hellogѸ˥֥     ChangeLog ǿ     ƥǿ     1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ڡ / page 1 (8)

pragmatics - hellogѸ˥֥

ǽ: 2026-07-15 01:27

2026-06-16 Tue

#6259. رѸ춵٤Ρ֤ΤۤϢܡ4 --- ֤֤ʤפϤʤ Watch out! ˤʤΤ ž륹ԡȤ [inohota][youtube][inohota_rensai][speech_act][sociolinguistics][notice][inohotanaze][historical_pragmatics][pragmatics]


inohota_rensai_eigokyouiku_20260612_front_cover.png

  *

612罤۽ŹرѸ춵7Ԥޤǯ١ƱˤơƱνʼʷضˤȤȤϢܴ֤Τۤإͥ PRESENTS Ѹ򿼤ҲءѸˤλפŸƤޤ4εϰ夵ˤ԰٤ѺäƤޤ֤֤֡ʤפϤʤ Watch out! ˤʤΤ ž륹ԡȤӡפǤ
ΰ夵ͤϡβʤɽ򤪤⤷겼ƤޤȤСïžӤˤʤäݡܸǤϤȤäˡ֤֤ʤפȤդФޤϷȤƤϴʾ̤ˤޤ󡥤ȤѸǤƱͤξ̤ Watch out! ɽΤŪǤܸ줬ȤưȤΤФѸˤƤۤŪʹ԰٤ؼ뤳ȤưȤ뷹ޤϡ֤뤵פФ Shut up! Be quiet!֤ޤפФ Move! ʤɤɽˤϻΥۡΡֹ߼ְ֡פȤɽФѸ Keep out ȤؼΤˤޤ줷Ƥޤ
ʤΤ褦ʸ԰ (speech_act) ΰ㤤ޤΤˤĤơ夵2ĤڤƤޤκǤפʥݥȤˤĤƤϡһ˼äϢܵˤƤɤߤ
Ҳ (sociolinguistics) Ū˽פʤΤϡ㤤ܿͤϻʸǡѸľŪפȤä̱̱²ΰ㤤˻ñ㲽ʤȤǤǤ褯ˤܤ͡פȤؤαԤĥåߤϪƤޤˤϻפ鷺˥ȤƤޤޤ
Ǹˡ⾯Ȥ󤻤ƤޤǯѸˤʬǤ˸θ椬ǤΥȥԥåϤγ٤鸫Ƥ⼨٤ǤޤѸˤ̤ľŪʹ԰٤׵Ф򹥤Ǥ櫓ǤϤޤ󡥤ȤСWill you be quiet? Τ褦ΰջ֤γǧ̤ƴŪ˰ڤ̿ɽ魯԰٤η⡤ѸʹߤΤȤǤϤޤȯãƤƤޤĤޤꡤѸޤľ᤹̿ΤǤϤʤֿʴηפ򼫤鳫󤷤ƤˤäƤΤǤŪʼҲؤθ̻ŪʱѸˤλ򺹤 speech act ϡƥ󥰤Ǥ͡

ʼ δ졡֤Τۤإͥ PRESENTS Ѹ򿼤ҲءѸˤλ4󡡡֤֤ʤפϤʤ Watch out! ˤʤΤ ž륹ԡȤӡסرѸ춵2026ǯ7桤罤۽Ź2026ǯ61244--45ǡ

[ | ѥڡ ]

2025-08-10 Sun

#5949. 2025ǯ٤ī륷꡼ֺ¤4but --- Ĥ¿³פޥɥޥåײƤߤޤ [asacul][mindmap][notice][kdee][hee][etymology][hel_education][lexicology][but][conjunction][adverb][preposition][conversion][pragmatics][link]

726ڡˤˡǯ٤ī㡼󥿡Υ꡼ֺ˾äȤԻ׵Ĥʱñ4ʲƴȤƤ1ˤȤʤbut --- Ĥ¿³פɶˤƳ֤ޤ
ֺ¤ȴϢơ Voicy heldio ˤ#1515. 726īֺ --- but ˤĤƹͤƤߤޤ󤫡#1518. Ѹ butűѸ acۿޤ
4ֺ¤Ƥ markmap Ȥ֥ġˤޥɥޥåײޤʲ򥯥åƳˡѤˤȤ


lib/asacul_most_attractive_words_in_hel_04_20250726_mindmap_large.png



ʤīֺ¤Υ꡼1󤫤3ˤĤƤޥɥޥåפƤޤ

#5857. 2025ǯ٤ī륷꡼ֺ¤1she --- 츻䤨ʤ̾פޥɥޥåײƤߤޤ ([2025-05-10-1])
#5887. 2025ǯ٤ī륷꡼ֺ¤2through --- ޤ¿ֻͤĸפޥɥޥåײƤߤޤ ([2025-06-09-1])
#5915. 2025ǯ٤ī륷꡼ֺ¤3autumn --- ³ƤפޥɥޥåײƤߤޤ ([2025-07-07-1])

꡼μ5ϡ823ڡˤˡguy --- ̾饫եʰ̣Ѳ뤲פꤷƳ֤ޤؿΤϡī㡼󥿡ɶθHPܺ٤򤴳ǧξ塤ߤС

[ | ѥڡ ]

2025-08-05 Tue

#5944. 󽾰̲ --- Ω [insubordination][syntax][conjunction][subordinator][language_change][terminology][may][pragmatics][speech_act][word_order][inversion]

³ (conjunction) ˤĴ٤Τ Fischer et al. 򻲾ȤƤȤ󽾰̲ (insubordination) Ȥ̣Τä (187) ³Ƴ뽾᤬ȼ鷺ΩѤ礬롥

Sometimes clauses with the formal markings of subordination are used without a proper main clause --- which is what Evans (2007) refers to as 'insubordination'.

(70) O that I were a Gloue vpon that hand (Shakespeare, Romeo & Juliet, II.2)

It is typical for such insubordinate clauses to come with specialized functions --- the insubordinate that-clause in (70) expresses a wish. It is still an unresolved issue, however, exactly how insubordinate clauses originate and develop, and how formal and functional change interact in this.


