Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  PRONOMINALIZATION
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

MI 'WE' AS A PRONOUN OF POWER AND SOLIDARITY

100%
Jobst A.
Magyar Nyelvor (Hungarian Language Guardian)
|
2007
|
vol. 131
|
issue 1
29-47
EN
Results of pragmatic research, including the distinction between semantic and referential meaning, the exploration of deictic phenomena and pronominal reference, as well as the elaboration of general communicative principles governing the process of communication, have created a theoretical basis for an objective linguistic analysis of texts the interpretation of which is debatable. Given that pronominalization is a prominent method of exophoric and endophoric reference, playing an important role in staking out the circumstances of an utterance and in organising the sense of a text, its study offers a fertile approach for the interpretation of various politically motivated types of text. Exploring the reference fields of pronouns helps us define the political groups participating in the discourse, whereas studying the organization of pronouns facilitates the determination of the relative distance of discourse participants. In functionalist examinations of pronominalization, the Hungarian literature has been concentrating on the anaphoric text-forming role of third person singular pronouns. The present paper tries to contribute to the issue of pronominal deixis by a pragmatically based study of the anaphoric use of first person plural pronouns, in harmony with the face-forming role of those pronouns in political discourse.
2

REMARKS ON QUOTATIVE 'SAYING'

100%
Boguslawski A.
Studies in Polish Linguistics
|
2004
|
vol. 1
29-45
EN
The author claims that two separae units of language should be distinguished in English (as well as, most probably, in other languages), which are based on morphological shape of 'say' (in case of English): first, the 'indirect discourse' 'say that____', and second, what he calls 'quotative' (or 'direct discourse') 'say: ______'. The former expresses a correlation between a chosen proposition (out of dual propositions generated by the respective propositional function) and appropriate action(s) the hearer can expect the utterer would carry out. The latter conveys just the fact of an expression being 'realized' ('materialized') by the utterer, for whatever reason and with an eye to just any purpose at will. It is the latter unit of language that is the proper object of scrutiny in the article. A definition to the unit is submitted and commented upon in much detail. All the main features of the unit are discussed; among other things, its relationship with literary texts is highlighted, its behaviour vis-a-vis pronominalization in the complement is described, the difference between the 1st person sentential 'prefix' 'I say: ____' and 'I say that _____ /I am saying that____' is analysed.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.