: 72–86. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Markkanen, R. and Schröder, H. 1997. Hedging and Discourse: Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mauranen, A. 2004. “They’re a Little Bit Different”. Observations on Hedges in Academic Talk. In Discourse Patterns in Spoken and Written Corpora, K. Aijmer and A.-B. Stenström (eds), 173–198. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Norsk talespråkskorpus – Oslodelen. Tekstlaboratoriet, ILN, Universitetet i Oslo. Available at [URL]
O’Keeffe, A. 2018. Corpus-Based Function-to-Form Approaches. In Methods in Pragmatics, A. H. Jucker, K. P. Schneider and W. Bublitz (eds), 587–618. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Keeffe, A., Clancy, B. and Adolphs, S. 2020. Introducing Pragmatics in Use (2nd Edition). Abingdon: Routledge. (unpagenated manuscript).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Opsahl, T. 2002. “Jeg bare: Hæ?! Hva skjedde her da?”: En studie av de kommunikative funksjonene til diskurspartikkelen ‘bare’ i et ungdomsspråkmateriale. Master’s Dissertation, University of Oslo.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Östman, J.-O. 1982. Pragmatic Particles in an Applied Perspective. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen (Special Issue): 135–153.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Overstreet, M. 1999. Whales, Candlelight, and Stuff Like That: General Extenders in English Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prince, E., Frader, J. and Bosk, C. 1982. On Hedging in Physician–Physician Discourse. In Linguistics and the Professions, R. J. di Pietro (ed.), 83–97. Norwood-New Jersey: Ablex.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rygg, K. 2017. “Typically Norwegian to be Impolite.” Impoliteness according to Whom? FLEKS Scandinavian Journal of Intercultural Theory and Practice 2017 4(1): 1–15. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Salager-Meyer, F. 1994. Hedges and Textual Communicative Function in Medical English Written Discourse. English for Specific Purposes 131: 149–70. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schiffrin, D. 1987. Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Solberg, T. K. 1990. Modalpartikler i norsk. Master’s Dissertation, University of Oslo.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Svennevig, J. 2007. “Ikke sant” as a Response Token in Norwegian Conversation. In Interpreting Utterances. Pragmatics and its Interfaces. Essays in Honour of Thorstein Fretheim, R.-A. Nilsen, N. A. A. Amfo and K. Borthen (eds), 175–189. Oslo: Novus Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2008. “Ikke sant” som respons i samtale. In Språk i Oslo Ny forskning omkring talespråk, J. B. Johannessen and K. Hagen (eds), 127–138. Oslo: Novus forlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2010. Pre-empting Reference Problems in Conversation. Language in Society 391: 173–202. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tchizmarova, I. K. 2005. Hedging Functions of the Bulgarian Discourse Marker xajde. Journal of Pragmatics 371: 1143–1163. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vassileva, I. 2001. Commitment and Detachment in English and Bulgarian Academic Writing. English for Specific Purposes 201: 83–102. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vold, E. T. 2006. Epistemic Modality Markers in Research Articles: A Cross-Linguistic and Cross-Disciplinary Study. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 161: 61–87. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yang, Y. 2013. Exploring Linguistic and Cultural Variations in the Use of Hedges in English and Chinese Scientific Discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 50(1): 23–36. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zadeh, L. A. 1965. Fuzzy Sets. Information and Control 81: 338–353. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Duan, Yuxiang & Liesbeth Degand
2025. A contrastive study of hedging in English and Chinese academic spoken discourse. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 november 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