ϡMay the force be with you! Τ褦ʵ ˡȯãεˤؤפƶmay ιʸϡ³ȼ鷺֤Ȥʤˤ꽾äƤ뤫Τ褦ǡǤϾѤäפǤϤΤΡȤü첽ǽפƤ롥󽾰̲λ֤ӸϤޤʤƤʤ褦ȯãλˤ϶Τ⤷ʤϢơ#5937. ³ʳ˽Ǥ뤳Ȥɸʤϡ ([2025-07-29-1]) ⻲ȡ

Fischer, Olga, Hendrik De Smet, and Wim van der Wurff. A Brief History of English Syntax. Cambridge: CUP, 2017.

[ | ѥڡ ]

2025-07-25 Fri

#5933. ³ but Ρֵܡ [adversative][conjunction][semantics][pragmatics][presupposition][negative][negation][oximoron][but]

ܸΡ֤ꡤѸ butܤ³ ((adversative) conjunction) ȸƤФ뤬⤽ܤȤϲϱѸ but Ѥɽܤ뤬㤨 A but B ȤȤA B δطܤǤȤϡ̣Τ
Ǥñ˹ͤСA B ̣ŪȿդξˡδطϵܤȤ뤫⤷ʤ̣Ū˸̩ȿդξˤϡbut ΩȤȤ߹蘆줿ɽϡܤȤ̷⡤뤤Ƶˡ (oxymoron) ȤʤäƤޤShe is rich but poor. Τ褦
äơ¿ξ硤but ˤܤɽϡ̣Ū˸̩ȿդȤŪʥȤ٤ʤΤ⤷ʤA 򤹤뤿ɬפ (presupposition) B ǤѤʤȤ A Ԥ뤳Ȥ B ΩʤȤŪʴ顤ܴطȤߤʤΤǤϤʤ
դĤĤȹͤƤԿʤʤΤǡQuirk et al. §13.32ˤäƤߤ

The use of but 13.32
But expresses a contrast which could usually be alternatively expressed by and followed by yet. The contrast may be in the unexpectedness of what is said in the second conjoin in view of the content of the first conjoin:

   John is poor, but he is happy. ['. . . and yet he is happy']

This sentence implies that his happiness is unexpected in view of his poverty. The unexpectedness depends on our presuppositions and our experience of the world. It would be reasonable to say:

   John is rich, but he is happy.

if we considered wealth a source of misery.
   The contrast expressed by but may also be a repudiation in positive terms of what has been said or implied by negation in the first conjoin (cf 13.42):

   Jane did not waste her time before the exam, but studied hard every evening. [1]

In such cases the force of but can be emphasized by the conjunct rather or on the contrary (cf 8.137):

   I am not objecting to his morals, but rather to his manners. [2]

With this meaning, but normally does not link two clauses, but two smaller constituents; for example, the conjoins are two predicates in [1] and two prepositional phrases in [2]. The conjoins cannot be regarded as formed simply by ellipsis from two full clauses, since the not in the first clause conjoin is repudiated in the second. Thus the expansion of [2] into two full clauses must be as follows:

   I am not objecting to his morals, but (rather) I am objecting to his manners.


ɤߡnot A but B ɽˤƤʤ but Ѥ뤫ʬäƤA ŪǡB ϹŪǤȤȿиǤ뤳Ȥܤ³ but ɽ路Ƥ롤ȤȤʤΤ

Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman, 1985.

[ | ѥڡ ]

2025-07-22 Tue

#5930. 726ڡˡīֺ¤βƴ1but --- Ĥ¿³פ֤ޤ [asacul][notice][conjunction][preposition][adverb][polysemy][semantics][pragmatics][syntax][negative][negation][hee][kdee][etymology][hel_education][helkatsu][link]


asacul_20250726.png



ǯī㡼󥿡ɶˤơѸˤΥ꡼ֺ¤˰٤٤dz֤Ƥޤǯ٤Υ꡼Υȥ˾äȤԻ׵ĤʱñǤ1˭ˤȴߤñ夲رѸ츻ŵʸҡˤ俷رѸ츻ϥɥ֥åʸҡˤʤɤʸ򻲾Ȥʤ顤Ѹˤ̥Ϥޤ
726ڡˤβϡƴνȤʤޤǽ but ܤͽǤBUTbut ιֺ¤90ʬĤΤǤ礦ޤäۤޤbut ˤޤĤϡ90ʬǤϸ꤭ʤۤ˭Ǥ󤲻Ϥȥ꤬ʤۤɤǤ

but εȯã
but ¿͡ˡ³졤°³졤ֻ졤졤̾졤ư
"only" ̣ but ˡȯãᤰ
but θ
but
but ˤޤĤθѡʤ˴ؤ
but ħŤȤϲ
but ¾³Ȥ

but ֤פȤȤä礦ʤɡΤʤǤޤ󡥤ΤޤʵˡҰ˹ͤƤߤޤ󤫡
ַϡɶǤ̼֤˲ä饤֤ǽǤޤ2ָθƨۿ⤴ѤǤޤԹΤ褤ˡǻäйǤֺ¤ξܺ١ߤīΥڡɤͤΥȥ꡼򿴤ꤪԤƤޤ

ʰʲ嵭2025/07/23(Wed)
ֺܹ¤ͽˤĤƤ heldio ˤ#1515. 726īֺ --- but ˤĤƹͤƤߤޤ󤫡ȤƤäƤޤҤ⤪İ



߷ ˧ͺԽ紴ˡرѸ츻ŵٿǡҡ2024ǯ
߷ ͧ ɹ δˡʡ 쵮 ءʹܶϡˡرѸ츻ϥɥ֥å١ҡ2025ǯ

Referrer (Inside): [2025-07-26-1] [2025-07-24-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2024-12-09 Mon

#5705. Ѹ˴ؤѤʵ䡡ܥΥå at [senbonknock][sobokunagimon][sociolingustics][voicy][heldio][goshosan][stress][personal_pronoun][pragmatics][variety][3ps][language_or_dialect][language_family][origin_of_language][artificial_language][waseieigo][stigma][synonym][sapir-whorf_hypothesis][lexicology]

޽¤ءˤˡƱؤdz֤ƤҲμȤˤޤ꤬Ȥޤ˼ֳγʤɤνǡ֤ܥΥå (senbonknock) 򴺹Ԥޤ޽ꤵ2ͤǤΥ饤Τ褦ܥΥåȤʤޤ䤬ӽФ80ʬۤɤΥƥ󥰤ʥåȤʤޤ
μȤΰϽ Voicy heldio ǼϿޤΤȾȸȾʬơۿޤʲ˳Ƽ䤪бץʬä򼨤ޤ

Ⱦ48ʬ #1284. Ѹ˴ؤѤʵ䡡ܥΥå at --- Part 1



(1) Chapter 2, 03:55 --- ȯΥȤʤΤǤĤϤޤʸˤ륢Ȥ¸߰յϡ
(2) Chapter 3, 04:58 --- ʤܸˤϡֻס͡סֲפʤ1;Τ¿θΤǤ
(3) Chapter 4, 00:03 --- ܸˤ褦ϱѸˤ¸ߤΤǤʡּפء
(4) Chapter 4, 04:40 --- ʤ you ˤϡ֤ʤפȡ֤ʤפξΰ̣ΤǤ
(5) Chapter 5, 02:57 --- ʤ3ñ -s ĤΤǤ
(6) Chapter 5, 01:26 --- 㤦²ʤΤ˻ƤϤޤʸζ̡θοء

ڸȾ35ʬ #1287. ؤܥΥå with ޽ (2)



(7) Chapter 2, 00:05 --- ǽ2Ĥθʹ֤ïǤ
(8) Chapter 2, 02:57 --- ζ̸뤳Ȥϼ¸ǽǤ
(9) Chapter 3, 03:35 --- ǽ˱Ѹ줬ܤäƤȤɤΤ褦ǤΤǤ
(10) Chapter 3, 02:51 --- ѸΤ褦ʤΤ¾ˤ⤢ΤǤ
(11) Chapter 4, 00:46 --- ܸΥХȷɸΤ褦ʤΤϱѸˤ⤢ޤ
(12) Chapter 5, 00:00 --- ʤѸˤ say, speak, tell ʤɡָפ̣ñ줬¿ΤǤ

ȤȤ⡤޽ꤵȤ heldio ۿ٥ȤȤʤޤ꤬Ȥޤ

[ | ѥڡ ]

2024-10-19 Sat

#5654. a friend of mine vs. one of my friends [double_genitive][genitive][syntax][determiner][definiteness][number][semantics][pragmatics]

ε#5653. 2°ɽ a friend of mine 2Ĥΰ̣Ūħ ([2024-10-18-1]) ˰³double_genitive 뤤 post-genitive ΰ̣롥 a friend of mine ȤɽȤ one of my friends Ȥΰ̣Ūʺۤ뤫ɤܤ롥
Quirk et al. (17.46) ˤСξɽ̾Ʊʸ̮ˤäƤϰۤʤް (entailment) ӤӤȤ

The two constructions a friend of his father's and one of his father's friends are usually identical in meaning. One difference, however, is that the former construction may be used whether his father had one or more friends, whereas the latter necessarily entails more than one friend. Thus:

Mrs Brown's daughter[8]
Mrs Brown's daughter Mary[9]
Mary, (the) daughter of Mrs Brown[10]
Mary, a daughter of Mrs Brown's[11]


[8] implies 'sole daughter', whereas [9] and [10] carry no such implication; [11] entails 'not sole daughter'.
   Since there is only one composition called the War Requiem by Britten, we have [12] but not [13] or [14]:

The War Requiem of/by Britten (is a splendid work.)[12]
*The War Requiem of Britten's[13]
*One of Britten's War Requiems[14]


̯ʰ㤤褦Ƕ̣ȤǺǸ˽Ҥ٤ƤӺεǿ줿ħˤȿ㤬롥㤨 "that wife of mine", "this war Requiem of Britten's", "this hand of mine", "the/that daughter of Mrs Brown's", "that son of yours" ʤɤ
Quirk et al. ϡ򼡤Τ褦롥"this hand of mine" ϡǤ "this one of my (two) hands" ΰ̣ǤϤʤ "this part of my body that I call 'hand'" ΰ̣Ǥ롥ޤԤʸ̮ǰ "a daughter of Mrs Brown's" ƤС򻲾Ȥݤ "the/that daughter of Mrs Brown's (that I mentioned)" ۤɤΰ̣ǻȤ뤳Ȥ롥ˡŪŪʰ̣礤 "that son of yours" ʤɤȤ⤢롥Ĥޤꡤ㳰Ū˷줬դ륱Ǥϡ餫Ρʰ̣ŪǤʤ˸ŪʴްդäƤȤȤ

Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman, 1985.

Referrer (Inside): [2025-01-01-1] [2024-10-20-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2024-08-05 Mon

#5579. Ȥϲ [interjection][pos][category][exclamation][syntax][onomatopoeia][terminology][exclamation][pragmatics][syntax]

(interjection) Ȥޥʡʻϡ褽쵬§ʤͣθȤȤǡɤͳ̥Ϥ롥Ū˼椫졤夲Ƥ롥εȤƤϡ#3689. Ѹδ ([2019-06-03-1])#3712. Ѹδ (2) ([2019-06-26-1])#3688. ܸδưʬ ([2019-06-02-1]) ʤɤ򻲾Ȥ줿
Crystal, McArthur, Bussmann γơѸ켭ŵ interjection Ƥߤ

interjection (n.) A term used in the TRADITIONAL CLASSIFICATION of PARTS OF SPEECH, referring to a CLASS of WORDs which are UNPRODUCTIVE, do not enter into SYNTACTIC relationships with other classes, and whose FUNCTION is purely EMOTIVE, e.g., Yuk!, Strewth!, Blast!, Tut tut! There is an unclear boundary between these ITEMS and other types of EXCLAMATION, where some REFERENTIAL MEANING may be involved, and where there may be more than one word, e.g. Excellent!, Lucky devil!, Cheers!, Well well! Several alternative ways of analysing these items have been suggested, using such notions as MINOR SENTENCE, FORMULAIC LANGUAGE, etc. (Crystal)


