Cover not available

In:Pragmatic Markers and Peripheries
Edited by Daniël Van Olmen and Jolanta Šinkūnienė
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 325] 2021
► pp. 199–228

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

Chapter 7
The Lithuanian focus particles net ‘even’ and tik ‘only’ and clause peripheries

ORCiD logo with link | Vilnius University
Published online: 13 October 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.325.07jas
Abstract
The present chapter investigates the Lithuanian focus particles net ‘even’ and tik ‘only’ and their potential to occur in clause peripheries. The results of the analysis provide evidence that net and tik have the potential to appear in clause peripheries; however, as peripheral elements, they are not so common in spoken Lithuanian. It is observed that net and tik share a set of functions with focus particles in Germanic as well as Romance languages: in clause peripheries, they contribute to discourse structure and common ground management as well as encode (inter)subjective information. Both Lithuanian particles exhibit language-specific properties too, though: they serve as illocutionary force modifiers not only strengthening the illocutionary force of a speech act but also softening it.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Features of focus particles in clause peripheries
  • 3.Data and methods
  • 4.Distribution of net and tik in spoken Lithuanian
  • 5.Lithuanian particles net and tik: General characteristics
  • 6.Lithuanian particles net and tik: Towards clause peripheries
  • 7.Clause-peripheral functions of net
    • 7.1Discourse structuring
    • 7.2Marking speaker’s viewpoint
    • 7.3Modifying illocutionary force
  • 8.Clause-peripheral functions of tik
    • 8.1Modifying illocutionary force: Softening speech acts
    • 8.2Modifying illocutionary force: Strengthening speech acts
  • 9.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
References (32)
References
Ambrazas, Vytautas (ed.). 1997. Lithuanian Grammar. Vilnius: Baltos lankos.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. Lietuvių kalbos istorinė sintaksė [Historical syntax of the Lithuanian language]. Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beeching, Kate. 2017. “Just a Suggestion: Just/e in French and English.” In Pragmatic Markers, Discourse Markers and Modal Particles: New Perspectives, ed. by Chiara Fedriani, and Andrea Sansò, 459–480. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 1998. “The Flowers are Lovely; Only, They have no Scent: The Evolution of a Pragmatic Marker.” In Anglistentag 1997 Giessen: Proceedings, ed. by Raimund Borgmeier, Herbert Grabes, and Andreas H. Jucker, 9–33. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Degand, Liesbeth. 2014. “‘So very Fast then’: Discourse Markers at Left and Right Periphery in Spoken French.” In Discourse Functions at the Left and Right Periphery: Cross-linguistic Investigations of Language Use and Language Change, ed. by Kate Beeching, and Ulrich Detges, 151–187. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Favaro, Marco. 2018. “Focus Marking and Illocutionary Modification: Functional Developments of Italian solo ‘only’”. In 51st Annual Meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea: Book of Abstracts, ed. by Olga Spevak, 414–416. Tallinn: University of Tallinn.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2020. “From Focus Marking to Illocutionary Modification: Functional Developments of Italian solo ‘only’”. In Information-Structural Perspectives on Discourse Particles, ed. by Pierre-Yves Modicom, and Oliver Duplâtre, 112–131. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Foolen, Ad, Richard van Gerrevink, Lotte Hogeweg, and Peia Prawiro-Atmodjo. 2009. “The Placement of Focus Particles in Dutch.” In Linguistics in the Netherlands 2009, ed. by Bert Botma, and Jacqueline van Kampen, 51–63. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grosz, Patrick. 2010. “German doch: An Element that Triggers a Contrast Presupposition.” Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistic Society 46: 163–177.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: 182–204. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. Spontaneous Spoken English: An Integrated Approach to the Emergent Grammar of Speech. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoeksema, Jack, and Frans Zwarts. 1991. “Some Remarks on Focus Adverbs.” Journal of Semantics 8 (1–2): 51–70. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney, and Geoffrey K. Pullum (eds). 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jasionytė-Mikučionienė, Erika. 2019. “Subordinating Conjunctions as Discourse Markers in Lithuanian.” Corpus Pragmatics 3: 285–301. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, Min-Joo, and Nathan Jahnke. 2011. “The Meaning of Utterance-Final Even.” Journal of English Linguistics 39: 36–64. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard. 1991. The Meaning of Focus Particles: A Comparative Perspective. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. “Syntax and Semantics of Additive Focus Markers from a Cross-linguistic Perspective: A Tentative Assessment of the State of the Art.” In Focus on Additivity: Adverbial modifiers in Romance, Germanic and Slavic languages, ed. by Anna-Maria De Cesare Greenwald, and Cecilia Andorno, 23–44. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leskien, August. 1903. “Litauische Partikeln und Konjunktionen [Lithuanian particles and conjunctions].” Indogermanische Forschungen 14: 89–113. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nau, Nicole, and Norbert Ostrowski. 2010. “Background and Perspectives for the Study of Particles and Connectives in Baltic languages.” In Particles and Connectives, ed. by Nicole Nau, and Norbert Ostrowski, 1–37. Vilnius: Vilnius University and Association “Academia Salensis”.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Panov, Vladimir. 2019. “Juk and gi, and “Particles” in Contemporary Lithuanian: Explaining Language-particular Elements in a Cross-linguistic Context.” Kalbotyra 72: 58–86. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ricca, Davide. 2017. “Meaning both ‘also’ and ‘only’? The Intriguing Polysemy of Old Italian pure.” In Focus on Additivity: Adverbial modifiers in Romance, Germanic and Slavic languages, ed. by Anna-Maria De Cesare Greenwald, and Cecilia Andorno, 45–76. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruskan, Anna. 2019. “Functional Variation of Discourse Particles in Lithuanian: A Look at Clause Peripheries.” Corpus Pragmatics 3 (4): 303–325. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schwenter, Scott A., and Richard Waltereit. 2010. “Presupposition Accommodation and Language Change.” In Subjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization, ed. by Kristin Davidse, Lieven Vandelanotte, and Hubert Cuyckens, 75–102. Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Smoczyński, Wojciech. 2007. Słownik etymologiczny języka litewskiego [Etymological dictionary of the Lithuanian language]. Vilnius: Vilnius University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sweetser, Eve E. 1988. “Grammaticalization and Semantic Bleaching.” Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 14: 389–405. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1999. “The Rhetoric of Counter-expectation in Semantic Change: A Study in Subjectifícation.” In Historical Semantics and Cognition, ed. by Andreas Blank, and Peter Koch, 61–89. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. “Intersubjectification and Clause Periphery.” English Text Construction 5: 7–28. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. “Investigating “Periphery” from a Functionalist Perspective.” Linguistics Vanguard 1 (1): 119–130. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C., and Richard B. Dasher. 2002. Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Valančė, Danguolė. 2017. Pabrėžiamųjų dalelyčių funkcijos ir vartosena dabartinėje rašytinėje lietuvių kalboje [Functions and usage of focus particles in contemporary written Lithuanian]. PhD dissertation, Kaunas: Vytautas Magnus University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van der Wouden, Ton, and Ad Foolen. 2015. “Dutch Particles in the Right Periphery.” In Final Particles, ed. by Sylvie Hancil, Alexander Haselow, and Margje Post, 221–247. Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zorikhina Nilsson, Nadezhda. 2013. “The Negated Imperative in Russian and Other Slavic Languages: Aspectual and Modal Meanings.” In Diachronic and Typological Perspectives on Verbs, ed. by Folke Josephson, and Ingmar Söhrman, 79–106. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue