Cover not available

In:Pragmatic Approaches to Latin and Ancient Greek
Edited by Camille Denizot and Olga Spevak
[Studies in Language Companion Series 190] 2017
► pp. 273–302

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

Chapter 13
Ancient Greek adversative particles in contrast

 | University of Amsterdam/Free University
Published online: 1 November 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.190.13all
Abstract
Ancient Greek is a language which abounds in discourse particles showing a wide range of functions. This paper aims at analyzing the semantic differences between the most frequent adversative particles in Greek: allá, kaítoi, méntoi and mé:n. Drawing on a number of functionally and cognitively-oriented theoretical approaches to pragmatics, I will argue that these particles can best be analyzed as polysemous networks of semantic extensions resulting from the semanticization of contextually evoked pragmatic inferences. I will also argue that the semantic distinction between the various adversative particles can be insightfully described in terms of discourse-pragmatic notions such as common ground, topos, discourse act and move.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction and theoretical background
  • 2.A typology of adversative relations
  • 3. Allá
  • 4. Méntoi
  • 5. Kaítoi
  • 6. Mé:n
  • 7.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
References (43)
References
Allan, Rutger J. 2013. Exploring modality’s semantic space: Grammaticalisation, subjectification and the case of ὀφείλω. Glotta: 1–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2016. Tense and aspect in classical Greek. Two historical developments: Augment and perfect. In The Greek Verb Revisited. A Fresh Approach to Biblical Exegesis, Steven E. Runge & Christopher J. Fresch (eds), 81–121. Bellingham: Lexham Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Forthcoming. The history of the future. In The Greek Future and its History, Frédéric Lambert, Rutger J. Allan & Theodore Markopoulos (eds). Louvain: Peeters.
Anscombre, Jean-Claude & Ducrot, Oswald. 1977. Deux mais en français? Lingua 43(1): 1–43. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1983. L’argumentation dans la langue. Brussels: Mardaga.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Basset, Louis. 1997. Ἀλλ’ ἐξόλοισθ’ αὐτῷ κοαξ. Réexamen des emplois de ἀλλά dans les Grenouilles d’Aristophane. In New Approaches to Greek particles, Albert Rijksbaron (ed.), 75–99. Amsterdam: J. C. Gieben.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas. 1993. Co-occurrence patterns among collocations: A tool for corpus-based lexical knowledge acquisition. Computational Linguistics 19(3): 531–8.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bonifazi, Anna. 2012. Homer’s Versicolored Fabric. The Evocative Power of Ancient Greek Epic Word-Making. Cambridge MA: Center for Hellenic Studies.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 2010. Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. 1996. Using Language. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, William & Cruse, D. Alan. 2004. Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cruse, D. Alan. 1992. Monosemy vs. polysemy. Linguistics 30: 577–99.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Denniston, John D. 1954. The Greek Particles, 2nd edn. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drummen, Annemieke. 2009. Discourse cohesion in dialogue. Turn-initial ἀλλά in Greek Drama. In Discourse Cohesion in Ancient Greek, Stéphanie J. Bakker & Gerry C. Wakker (eds), 135–69. Leiden: Brill. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. Dramatic Pragmatics. A Discourse Approach to Particle Use in Ancient Greek Tragedy and Comedy. PhD dissertation, University of Heidelberg.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, Stephan T. 2010. Behavioral profiles: A fine-grained and quantitative approach in corpus-based lexical semantics. The Mental Lexicon 5(3): 323–46.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2015. Polysemy. In Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, Ewa Dąbrowska & Dagmar Divjak (eds), 472–490. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees & Mackenzie, J. Lachlan. 2008. Functional Discourse Grammar. A Typologically-based Theory of Language Structure. Oxford: OUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Traugott, Elizabeth C. 2003. Grammaticalization, 2nd edn. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jacquinod, Bernard. 1997. Sur le rôle pragmatique de καίτοι. In New Approaches to Greek Particles, Albert Rijksbaron (ed.), 131–49. Amsterdam: J. C. Gieben.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kroon, Caroline. 1995. Discourse Particles in Latin. A Study of nam, enim, autem, vero and at. Amsterdam: J. C. Gieben.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol I: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2008. Cognitive Grammar. A Basic Introduction. Oxford: OUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, Robin T. 1971. Ifs, ands and buts about conjunction. In Studies in Semantics, Charles Fillmore & Terence Langendoen (eds), 114–49. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej. 2004. Towards a semantic typology of adversative and contrastive marking. Journal of Semantics 21: 177–198.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mann, William C. & Thompson, Sandra. A. 1988. Rhetorical structure theory. Towards a functional theory of text organization. TEXT 8(3): 243–81. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mauri, Caterina. 2008. Coordination Relations in the Languages of Europe and Beyond. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mosegaard Hansen, Maj-Britt. 1998. The Function of Discourse Particles. A Study with Special Reference to Spoken Standard French. [Pragmatics and Beyond New Series 53]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Riemer, Nick. 2005. The Semantics of Polysemy: Reading Meaning in English and Warlpiri. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rudolph, Elisabeth. 1996. Contrast. Adversative and Concessive Expressions on Sentence and Text Level. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanders, Ted, Spooren, Wilbert & Noordman, Leo. 1992. Toward a taxonomy of coherence relations. Discourse processes 15(1): 1–35. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sicking, Chistiaan & van Ophuijsen, Johannes M. 1993. Two Studies in Attic particle usage. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Slings, Simon R. 1997. Adversative relators between PUSH and POP. In New Approaches to Greek Particles, Albert Rijksbaron (ed.), 101–29. Amsterdam: Gieben.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Strassler, Robert B. (ed.). 1998. The Landmark Thucydides. A Comprehensive Guide to the Peloponnesian War. New York NY: Touchstone.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taylor, John R. 2002. Cognitive Grammar. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2003. Linguistic Categorization. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2012. The Mental Corpus. How Language is Represented in the Mind. Oxford: OUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C. 1999. The role of pragmatics in semantic change. In Pragmatics in 1998: Selected Papers from the 6th International Pragmatics Conference, Vol. II, Jef Verschueren (ed.), 93–102, Antwerp: International Pragmatics Association.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2004. Historical pragmatics. In The Handbook of Pragmatics, Laurence R. Horn & Gregory Ward (eds), 538–61, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C. & Dasher, Richard B. 2002. Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verhagen, Arie. 2005. Constructions of Intersubjectivity. Discourse, Syntax, and Cognition. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wakker, Gerry C. 1997. Emphasis and affirmation. some aspects of μήν in tragedy. In New Approaches to Greek Particles, Albert Rijksbaron (ed.), 209–31. Amsterdam: J. C. Gieben.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Breunesse, Merlijn & Margherita Fantoli
2022.  Quia, quoniam, and information management in Plautus. Journal of Latin Linguistics 21:2 ► pp. 163 ff. DOI logo
Sluiter, Ineke
2021. Old Is the New New: The Rhetoric of Anchoring Innovation. In The Language of Argumentation [Argumentation Library, 36], ► pp. 243 ff. DOI logo
La Roi, Ezra
2020. The Variation of Classical Greek Wishes. Glotta 96:1 ► pp. 213 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 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