INTERJECTION [15c: through French from Latin interiectio/interiectionis something thrown in]. A part of speech and a term often used in dictionaries for marginal items functioning alone and not as conventional elements of sentence structure. They are sometimes emotive and situational: oops, expressing surprise, often at something mildly embarrassing, yuk/yuck, usually with a grimace and expressing disgust, ow, ouch, expressing pain, wow, expressing admiration and wonder, sometimes mixed with surprise. They sometimes use sounds outside the normal range of a language: for example, the sounds represented as ugh, whew, tut-tut/tsk-tsk. The spelling of ugh has produced a variant of the original, pronounced ugg. Such greetings as Hello, Hi, Goodbye and such exclamations as Cheers, Hurra, Well are also interjections. (McArthur)


interjection [Lat. intericere 'to throw between']
Group of words which express feelings, curse, and wishes or are used to initiate conversation (Ouch!, Darn!, Hi!). Their status as a grammatical category is debatable, as they behave strangely in respect to morphology, syntax, and semantics: they are formally indeclinable, stand outside the syntactic frame, and have no lexical meaning, strictly speaking. Interjections often have onomatopoeic characteristics: Brrrrr!, Whoops!, Pow! (Bussmann)


¾Ѹ켭ŵ٤ƤȤǤ롥ޤܤ뤳ȤΤʤ̥ϤäƤ

Crystal, David, ed. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. 6th ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2008. 295--96.
McArthur, Tom, ed. The Oxford Companion to the English Language. Oxford: OUP, 1992.
Bussmann, Hadumod. Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. Trans. and ed. Gregory Trauth and Kerstin Kazzizi. London: Routledge, 1996.

Referrer (Inside): [2025-01-01-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2024-03-19 Tue

#5440. źˡˤ⤢ޤʤȤФ̩١˼Ҥޥץޡӡ2023ǯ [review][toc][syntax][semantics][pragmatics][youtube][inohota][notice]


ź ˤ⤢ޤʤȤФ̩١˼Ҥޥץޡӡ2023ǯ



ǯ12˽Ǥ줿źˤդ򤪤⤷뿷ɽӤܸǡɤǤߤʤܤǤäȾФäƤޤܸ˭٤˵󤲤ʤ顤ȤФۣ˾ƤƤޤɤߤ䤹Ĵʤ⡤¤ϸŪʴؾνƤꡤʪ񤭤ߤƤ˽񤱤ǽ񤱤ʤפδͭܤȤʤäƤޤ
ɤΤ褦ʻ㤬ȤƤΤϥ٥θФǤƤߤޤ礦



1. ֥㡼ظ --- ɽۣ椵
2. OKǤסַ빽Ǥ --- ˺ܤäƤۣ椵
3. ˼夲Ƥ --- ۣ̾椵
4. ֻˤлҤ夬ޤ --- ̾δط
5. ܤν礹 --- ¤Ūۣ椵
6. Ȭθ夬Ƥޤ --- ä
7. 󡻺̤ǤϤޤ󤫡 --- ʸʸۣ椵
8. ּʬϤǤ͡ --- ۣ̾椵
9. ֤ʤϤǤꤤޤ --- ΰ̣
10. ۣ椵Ȥޤդ礦ˡ



ŪʴϡȤ櫓칽¤ؤܤΩäƤޤ³줬ĤʤƤǤϲȲΥפϤɤޤǤƻ줬ˤΤ֤Ρפ¿Ūˤۤ˸Ụ̄Ūۣ夲Ƥޤ
ܸܽɤ߽񤭤ݤդ٤ޤȤ᤿ܤȤƤϡŪܸνäޥ˥奢ȤɤळȤǤȻפޤषŪʴؿܽ˼äƤߤ顤ŪΤ⤷兩ʬäƤȤ褦ɤޤꤵƤΤ⤷ޤۣγƻˤĤƤϡפȡֲסʴˤդƤޤ
ܽΤ⤦1Ĥɤϡ˵󤲤ƤܸλѸˤɤʤ뤫ѸäɤΤ褦ɽʤɤȹͤʤɤ߿ʤ뤳ȤˤäơξθȤƤιԤΰ㤤˵ŤȤ褦ɤǤξ֤ˤʤꤽǤ
ܽˤĤƤ YouTube ֤Τۤإͥפˤ#205. źˤ⤢ޤʤȤФ̩٤ΤҲβǼ夲ƤޤҤ



ۣˤĤƤ hellog #2278. ̣ۣ ([2015-07-23-1])#4913. ξˤ⤤ --- ŪξŪξޤǡ ([2022-10-09-1]) ε⤴ɤ

ź ˤ⤢ޤʤȤФ̩١˼Ҥޥץޡӡ2023ǯ

Referrer (Inside): [2024-03-20-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2024-03-18 Mon

#5439. Ѹ켭񤫤齸᤿ tautology ȿȡȥˤλ [tautology][voicy][heldio][rhetoric][logic][pragmatics][semantics][khelf][aokikun][word_play][periphrasis]



ī Voicy ֱѸθ츻ȤˤĤ饸 (heldio)פۿ#1022. ȡȥ --- khelf ĹڤθơޡǤˤ tautology Ȥϲ"A is A" Τ褦ʰ츫̵̣ʷʤ¸ߤʤФ̣ͭȤʤΤˤĤƤϡkhelfʷѸ˥ե˲ĹڵȤȤ˺äȸƤƤͽǤϤƬФȤݤǤۿǤҤİС
ȡȥˤĤƤϡhellog Ǥϡ#4851. tautology ([2022-08-08-1]) ȤƤǤƳƤޤϱѸ켭񤫤ѸΥȡȥλ򤤤ĤƤߤޤ

a beginner who has just started
free gift
He lives alone by himself.
hear with one's ears
helpful assistance
necessary essentials
new innovation
real truth
She is dumb and can not speak.
speak all at once together
the modern university of today
The money should be adequate enough.
They spoke in turn, one after the other.
This candidate will win or not win.
very excellent
widow woman

