This paper will focus on two important, but controversial issues about 'denial', namely... more This paper will focus on two important, but controversial issues about 'denial', namely the reasons that may lead to the rejection of a given utterance, and the way to identify this utterance whenever it is absent from text surface. We aim to show that 'denial' ...
Neste trabalho, apresentam-se os procedimentos adotados para a constituição do corpus Produção Or... more Neste trabalho, apresentam-se os procedimentos adotados para a constituição do corpus Produção Oral em Provas de Português L2 (POPL2). Pretende-se, com este projeto, obter dados de natureza oral produzidos por aprendentes tardios de Português L2 (PL2) em contexto instrucional e em momento de avaliação. Convocam-se, neste artigo, as questões associadas à conceção e disponibilização de corpora de produções orais de aprendentes tardios (Granger 2002; Adolphs & Knight 2010; Adolphs & Carter 2013; Ballier & Martin 2015; Santos et al. 2016; Bell & Payant 2021), com especial relevância para os constrangimentos que, neste âmbito, emergem do contexto e condições de recolha, do uso dos instrumentos técnicos para a captação de som e da posterior transcrição de dados orais. Descrevem-se, ainda, as recolhas experimentais que foram realizadas com vista à validação de opções metodológicas.
The main purpose of this study is to analyse the denial or refutation discourse relation and the ... more The main purpose of this study is to analyse the denial or refutation discourse relation and the linguistic constructions that express it in European contemporary Portuguese. Operating at the pragmatic level, denial can be defined as the discourse relation that holds between an utterance, produced by a speaker B, whose function is to reject another utterance, the target utterance produced by a speaker A. Prototypically, this relation occurs in dialogues and functions as a reactive act, a face-threatening act that challenges the faces of both speakers. The text span that carries out this function is typically followed by a discourse continuation that corrects or rectifies the target utterance. In his/her corrective discourse move, the speaker B presents the information that, in his/her opinion, should replace what was previously rebutted. In its most prototypical occurrences, denial involves what is said or implied in the rebutted utterance. In its less prototypical occurrences, it can equally involve formal aspects of the rebutted utterance, associated, in a broad sense, with its linguistic accuracy. Typically, in both cases, it is not the entire utterance produced by the speaker A that is rejected, but only the constituents that lead to its unacceptability from the point of view of the speaker B. Such constituents are typically focused by a wide range of linguistic processes, such as constituent negation, cleft sentences and contrastive intonation. A comprehensive analysis of these syntactic and prosodic focusing processes needs to consider the discourse function of the sequences in which they occur. In contemporary European Portuguese, the denial and correction text sequences under analysis can be shaped into two types of paratactic constructions: coordination and juxtaposition constructions. In coordination constructions, the linguistic forms não p, mas q or não p, mas sim/mas antes/e sim q, seem to be specialized in the linguistic marking of the discourse relations at stake (denial and correction). These constructions can be used to reject not only what has been said in or implied by the target utterance, but also some formal aspects of its linguistic formulation. In coordination constructions, denial and rectification may also be expressed by the construction não só p, mas também q, which is specialized in the rebuttal of the propositional content or the Q-implicatures associated with the target utterance. Constructions such as não é p, mas/mas sim/mas antes/e sim q, não se diz p, mas/mas sim/mas antes/e sim q, seem to be specialized in the rejection of formal aspects of the target utterance. In juxtaposition constructions such as não p || q, the link between the text spans that refute and rectify the target utterance is not marked by any connective. There are no restrictions concerning the kind of element (propositional content, implicatures or formal aspects) that triggers the rejection of the target utterance. In the juxtaposition constructions, the denial and corrective text spans can also assume specialized forms when only formal aspects of the target utterance are involved. It is the case of não é p || é q or similar ones, such as não se diz p || diz-se q or p, não || q. It is worth stressing that in juxtaposition constructions, the denial text span does not necessarily take the form of a (metalinguistic) negative utterance. Finally, juxtaposition constructions also display structures such as não p || antes/sim/pelo contrário q. In this context, these expressions behave as discourse markers or discourse connectives. They give instructions on how to compute the discourse relation that holds between p and q. The constructions não p || sim/antes q, where the units sim and antes signal, respectively, the polarity contrast and the preferential value of the text span in which they occur, are only acceptable when what is being rejected is the propositional content or the implicatures associated with the target utterance. The construction não p || pelo contrário q, given the antithetical value of the connective pelo contrário, is only acceptable when what is being rejected is the propositional content of the target utterance. More specifically, this construction is only acceptable when, in the target utterance and in the utterance introduced by pelo contrário, there are two distinct predicates related by an antonymic semantic relation. In contemporary European Portuguese, there are other kinds of expressions (non-connective ones) whose function, in specific contexts, is also related with the conventional marking of the discourse relation of denial: lá, cá, agora (Martins, 2010) and nada, in constructions such as [V_nada] (Pinto, 2011), seem to have a clear denial marking function. Furthermore, the expression mas é may also signal the rectification/correction discourse relation. These expressions occur predominantly in oral interaction, particularly in informal registers, and their usage seems to be restricted to cases where what is being rejected is the propositional content or the implicatures associated with the target utterance.
