Difference between revisions of "Clift2006"
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Rebecca Clift; |Title=Indexing stance: Reported speech as an interactional evidential |Tag(s)=EMCA; Epistemics; Reported Speech; Eviden...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BibEntry | {{BibEntry | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
| − | |Author(s)=Rebecca Clift; | + | |Author(s)=Rebecca Clift; |
| − | |Title=Indexing stance: | + | |Title=Indexing stance: reported speech as an interactional evidential |
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Epistemics; Reported Speech; Evidentiality; Stance; Deixis; Interaction; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Epistemics; Reported Speech; Evidentiality; Stance; Deixis; Interaction; |
|Key=Clift2006 | |Key=Clift2006 | ||
|Year=2006 | |Year=2006 | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
|Volume=10 | |Volume=10 | ||
|Number=5 | |Number=5 | ||
| − | |Pages= | + | |Pages=569–595 |
| − | |URL= | + | |URL=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2006.00296.x |
| − | |Abstract=The notion of linguistic stance as a | + | |DOI=10.1111/j.1467-9841.2006.00296.x |
| − | is here explored through an investigation of reported speech in English | + | |Abstract=The notion of linguistic stance as a non‐grammaticalized form of evidentiality is here explored through an investigation of reported speech in English interaction. Reported speech is found to be one of a variety of resources with which speakers lay claim to epistemic priority vis‐à‐vis recipients. Such resources are not identifiable as stance markers independently of the sequential contexts in which they appear; sequential position is shown to be central in providing at once a constraint on what can be said and a resource to exploit in saying it. Resources dependent on sequential position to index stance are deemed to be interactional evidentials to distinguish them from the well‐documented stand‐alone evidentials. Interactional and stand‐alone evidentials, as forms of deixis, are directed to the orientations of epistemic authority and accountability respectively; their distinct means of marking evidentiality are grounded in the motivation to be explicit with regard to accountability and inexplicit with regard to authority. |
| − | interaction. Reported speech is found to be one of a variety of resources | ||
| − | with which speakers lay claim to epistemic priority | ||
| − | Such resources are not identifiable as stance markers independently of the | ||
| − | sequential contexts in which they appear; sequential position is shown to be | ||
| − | central in providing at once a constraint on what can be said and a resource | ||
| − | to exploit in saying it. Resources dependent on sequential position to index | ||
| − | stance are deemed to be interactional evidentials to distinguish them from | ||
| − | the | ||
| − | evidentials, as forms of deixis, are directed to the orientations of epistemic | ||
| − | authority and accountability respectively; their distinct means of marking | ||
| − | evidentiality are grounded in the motivation to be explicit with regard to | ||
| − | accountability and inexplicit with regard to authority. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 11:18, 13 November 2019
| Clift2006 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Clift2006 |
| Author(s) | Rebecca Clift |
| Title | Indexing stance: reported speech as an interactional evidential |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Epistemics, Reported Speech, Evidentiality, Stance, Deixis, Interaction |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2006 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Journal of Sociolinguistics |
| Volume | 10 |
| Number | 5 |
| Pages | 569–595 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1467-9841.2006.00296.x |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
The notion of linguistic stance as a non‐grammaticalized form of evidentiality is here explored through an investigation of reported speech in English interaction. Reported speech is found to be one of a variety of resources with which speakers lay claim to epistemic priority vis‐à‐vis recipients. Such resources are not identifiable as stance markers independently of the sequential contexts in which they appear; sequential position is shown to be central in providing at once a constraint on what can be said and a resource to exploit in saying it. Resources dependent on sequential position to index stance are deemed to be interactional evidentials to distinguish them from the well‐documented stand‐alone evidentials. Interactional and stand‐alone evidentials, as forms of deixis, are directed to the orientations of epistemic authority and accountability respectively; their distinct means of marking evidentiality are grounded in the motivation to be explicit with regard to accountability and inexplicit with regard to authority.
Notes