̣ѡʤɤδ͡ʬǤǤΤˤäƤ periphrasis ʱˡˡpleonasm ʾˡˡredundancy ʾĹˡrepetition ʷ֤ˤʤɤȸƤѤۤŬڤʻ⤢ꤽǤޤͷ (word_play) ȤطƤǤ
ˤäƥȡȥμϰۤʤΤ̸ˤȡȥεȯãϡȡȥθŪǽϡ椬Ƥ֡ꤷΤơޤǤ

Referrer (Inside): [2025-01-01-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2024-01-28 Sun

#5389. Ū if you like ֤äƤ褱СפȯŸ (2) [pragmatics][discourse_marker][lmode][construction_grammar][politeness][comment_clause][syntax][constructionalisation][corpus][speed_of_change]

Voicy heldio ˤ#961. ɾ if you like ֤ƤӤСꤷơѽХե졼 if you like Ϥ



¤ϻ伫Ȥ˺ƤΤˤĤƤ hellog ǡ#4593. Ū if you like ֤äƤ褱СפȯŸ ([2021-11-23-1]) ȤƼ夲ƤβεǤ⻲ȡѤ Brinton ʸɤľif you like ɽˤĤƶ̣Ū¤ΤäΤǡ˵Ƥ
Brinton ŪѤ if you choose/like/prefer/want/wish त "if-ellipitical clauses" (= "if-ECs") ̾դƤ (273) ̣δ顤2 if-ECs ̤롥1ĤϾάƤŪ줬ΥƥȤŪ䤨륿פǤ ("elliptical form") 2ĤŪΥƥȤ䤦ȤϤǤäѤ᥿ŪȤѤ륿פǤ ("metalinguistic parenthetical") ƥפˤĤơBrinton (281) ˥ѥ齦ä1Ĥĵ󤲤Ƥߤ褦

1. I said no, they are copper, but if you choose, you shall have them (1763 John Routh, Violent Theft; OBP)
2. I ought to occupy the foreground of the picture; that being the hero of the piece, or (if you choose) the criminal at the bar, my body should be had into court. (1822 De Quincy, Confessions of an English Opium Eater; CLMETEV)

choose ȤưѤǤ롥Ԥ if you choose to have them Τ褦˥ƥȤ˴ŤŪ䤦ȤǤ뤬ԤϤΤ褦ˤ䤨ʤޤǥ᥿Ū if you choose to say so ۤɤްդƤˡ
ŪˤϡԤΥפ㤬ưؤĤ18--19˽ФƤ롥ơ⤷ȤˡԤΥפ㤬θǯ100ǯۤ٤ƽФƤ롥ΤȤƤϡư줬«ˤʤäơäȻ褦ˡγĥ뤲Ƥ뤳Ȥˤʤ롥Brinton (282) "Dating of if-ECs" ꤹɽǤ褦Ѹ͡ʥѥѤǯĴη̤Ǥ롥

 Earliest elliptical formEarliest metalinguistic parenthetical
if you choose17631822
if you like17231823
if you wish18191902/PDE
if you prefer18481900
if you want1677/18241934



ˤ⤷Τϡ᥿Ūˡνؤ if you choose ϡߤޤǤ˿͵򼺤äƤ뤳ȤǤ⿷ if you want ᥿ŪˡȤƤ٤Ωʤ괶ΤΤϤ¾3like, wish, prefer դΤǤ롥ư줬«ˤʤäɽˡȯŸƤȤƤ⡤ΰ괶˺ФΤϤʤʤΤȤƤⶽ̣

Brinton, Laurel J. "If you choose/like/prefer/want/wish: The Origin of Metalinguistic and Politeness Functions." Late Modern English Syntax. Ed. Marianne Hundt. Cambridge: CUP, 2014.

[ | ѥڡ ]

2023-10-25 Wed

#5294. ¤, [information_structure][pragmatics][discourse_analysis][khelf][syntax][article][khelf-conference-2023][seminar][hel_education][voicy][heldio][notice]

Voicy heldio ˤ#873. ߹ɼϿ꡼ (7) --- ¤ۿޤkhelf ʷѸ˥եˤΥС3̾ˤϿǡɾƤޤʤ꤬ȤޤˡϺפˡ¤ (information_structure) ȤѸ졦ǰδܤǫ˲⤵Ƥޤ



¤˴ؤŪ1Ĥˡֵ (given information) ȡֿ (new information) Ωޤäϸ§ȤơäʹˤȤäƴΤε󼨤˻Ϥޤꡤξ̤Τοä뤳ȤǡʳŪ˶ͭμѤƤޤĤޤꡤ󢪿ȿʤߡˤΤȤʤäơξ˿Ѥ߾夲졤ˤޤǤΤȤʤäƼο󤬲ä롤ȤȤǤ
Cruse Ѹ켭ŵ "given vs new information" (74--75) ιܤѤޤ

given vs new information These notions are concerned with what is called the 'information structure' of utterances. In virtually all utterances, some items are assumed by the speaker to be already present in the consciousness of the hearer, mostly as a result of previous discourse, and these constitute a platform for the presentation of new information. As the discourse proceeds, the new information of one utterance can become the given information for subsequent utterances, and so on. The distinction between given and new information can be marked linguistically in various ways. The indefinite article typically marks new information, and the definite article, given information: A man and a woman entered the room. The man was smoking a pipe. A pronoun used anaphorically indicates given information: A man entered the room. He looked around for a vacant seat. The stress pattern of an utterance can indicate new and given information (in the following example capitals indicate stress):

   PETE washed the dishes. (in answer to Who washed the dishes?)
   Pete washed the DISHES. (in answer to What did Pete do?)

Givenness is a matter of degree. Sometimes the degree of givenness is so great that the given item(s) can be omitted altogether (ellipsis):

   A: What did you get for Christmas?
   B: A computer. (The full form would be I got a computer for Christmas.)


äϵξ˿դä뤳ȤήƤȤ¤δܻƳޤ

Cruse, Alan. A Glossary of Semantics and Pragmatics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 2006.