This paper will focus on two important, but controversial issues about 'denial', namely... more This paper will focus on two important, but controversial issues about 'denial', namely the reasons that may lead to the rejection of a given utterance, and the way to identify this utterance whenever it is absent from text surface. We aim to show that 'denial' ...
Neste trabalho, apresentam-se os procedimentos adotados para a constituição do corpus Produção Or... more Neste trabalho, apresentam-se os procedimentos adotados para a constituição do corpus Produção Oral em Provas de Português L2 (POPL2). Pretende-se, com este projeto, obter dados de natureza oral produzidos por aprendentes tardios de Português L2 (PL2) em contexto instrucional e em momento de avaliação. Convocam-se, neste artigo, as questões associadas à conceção e disponibilização de corpora de produções orais de aprendentes tardios (Granger 2002; Adolphs & Knight 2010; Adolphs & Carter 2013; Ballier & Martin 2015; Santos et al. 2016; Bell & Payant 2021), com especial relevância para os constrangimentos que, neste âmbito, emergem do contexto e condições de recolha, do uso dos instrumentos técnicos para a captação de som e da posterior transcrição de dados orais. Descrevem-se, ainda, as recolhas experimentais que foram realizadas com vista à validação de opções metodológicas.
The main purpose of this study is to analyse the denial or refutation discourse relation and the ... more The main purpose of this study is to analyse the denial or refutation discourse relation and the linguistic constructions that express it in European contemporary Portuguese. Operating at the pragmatic level, denial can be defined as the discourse relation that holds between an utterance, produced by a speaker B, whose function is to reject another utterance, the target utterance produced by a speaker A. Prototypically, this relation occurs in dialogues and functions as a reactive act, a face-threatening act that challenges the faces of both speakers. The text span that carries out this function is typically followed by a discourse continuation that corrects or rectifies the target utterance. In his/her corrective discourse move, the speaker B presents the information that, in his/her opinion, should replace what was previously rebutted. In its most prototypical occurrences, denial involves what is said or implied in the rebutted utterance. In its less prototypical occurrences, it can equally involve formal aspects of the rebutted utterance, associated, in a broad sense, with its linguistic accuracy. Typically, in both cases, it is not the entire utterance produced by the speaker A that is rejected, but only the constituents that lead to its unacceptability from the point of view of the speaker B. Such constituents are typically focused by a wide range of linguistic processes, such as constituent negation, cleft sentences and contrastive intonation. A comprehensive analysis of these syntactic and prosodic focusing processes needs to consider the discourse function of the sequences in which they occur. In contemporary European Portuguese, the denial and correction text sequences under analysis can be shaped into two types of paratactic constructions: coordination and juxtaposition constructions. In coordination constructions, the linguistic forms não p, mas q or não p, mas sim/mas antes/e sim q, seem to be specialized in the linguistic marking of the discourse relations at stake (denial and correction). These constructions can be used to reject not only what has been said in or implied by the target utterance, but also some formal aspects of its linguistic formulation. In coordination constructions, denial and rectification may also be expressed by the construction não só p, mas também q, which is specialized in the rebuttal of the propositional content or the Q-implicatures associated with the target utterance. Constructions such as não é p, mas/mas sim/mas antes/e sim q, não se diz p, mas/mas sim/mas antes/e sim q, seem to be specialized in the rejection of formal aspects of the target utterance. In juxtaposition constructions such as não p || q, the link between the text spans that refute and rectify the target utterance is not marked by any connective. There are no restrictions concerning the kind of element (propositional content, implicatures or formal aspects) that triggers the rejection of the target utterance. In the juxtaposition constructions, the denial and corrective text spans can also assume specialized forms when only formal aspects of the target utterance are involved. It is the case of não é p || é q or similar ones, such as não se diz p || diz-se q or p, não || q. It is worth stressing that in juxtaposition constructions, the denial text span does not necessarily take the form of a (metalinguistic) negative utterance. Finally, juxtaposition constructions also display structures such as não p || antes/sim/pelo contrário q. In this context, these expressions behave as discourse markers or discourse connectives. They give instructions on how to compute the discourse relation that holds between p and q. The constructions não p || sim/antes q, where the units sim and antes signal, respectively, the polarity contrast and the preferential value of the text span in which they occur, are only acceptable when what is being rejected is the propositional content or the implicatures associated