In spoken Japanese, subordinate clauses often occur without their main clauses. Ohori (1995; 1997) called them suspended clause constructions (SCCs) and formulated that a SCC occurs when “the intended message is either contextually inferable or conventionalized.” However, it is not very clear when and how the conversational participants know whether the intended message is contextually inferable (or conventionalized) or not, since a SCC and a “non-suspended version” of subordinate clause are not totally distinct category. Therefore, in order to consider the motivation for SCCs, we need to look carefully at the details of the process of producing SCCs. Based on the corpus analysis on naturally occurring conversational recordings, I propose to modify Ohori’s formulation from the Interactional Linguistic point of view.
1 Introduction
It has been widely known that, in spoken Japanese, subordinate clauses (e.g. kedo- /kara- /node- /noni- clauses) often occur without their main clauses (Martin, 1975; Hinds, 1986). While they are syntactically incomplete, they comprise a complete utterance. For example, in (1), speaker A uses a kedo (‘though,’ ‘but’) clause without its main clause.
Ohori (1995; 1997) argued that such patterns can be seen as independent grammatical constructions in the sense of Fillmore et al. (1988) and called them suspended clause constructions (SCCs). Answering to a question of “under what conditions can a clause ‘marked for subordination’ not be accompanied by a following main clause?” (pp.201-202), Ohori (1995) formulated that a SCC occurs when “the intended message is either contextually inferable or conventionalized” (p.213).
From the Construction Grammarians’ point of view, Ohori (1995:216) argued tha...
... middle of paper ...
...r when and how the conversational participants know whether the intended message is contextually inferable (or conventionalized) or not, since a SCC and a “non-suspended version” of subordinate clause are not totally distinct category. Therefore, in order to consider the motivation for SCCs, we need to look carefully at the details of the process of producing SCCs.
Based on the corpus analysis on naturally occurring conversational recordings, I found that it cannot be predetermined whether an subordinate clause is a SCC or not. Rather, SCCs are realized retrospectively as a result of interactive negotiation among conversational participants. Thus, I propose to modify Ohori’s formulation as follows: a SCC occurs when the fact that the intended message is either contextually inferable or conventionalized is interactionally observable by the participants’ behavior.
Conversation Analysis (CA) is the study of talk-within-interaction that attempts to describe the orderliness, structure and sequential patterns of interaction in conversation. It is a method of qualitative analysis developed by Harvey Sacks with the aid of Emmanuel Schegloff and Gail Jefferson in the late 1960s to early 1970s. Using the CA frame of mind to view stories shows us that what we may think to be simplistic relaying of information or entertaining our friends is in fact a highly organised social phenomena that is finely tuned in a way that expresses the teller’s motivation behind the talk. (Hutchby & Wooffitt, 2011). It is suggested that CA relies on three main assumptions; talk is a form of social action, action is structurally organised, talk creates and maintains inter-subjectivity (Atkinson & Heritage, 1984).
Amy Tan is somewhat a genius. She understands that communication is relative and not solely dependent on predefined syntax. Obviously she does not want to jeopardize her credibility as a professional, thus dew to the somewhat unconventional position of the paper, Amy presents the information as an opinion based on personal experience. Upon completing the introduction of this passage, the reader has concluded the following passage will most likely be the author's opinion on the English language; and is not to be analyzed with the same scrutiny as a research paper.
The two types of clauses are dependent and independent clauses. Both a dependent and an independent clause have a subject and a verb, but the difference comes with, the independent clause also has a complete thought where the dependent clause does not have a complete thought. The two ways to remove a complete thought is to either add a subordinate conjunction to the sentence or add a relative clause by placing a pronoun at the beginning of the sentence, these acts as an information enhancer on either a person or an object.
This template helps account for all of the different effects. We see these in examples (25), (26), (32-41), and (63). Adverbs are normally modifiers and quantifiers, and trigger minimality effects in wh-chains. Some belong only to the modifiers, like attentivement, and therefore do not have an effect on quantificational chains (Rizzi 2004: 244). “Simple adverb preposing targets the Mod position”, but can also target “the ordinary Focus position” and “negation belongs to both the quantificational class and the modifier class”(Rizzi 2004:244). This is one of the main differences between the first and second paper, the further analysis of the overall structure of the left periphery and how adverbs both help make it clear and how it explains their placement.
Knobe, Joshua. "Intentional Action and Side Effects in Ordinary Language." Oxford Journals 63.3 (2003): 190-94. JStor. Oxford University Press.
From what I have discussed above, I assert that a phrase is not only composed by two subphrases sometimes. In addition, a group of subphrases form a higher hierarchical phrase should has the functional utilities. The functional utilities could be accorded with either the process of the development of the music, or echo of two portions. Last but not least, the composer through elaboration, rhythmic diminishing, and overlapping to form phrases to a higher hierarchical phrase.
Donnellen (1966) criticized the Russell and Strawson’s view. He claimed that there are attributive and referential uses of definite description. The former is about attributively using definite description in an assertion which stating something about “A is B”. The latter is about speaker using the description to let the audience to know what is “A is B” about. Donnellen claimed that Russell focus on former and Strawson focus on latter.
This rule often makes people confused whenever they translate in their brains. While the structure order of English is “subject + verb + object”, the structure order of Korean is “subject + object”. For instance, unlike with English, students assignment do in Korea. Hence, there is a saying in Korea that “people need to listen until the end of the sentences.” This means people never know if the speaker is talking about past, present, future, positive or negative until the speaker finished her or his speech. On the other hand, people can know who and what the speaker does, unless people listen to the whole
This paper will explain the process we, as humans usually follow to understand a certain text or utterance. This explanation would be achieved through the analysis of two journal articles from semantics and pragmatics perspective, taking into account a range of techniques associated with each of the two concepts including:
Grammatical voice is a conventional technique of guiding the reader through the story using a first-person point of view. This is a...
White, A. (2003). Women’s usage of specific linguistic functions in the context of casual conversation: Analysis and discussion. Retrieved from http://www.bhamlive3.bham.ac.uk /Documents/college-artslaw/cels/essays /sociolinguistics/White5.pdf
At this level, the investigation specifically targets the linguistic dimension of discourse: phonological (stress, pitch, volume, intonation) or graphical structures (headlines, bold characters, layout); syntactic structures (word order, topicalization, clausal relations, split constructions); semantic structures (explicit vs. implicit, implications – insinuations, vagueness, presuppositions, allusions, symbolism, collective symbolism, figurativeness, metaphorism); pragmatics (intention, mood, opinion, perspective, relative distance); formal structures (idioms, sayings, clichés, set phrases, language patterns); logic and composition of the discourse (argumentation – strategy, types, cohesion,
Miller, T. P, & Faigley, L. (1982). College English. National Council of teachers of English, 44(6). Retrieved from http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0010-
Grice writes that because we are, for the most part, a group of coherent and cooperative human beings, “our talk exchanges do not normally consist of a succession of disconnected remarks, and would not be rational if they did” (“Logic and Conversation” pg. 44). That is, the conversations ...
Burgess, J., & Etherington, S. (2002). Focus on grammatical form explicit or implicit? System, 30, 433-458.