[ | ѥڡ ]

2023-10-20 Fri

#5289. ̾˰̣ϤΤ [name_project][onomastics][voicy][heldio][personal_name][toponymy][semantics][pragmatics]

̾ؤ뤤ϸͭ̾ (onomastics) 1Ĥˡɸε롥Ϥ̾˰̣ΤɤˤĤƤϡĹ餯ͤ³Ƥ#5197. ͭ̾˰̣ϤΤʤΤ ([2023-07-20-1]) 򻲾Ȥ줿Voicy ֱѸθ츻ȤˤĤ饸 (heldio)פΥץߥꥹʡۿֱͥѸˤ (helwa)סͭˤǤ֡ڱѸˤ #15̾˰̣뤫ʤȤƵƤ롥
Nyström (40--41) ϡͭ̾ˤϹ̣ǤΡְ̣פȤơ"the maxium meaningfulness thesis" ˻ƱƤ (40) ʲ Nyström εꡤǤפ

Do names have meaning or not, that is do they have both meaning and reference or do they only have reference? This question is closely connected to the dichotomy proper name---common noun (or to use another pair of terms name--appellative) and also to the idea of names being more or less 'namelike', showing a lower or higher degree of propriality or 'nameness'. Can a certain name be a more 'namelike' name than another? I believe it can. To support such an assertion one might argue that a name is not a physical, material object. It is an abstract conception. A name is the result of a complex mental process: sometimes (when we hear or see a name) the result of an individual analysis of a string of sounds or letters, sometimes (when we produce a name) the result of a verbalization of a thought. We shall not ask ourselves what a name is but what a name does. To use a name means to start a process in the brain, a process which in turn activates our memories, fantasy, linguistic abilities, emotions, and many other things. With an approach like that, it would be counterproductive to state that names do not have meaning, that names are meaningless.


̾ȤϲפȤ䤤̾ϲ򤹤ΤפȤ̾䤦ȤפʤΤǤϤʤȤˤܤڤꡤ줫夲ƤФȡ

Nyström, Staffan. "Names and Meaning." Chapter 3 of The Oxford Handbook of Names and Naming. Ed. Carole Hough. Oxford: OUP, 2016. 39--51.

[ | ѥڡ ]

2023-10-13 Fri

#5282. Jespersen ΡֶʣפλŦ [plural][number][numeral][personal_pronoun][personal_name][plural_of_approximation][semantics][pragmatics]

ε#5281. ʣ ([2023-10-12-1]) ˤʣ (plural_of_approximation) ˤĤơǽ˻ŦΤ Jespersen (83--85) Ǥ롥θŵɤ߱ΤǡΤޤްѤ

          Plural of Approximation
   4.51 The sixties (cf. 4.12) has two meanings, first the years from 60 to 69 inclusive in any century; thus Seeley E 249 the seventies and the eighties of the eighteenth century | Stedman Oxford 152 in the "Seventies" [i.e. 1870, etc.] | in the early forties = early in the forties. Second it may mean the age of any individual person, when he is sixty, 61, etc., as in Wells U 316 responsible action is begun in the early twenties . . . Men marry before the middle thirties | Children's Birthday Book 182 While I am in the ones, I can frolic all the day; but when I'm in the tens, I must get up with the lark . . . When I'm in the twenties, I'll be like sister Joe . . . When I'm in the thirties, I'll be just like Mama.
   4.52. The most important instance of this plural is found in the pronouns of the first and second persons: we = I + one or more not-I's. The pl you (ye) may mean thou + thou + thou (various individuals addressed at the same time), or else thou + one or more other people not addressed at the moment; for the expressions you people, you boys, you all, to supply the want of a separate pl form of you see 2.87.
   A 'normal' plural of I is only thinkable, when I is taken as a quotation-word (cf. 8.2), as in Kipl L 66 he told the tale, the I--I--I's flashing through the record as telegraph-poles fly past the traveller; cf. also the philosophical plural egos or me's, rarer I's, and the jocular verse: Here am I, my name is Forbes, Me the Master quite absorbs, Me and many other me's, In his great Thucydides.
   4.53. It will be seen that the rule (given for instance in Latin grammars) that when two subjects are of different persons, the verb is in "the first person rather than the second, and in the second rather than the third" 'si tu et Tullia valetis, ego et Cicero valemus, Allen and Greenough, Lat. Gr. §317) is really superfluous, as a self-evidence consequence of the definition that "the first person plural is the first person singular plus some one else, etc." In English grammar the rule is even more superfluous, because no persons are distinguished in the plural of English verbs.
   When a body of men, in response to "Who will join me?", answer "We all will", their collective answers may be said to be an ordinary plural (class 1) of I (= many I's), though each individual "we will" means really nothing more than "I will, and B and C . . . will, too" in conformity with the above definition. Similarly in a collective document: "We, the undersigned citizens of the city of . . ."
   4.54. The plural we is essentially vague and in no wise indicates whom the speaker wants to include besides himself. Not even the distinction made in a great many African and other languages between one we meaning 'I and my own people, but not you', and another we meaning 'I + you (sg or pl)' is made in our class of languages. But very often the resulting ambiguity is remedied by an appositive addition; the same speaker may according to circumstances say we brothers, we doctors, we Yorkshiremen, we Europeans, we gentlemen, etc. Cf. also GE M 2.201 we people who have not been galloping. --- Cf. for 4.51 ff. PhilGr p. 191 ff.
   4.55. Other examples of the pl of approximation are the Vincent Crummleses, etc. 4.42. In other languages we have still other examples, as when Latin patres many mean pater + mater, Italian zii = zio + zia, Span. hermanos = hermano(s) + hermana(s), etc.


ʣȤäƤ⡤ΰ̣ʣǤ롥ϡ츫ƷȤߤơܼŪˤϰ̣ȸʤΤȻפ

Jespersen, Otto. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. Part 2. Vol. 1. 2nd ed. Heidelberg: C. Winter's Universitätsbuchhandlung, 1922.