with the target utterance. The construction não p || pelo contrário q, given the antithetical value of the connective pelo contrário, is only acceptable when what is being rejected is the propositional content of the target utterance. More specifically, this construction is only acceptable when, in the target utterance and in the utterance introduced by pelo contrário, there are two distinct predicates related by an antonymic semantic relation. In contemporary European Portuguese, there are other kinds of expressions (non-connective ones) whose function, in specific contexts, is also related with the conventional marking of the discourse relation of denial: lá, cá, agora (Martins, 2010) and nada, in constructions such as [V_nada] (Pinto, 2011), seem to have a clear denial marking function. Furthermore, the expression mas é may also signal the rectification/correction discourse relation. These expressions occur predominantly in oral interaction, particularly in informal registers, and their usage seems to be restricted to cases where what is being rejected is the propositional content or the implicatures associated with the target utterance.
Uploads
Papers by Sara Sousa
Operating at the pragmatic level, denial can be defined as the discourse relation that holds between an utterance, produced by a speaker B, whose function is to reject another utterance, the target utterance produced by a speaker A. Prototypically, this relation occurs in dialogues and functions as a reactive act, a face-threatening act that challenges the faces of both speakers.
The text span that carries out this function is typically followed by a discourse continuation that corrects or rectifies the target utterance. In his/her corrective discourse move, the speaker B presents the information that, in his/her opinion, should replace what was previously rebutted.
In its most prototypical occurrences, denial involves what is said or implied in the rebutted utterance. In its less prototypical occurrences, it can equally involve formal aspects of the rebutted utterance, associated, in a broad sense, with its linguistic accuracy. Typically, in both cases, it is not the entire utterance produced by the speaker A that is rejected, but only the constituents that lead to its unacceptability from the point of view of the speaker B. Such constituents are typically focused by a wide range of linguistic processes, such as constituent negation, cleft sentences and contrastive intonation. A comprehensive analysis of these syntactic and prosodic focusing processes needs to consider the discourse function of the sequences in which they occur.
In contemporary European Portuguese, the denial and correction text sequences under analysis can be shaped into two types of paratactic constructions: coordination and juxtaposition constructions.
In coordination constructions, the linguistic forms não p, mas q or não p, mas sim/mas antes/e sim q, seem to be specialized in the linguistic marking of the discourse relations at stake (denial and correction). These constructions can be used to reject not only what has been said in or implied by the target utterance, but also some formal aspects of its linguistic formulation.
In coordination constructions, denial and rectification may also be expressed by the construction não só p, mas também q, which is specialized in the rebuttal of the propositional content or the Q-implicatures associated with the target utterance. Constructions such as não é p, mas/mas sim/mas antes/e sim q, não se diz p, mas/mas sim/mas antes/e sim q, seem to be specialized in the rejection of formal aspects of the target utterance.
In juxtaposition constructions such as não p || q, the link between the text spans that refute and rectify the target utterance is not marked by any connective. There are no restrictions concerning the kind of element (propositional content, implicatures or formal aspects) that triggers the rejection of the target utterance.
In the juxtaposition constructions, the denial and corrective text spans can also assume specialized forms when only formal aspects of the target utterance are involved. It is the case of não é p || é q or similar ones, such as não se diz p || diz-se q or p, não || q. It is worth stressing that in juxtaposition constructions, the denial text span does not necessarily take the form of a (metalinguistic) negative utterance.
Finally, juxtaposition constructions also display structures such as não p || antes/sim/pelo contrário q. In this context, these expressions behave as discourse markers or discourse connectives. They give instructions on how to compute the discourse relation that holds between p and q. The constructions não p || sim/antes q, where the units sim and antes signal, respectively, the polarity contrast and the preferential value of the text span in which they occur, are only acceptable when what is being rejected is the propositional content or the implicatures associated with the target utterance. The construction não p || pelo contrário q, given the antithetical value of the connective pelo contrário, is only acceptable when what is being rejected is the propositional content of the target utterance. More specifically, this construction is only acceptable when, in the target utterance and in the utterance introduced by pelo contrário, there are two distinct predicates related by an antonymic semantic relation.
