Similarities and differences between two Hungarian particles for also: szintén and is
The paper provides a comparative analysis of the syntax, semantics and pragmatics of two Hungarian particles with the same logical core meaning also: is and szintén. The analysis yields important theoretical implications since it demonstrates how two particles sharing the same logical-propositional...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin
2020-12-01
|
| Series: | LingBaW |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://czasopisma.kul.pl/index.php/LingBaW/article/view/11832 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832592756099252224 |
|---|---|
| author | Judit Farkas Bettina Futó Aliz Huszics Judit Kleiber Mónika Dóla Gábor Alberti |
| author_facet | Judit Farkas Bettina Futó Aliz Huszics Judit Kleiber Mónika Dóla Gábor Alberti |
| author_sort | Judit Farkas |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description |
The paper provides a comparative analysis of the syntax, semantics and pragmatics of two Hungarian particles with the same logical core meaning also: is and szintén. The analysis yields important theoretical implications since it demonstrates how two particles sharing the same logical-propositional/truth-functional core meaning can expand into two different markers. In discourse, is acts as an intensional/metacognitive pragmatic marker in the sense as proposed by Aijmer et al. (2006), while szintén functions as a coherence-signaling discourse marker. The two particles share certain syntactic-semantic properties: neither of them can be followed by a topic, they both have distributive meaning, and both of them can pertain to the noun phrase that they immediately follow, as well as to ordered n-tuples of noun phrases. However, there are also syntactic and pragmasemantic differences between them. Namely, their ordered n-tuples have different word orders; is can function as a pragmatic marker while szintén cannot; szintén can appear as a separate clause, while is cannot (this is presumably related to the fact that szintén can be stressed, while is is obligatorily unstressed); and finally, szintén can have a peculiar discourse-preserving function. We explain the syntactic differences between the two particles using the partial spell-out technique of minimalist generative syntacticians (first applied to Hungarian by Surányi 2009), and the Cinque-hierarchy-based approach to Hungarian sentence- and predicate-adverbials (Surányi 2008). We account for the pragmasemantic properties of the pragmatic-marker variant of is in the formal representational dynamic theory of interpretation called ReALIS, already presented in the LingBaW series (Alberti et al. 2016, Kleiber and Alberti 2017, Viszket et al. 2019).
|
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-f24ba8caf9294490a7c3b65c339b73af |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2450-5188 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2020-12-01 |
| publisher | The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin |
| record_format | Article |
| series | LingBaW |
| spelling | doaj-art-f24ba8caf9294490a7c3b65c339b73af2025-01-21T05:13:49ZengThe John Paul II Catholic University of LublinLingBaW2450-51882020-12-016110.31743/lingbaw.11832Similarities and differences between two Hungarian particles for also: szintén and isJudit Farkas0Bettina Futó1Aliz Huszics2Judit Kleiber3Mónika Dóla4Gábor Alberti5University of PécsUniversity of PécsUniversity of PécsUniversity of PécsUniversity of PécsUniversity of Pécs The paper provides a comparative analysis of the syntax, semantics and pragmatics of two Hungarian particles with the same logical core meaning also: is and szintén. The analysis yields important theoretical implications since it demonstrates how two particles sharing the same logical-propositional/truth-functional core meaning can expand into two different markers. In discourse, is acts as an intensional/metacognitive pragmatic marker in the sense as proposed by Aijmer et al. (2006), while szintén functions as a coherence-signaling discourse marker. The two particles share certain syntactic-semantic properties: neither of them can be followed by a topic, they both have distributive meaning, and both of them can pertain to the noun phrase that they immediately follow, as well as to ordered n-tuples of noun phrases. However, there are also syntactic and pragmasemantic differences between them. Namely, their ordered n-tuples have different word orders; is can function as a pragmatic marker while szintén cannot; szintén can appear as a separate clause, while is cannot (this is presumably related to the fact that szintén can be stressed, while is is obligatorily unstressed); and finally, szintén can have a peculiar discourse-preserving function. We explain the syntactic differences between the two particles using the partial spell-out technique of minimalist generative syntacticians (first applied to Hungarian by Surányi 2009), and the Cinque-hierarchy-based approach to Hungarian sentence- and predicate-adverbials (Surányi 2008). We account for the pragmasemantic properties of the pragmatic-marker variant of is in the formal representational dynamic theory of interpretation called ReALIS, already presented in the LingBaW series (Alberti et al. 2016, Kleiber and Alberti 2017, Viszket et al. 2019). https://czasopisma.kul.pl/index.php/LingBaW/article/view/11832particlesdistributive meaningHungarianpragmatic and discourse markers |
| spellingShingle | Judit Farkas Bettina Futó Aliz Huszics Judit Kleiber Mónika Dóla Gábor Alberti Similarities and differences between two Hungarian particles for also: szintén and is LingBaW particles distributive meaning Hungarian pragmatic and discourse markers |
| title | Similarities and differences between two Hungarian particles for also: szintén and is |
| title_full | Similarities and differences between two Hungarian particles for also: szintén and is |
| title_fullStr | Similarities and differences between two Hungarian particles for also: szintén and is |
| title_full_unstemmed | Similarities and differences between two Hungarian particles for also: szintén and is |
| title_short | Similarities and differences between two Hungarian particles for also: szintén and is |
| title_sort | similarities and differences between two hungarian particles for also szinten and is |
| topic | particles distributive meaning Hungarian pragmatic and discourse markers |
| url | https://czasopisma.kul.pl/index.php/LingBaW/article/view/11832 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT juditfarkas similaritiesanddifferencesbetweentwohungarianparticlesforalsoszintenandis AT bettinafuto similaritiesanddifferencesbetweentwohungarianparticlesforalsoszintenandis AT alizhuszics similaritiesanddifferencesbetweentwohungarianparticlesforalsoszintenandis AT juditkleiber similaritiesanddifferencesbetweentwohungarianparticlesforalsoszintenandis AT monikadola similaritiesanddifferencesbetweentwohungarianparticlesforalsoszintenandis AT gaboralberti similaritiesanddifferencesbetweentwohungarianparticlesforalsoszintenandis |