[ | ѥڡ ]

2023-07-23 Sun

#5200. ɽˡ [onomastics][toponymy][deixis][conversation_analysis][pragmatics]

ɽˡ (place formulations) ˤϡĤ롥De Stefani (60) ϡԸ˸ڤ5Ĥ󼨤Ƥ롥줾ˤĤƻפĤź롥

1. geographical formulations: ꡤ١١ѡΥ
2. relation to members formulations: ڷβȡסֻγع
3. relation to landmarks formulations: ֱؤסֶζ᤯
4. course of action places: ֻ䤬Ƚвäءס֤Υäѡ
5. place names: ַػĥѥס֥ɥ

ۤˡ֤ (here) ֤ (there) ʤɤľɽ⤢
⤷ΤϡƱξؤˤƤʣɽˡ뤳ȤǤ롥㤨СˤȤäơ֤פϡԡԡĮܡϡפǤꡤֻβȡפǤ⤢ꡤ֤ε񤤤ƤפǤ⤢롥ɽ򤹤뤫ϡ䤬ɤΤ餤β٤ǤξؤΤʹ꤬ɤ٤λμ碌Ƥͽۤ뤫ʤʣΥѥ᡼˰¸롥
㤨СѸҤ˱ؤؤƻҤͤ줿ˡ֤˸2ܤο򱦤˶ʤä150᡼ȥ뤯餤ǤפΤ褦˥ɥޡΥʤɤξͿĤȤȤϤ褯뤬褷ơֻ䤬ȽвäءפڷβȤ鸫ȤפȤʤ߹԰٤ˤ͡ʥѥ᡼θǺǤŬڤФ줿ɤȤʤΤǤ롥
Τߤʤ餺ͤɽˡˤĤƤƱ褦ʤȤǤ롥Ǥϡ(5) Τ褦̾ƿ̾ľѤ륱ȤΤϡɤΤ褦ʾʤΤ㤳ˤơ̾ȿ̾ʤɤ̾򸦵оݤȤͭ̾ (onomastics) ϡ (pragmatics) ʬ (conversation_analysis) ʤɤʬȸĤȤˤʤ롥

De Stefani, Elwys. "Names and Discourse." Chapter 4 of The Oxford Handbook of Names and Naming. Ed. Carole Hough. Oxford: OUP, 2016. 52--66.

[ | ѥڡ ]

2023-05-19 Fri

#5135. 괧ȯãΰ̷ϩ [grammaticalisation][article][pragmatics][semantics][historical_pragmatics][unidirectionality][numeral]

Heine and Kuteva (92) ˤȡˤ괧 (indefinite article) ȯãƤϩ򤿤ɤäƤߤȡФФˤϰ̣ŪŪʴϢʳǧȤ

1An item serves as a nominal modifier denoting the numerical value 'one' (numeral).
2The item introduces a new participant presumed to be unknown to the hearer and this participant is then taken up as definite in subsequent discourse (presentative marker).
3The item presents a participant known to the speaker but presumed to be unknown to the hearer, irrespective of whether or not the participant is expected to come up as a major discourse participant (specific indefinite marker).
4The item presents a participant whose referential identity neither the hearer nor the speaker knows (nonspecific indefinite marker).
5The item can be expected to occur in all contexts and on all types of nouns except for a few contexts involving, for instance, definiteness marking, proper nouns, predicative clauses, etc. (generalized indefinite article).


Ѹ괧ȯãˤƤ⡤ΰϢʳ줿Τɤϡܺ٤ĴƤߤʤʬʤʤȤȯãγϤ1ʳŪΤǤ롥Ĥޤꡤ one ʸűѸ ān) ϤޤäȤϵʤ2--5γʳ¾ڤСʸˡ (grammaticalisation) ΰ (unidirectionality) ٻȤƼ夲뤳Ȥˤʤܤ٤ϡ餯ѸѸˤƤȤʤ˰㤤ʤ
Ϣơ#2144. ȯãȵǽƤȯ ([2015-03-11-1]) ⻲ȡ

Heine, Bernd and Tania Kuteva. "Contact and Grammaticalization." Chapter 4 of The Handbook of Language Contact. Ed. Raymond Hickey. 2010. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013. 86--107.

[ | ѥڡ ]

2023-03-26 Sun

#5081. ɸΰ̣Ф3ĤΥץ [discourse_marker][pragmatics][prototype][semantics][polysemy][homonymy]

#5074. Ѹɸ43 ([2023-03-19-1])#5075. ɸθŪħ ([2023-03-20-1]) ɸ () ŪˤȤ館ƤΤ褤ȤǤ롥
¤Ϥ3ĤΥץϡɸΰ̣ˤȤɤޤ餺̤θΰ̣ʬϤݤˤ⤽ΤޤޱѤǤ롥פˡƱ۵ (homonymy) ʤΤ뤤¿ (polysemy) ʤΤȤˤĤƤϡʲε⻲Ȥ줿

#286. homonymy, homophony, homography, polysemy ([2010-02-07-1])
#815. polysemic clash? ([2011-07-21-1])
#1801. homonymy polysemy ζ ([2014-04-02-1])
#2823. homonymy polysemy ζ (2) ([2017-01-18-1])

ʸҡע ͳˡرѸɸˡŵ43δܥǥޡ١ҡ2015ǯ

[ | ѥڡ ]

2023-03-20 Mon

#5075. ɸθŪħ [discourse_marker][pragmatics][prototype][category]

ε#5074. Ѹɸ43 ([2023-03-19-1]) ǾҲ𤷤ۤΡرѸɸˡŵ٤Ǥϡɸ (discourse_marker) ˤĤƤν¤⤬ͿƤ롥äˡɸˤĤƤδŪʹͤפεͭѤǤ롥
ɸʻʹ⤤٥Υƥ꡼ǤꡤĤΥƥ꡼ϥץȥ (prototype) ȤƲᤵ٤ΤǤ롤ȤϤޤ롥ɸΤΤȤ⡤ɸŪˡ롤Ȥª˶ᤤθˡɸΰŪħפꤹ륳ब³ (333--34) ȤƤ褯ޤȤޤäƤΤǡ˰ѤƤ

ɸ˶̤ǤŪħϡäβ餫ȯðտޤޤõǽƤפȤǤ롥á (discourse) ϹˤȤ館ơɸʸ̮䡤ƥȤȤƶ񸽲ʸ̮Τߤʤ餺ȯþ (utterance situation) ΤޤΤȤ롥ˡȯþ˻Ϳäꡦʹμ䥳ߥ˥νǤɸεǽ˴Ϳ롥ʲĤδɸħޤȤ롥