In contemporary European Portuguese, there are other kinds of expressions (non-connective ones) whose function, in specific contexts, is also related with the conventional marking of the discourse relation of denial: lá, cá, agora (Martins, 2010) and nada, in constructions such as [V_nada] (Pinto, 2011), seem to have a clear denial marking function. Furthermore, the expression mas é may also signal the rectification/correction discourse relation. These expressions occur predominantly in oral interaction, particularly in informal registers, and their usage seems to be restricted to cases where what is being rejected is the propositional content or the implicatures associated with the target utterance.
Operating at the pragmatic level, denial can be defined as the discourse relation that holds between an utterance, produced by a speaker B, whose function is to reject another utterance, the target utterance produced by a speaker A. Prototypically, this relation occurs in dialogues and functions as a reactive act, a face-threatening act that challenges the faces of both speakers.
The text span that carries out this function is typically followed by a discourse continuation that corrects or rectifies the target utterance. In his/her corrective discourse move, the speaker B presents the information that, in his/her opinion, should replace what was previously rebutted.
In its most prototypical occurrences, denial involves what is said or implied in the rebutted utterance. In its less prototypical occurrences, it can equally involve formal aspects of the rebutted utterance, associated, in a broad sense, with its linguistic accuracy. Typically, in both cases, it is not the entire utterance produced by the speaker A that is rejected, but only the constituents that lead to its unacceptability from the point of view of the speaker B. Such constituents are typically focused by a wide range of linguistic processes, such as constituent negation, cleft sentences and contrastive intonation. A comprehensive analysis of these syntactic and prosodic focusing processes needs to consider the discourse function of the sequences in which they occur.
In contemporary European Portuguese, the denial and correction text sequences under analysis can be shaped into two types of paratactic constructions: coordination and juxtaposition constructions.
In coordination constructions, the linguistic forms não p, mas q or não p, mas sim/mas antes/e sim q, seem to be specialized in the linguistic marking of the discourse relations at stake (denial and correction). These constructions can be used to reject not only what has been said in or implied by the target utterance, but also some formal aspects of its linguistic formulation.
In coordination constructions, denial and rectification may also be expressed by the construction não só p, mas também q, which is specialized in the rebuttal of the propositional content or the Q-implicatures associated with the target utterance. Constructions such as não é p, mas/mas sim/mas antes/e sim q, não se diz p, mas/mas sim/mas antes/e sim q, seem to be specialized in the rejection of formal aspects of the target utterance.
In juxtaposition constructions such as não p || q, the link between the text spans that refute and rectify the target utterance is not marked by any connective. There are no restrictions concerning the kind of element (propositional content, implicatures or formal aspects) that triggers the rejection of the target utterance.
In the juxtaposition constructions, the denial and corrective text spans can also assume specialized forms when only formal aspects of the target utterance are involved. It is the case of não é p || é q or similar ones, such as não se diz p || diz-se q or p, não || q. It is worth stressing that in juxtaposition constructions, the denial text span does not necessarily take the form of a (metalinguistic) negative utterance.
Finally, juxtaposition constructions also display structures such as não p || antes/sim/pelo contrário q. In this context, these expressions behave as discourse markers or discourse connectives. They give instructions on how to compute the discourse relation that holds between p and q. The constructions não p || sim/antes q, where the units sim and antes signal, respectively, the polarity contrast and the preferential value of the text span in which they occur, are only acceptable when what is being rejected is the propositional content or the implicatures associated with the target utterance. The construction não p || pelo contrário q, given the antithetical value of the connective pelo contrário, is only acceptable when what is being rejected is the propositional content of the target utterance. More specifically, this construction is only acceptable when, in the target utterance and in the utterance introduced by pelo contrário, there are two distinct predicates related by an antonymic semantic relation.
In contemporary European Portuguese, there are other kinds of expressions (non-connective ones) whose function, in specific contexts, is also related with the conventional marking of the discourse relation of denial: lá, cá, agora (Martins, 2010) and nada, in constructions such as [V_nada] (Pinto, 2011), seem to have a clear denial marking function. Furthermore, the expression mas é may also signal the rectification/correction discourse relation. These expressions occur predominantly in oral interaction, particularly in informal registers, and their usage seems to be restricted to cases where what is being rejected is the propositional content or the implicatures associated with the target utterance.