ڸŪŪħ
(a) 줫ʤΤ¿٥롤٥ΤΤޤޤ롥
(b) ŪñθˤϽǤʤ
(c) ݡȼΩĴ뤳Ȥ¿
(d) õǽ˱ޤޤʲĴȼ
Ūħ
(a) ʸƬ˸뤳Ȥ¿ʸ桤ʸΤ⤢롥
(b) ̿ιǤγ¦롤뤤칽¤ˤ䤫ղä롥
(c) ŪǤ롥
(d) ʣɸ뤳Ȥ롥
(e) ñȤѤ뤳Ȥ롥
ڰ̣Ūħ
(a) 켫Τǡʸοͤ˴ؤ복ǰỤ̄ۤȤɡ뤤ʤΤ¿
(b) ʸοͤ˴ؤ복ǰỤ̄ľˤ⡤ʸ̤ΰ̣ɽ礬¿
ڵǽŪħ
¿ǽŪǡĤå٥ǵǽΤ¿
ڼҲŪʸŪħ
(a) 񤭸դäդѤ礬¿
(b) ʸΤѤΤ¿
(c) ϰŪװ̡ǯ𡤼Ҳء̤ʤɤˤħ롥


͡ʳ٤ʬϤ뤳ȤΤǤοƥ꡼Ǥ뤳Ȥʬε ([2023-03-19-1]) 43ɸפ⤫٤ʤ顤ħǧ줿

ʸҡע ͳˡرѸɸˡŵ43δܥǥޡ١ҡ2015ǯ

Referrer (Inside): [2023-03-26-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2023-03-19 Sun

#5074. Ѹɸ43 [discourse_marker][pragmatics][review]

ǯ (pragmatics) θˤʤäƤƤʬ1Ĥˡɸ (discourse_marker) 롥#2041. ɸ졤 ([2014-11-28-1])#3267. ɸȤηϩ ([2018-04-07-1])#3268. ɸΥ饤եû ([2018-04-08-1]) ϤȤ뤤ĤεǼ夲Ƥ
ѸɸλϤˡ ʸҡע ͳˡرѸɸˡŵ43δܥǥޡ١ʸҡ2015ǯˤҲ𤷤Ƥ

 ʸҡע  ͳˡرѸɸˡŵ43δܥǥޡ١ҡ2015ǯ



ˤ̤ꡤ43ζŪɸ夲졤ơˡܽҤƤޤܽˤϡɸˤĤƤν¤ޤޤƤޤʡɸߡסɸˤĤƤδŪʹͤסɸεǽŪʬסˡ
43ɸϰʲ5ĤΥƥ꡼ʬƤޤäˤäѤ򤹤ɽǤ뤳ȤȻפޤ줳ɸפǤ

ΡŪɽ

actually
anyway
besides
first(ly) [last(ly)]
however [nevertheless, nonetheless, still]
kind [sort] of
like
now
please
then
though
whatever

Ρֻɽ

according to
after all
at last
at least
by the way
in fact
in other words
of course
on the other hand [on [to] the contrary]

Ρ³Ūɽ

and
but [yet]
plus
so

ΡŪɽ

ah
huh
look
oh
okay
say
uh
well
why
yes/no

Ρ쥭ե쥤

I mean
if anything
if you don't mind
if you like
mind (you)
you know
you know what?
you see

ʸҡע ͳˡرѸɸˡŵ43δܥǥޡ١ҡ2015ǯ

Referrer (Inside): [2023-03-26-1] [2023-03-20-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2023-02-18 Sat

#5045. deafening silence ּĤ󤶤褦ۡ [oxymoron][voicy][heldio][collocation][rhetoric][pragmatics][ethnography_of_speaking][prosody][syntagma_marking][sociolinguistics][anthropology][link][collocation]

Voicy ֱѸθ츻ȤˤĤ饸 (heldio)ˤơ#624. ۡפθء#627. ۡפ̱²ء2ˤ錄ä (silence) ˤĤƸŪ˹ͤƤߤޤ



hellog ȤƤϡεطޤޤȤɤߤɤ

#1911. ([2014-07-21-1])
#1910. ٻߡ ([2014-07-20-1])
#1633. ٤̱ۤ²ء ([2013-10-16-1])
#1644. ٤̱ۤ² (2) ([2013-10-27-1])
#1646. ȯù԰٤ʸ ([2013-10-29-1])

heldio ΥˡꥹʡͭפʥȤ¿Ϥޤʤ꤬Ȥޤˡ䤫ΥȥХåΤʤ deafening silence ּĤ󤶤褦ۡפȤɤʹФΤäѸɽ˿ޤƵˡ (oxymoron) 1ĤǤѸǤϤ褯ΤƤΤ1ĤΤ褦Ǥ
ܤΤʤäΤĴ٤ƤߤޤOED ˤȡdeafening, adj. θ1b˼Τ褦˵󤲤Ƥޤ1968ǯ˽Фοɽ (collocation) Τ褦Ǥ

b. deafening silence n. a silence heavy with significance; spec. a conspicuous failure to respond to or comment on a matter.
   1968 Sci. News 93 328/3 (heading) Deafening silence; deadly words.
   1976 Survey Spring 195 The so-called mass media made public only these voices of support. There was a deafening silence about protests and about critical voices.
   1985 Times 28 Aug. 5/1 Conservative and Labour MPs have complained of a 'deafening silence' over the affair.


ʸ䤷̤ȡdeafening silence 㡼ʥꥺѸȤƻϤޤäȤäƤ褵Ǥ
Ϣ۵ silent majority ϽФ1786ǯǤϤŪʸ̮ѤƤޤ

1786 J. Andrews Hist. War with Amer. III. xxxii. 39 Neither the speech nor the motion produced any reply..and the motion [was] rejected by a silent majority of two hundred and fifty-nine.


ǶǤΥȤ湳ĥǥ⵭˿ȤǤsilence ۡˤθȶӤĤƤȤΤ˼ŪǤ͡ơδ deafening silence ȤɽɾȡŪץץ󤷤ޤ
oxymoron ˤĤƤϡheldio #392. "familiar stranger" Ƶˡ (oxymoron)⤼Ҥİ

Referrer (Inside): [2023-02-19-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

Powered by WinChalow1.0rc4 based on chalow