No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Capítulo 13. La atenuación en Gandía Shore: los marcadores conversacionales ¿eh?, ¿no?, ¿sabes? y ¿vale?
... Ever since one of the first works that studied this marker with more detail (Ortega Olivares 1985) to more recent publications like García Vizcaíno (2005), Rodríguez Muñoz (2009), Landone (2009), Montañez (2008Montañez ( , 2015, Fuentes and Brenes (2014), and Cestero (2003, 2019, mitigation has been identified as one of the values of this marker. In fact, some publications ( Uclés 2017Uclés , 2018 have focused entirely on describing the mitigating function of ¿no?, among other control of contact markers. ...
This paper explores the relationship between epistemic (a)symmetries and mitigation in three different genres (conversation, interview and monologue) through the study of a specific form: the Spanish discourse maker ¿no? To do so, an analysis combining qualitative and quantitative methods has been carried out. The main results show how the differences in the distribution of the absolute values of ¿no? and its mitigating values across genres may be caused by the type of sequences that compose each genre. As for mitigation and knowledge, five different knowledge configurations have been established. Their distribution shows how mitigation seems to favour specific epistemic configurations, whereas non-mitigating data seem to be clustered around other epistemic figures. Taking into account epistemic configurations has also enabled discovery of two different types of mitigation to protect the speaker’s face.
This paper provides a definition of mitigation based on three interconnected dimensions: cognitive, rhetorical/social, and linguistic. According to the definition provided, some specific requirements from all three dimensions must be met for a linguistic expression to be considered an instance of pragmatic mitigation (self-image protection, communicative effectiveness and some specific semantic-pragmatic characteristics mainly related with Levinson's (2000) M-heuristics, respectively). The definition builds on previous contributions and considers important descriptive problems, such as the heterogeneity of the linguistic mechanisms used to express mitigation and the partiality or incompleteness of some definitions, which consider mitigation from a single perspective and are therefore only valid for specific contexts, genres or varieties.
In this paper the functions of the Spanish discourse marker ¿no? are analysed from a pragmatic and an interactive perspective. Specifically, we explore the values of ¿no? taking the pragmatic phenomena of mitigation and boosting, as well as the notion of affiliation as described in conversation analysis. The previous literature devoted to the study of this linguistic form has consistently identified its uses as a confirmation request or a phatic device (Fuentes, 1990, 2009; Santos Río, 2003; García Vizcaíno, 2005; Montañez, 2008, 2015; Rodríguez Muñoz, 2009; Móccero, 2010; Santana, 2017). This work, however, analyses how the mitigating uses interact and share features with neighbouring categories such as boosting and affiliation. As a result, this allows not only to gain a better grasp of how ¿no? works, but also to establish how these concepts interact and intersect with each other.
Since the early 20th century reference has been made to the existence of a phatic or contact function in human communication, although only recently has it begun to be studied in depth. This function is realised through the use of various verbal and non-verbal resources with different ends: to ensure that the communication channel is open and working; to initiate, prolong or end communication; and to attract the interlocutor’s attention. With a view to understanding better how phatic resources work, what functions they perform in interaction, and how they are influenced by certain social (sex, age, education) and geolectal factors, we are currently engaged in a socio-pragmatic study which will enable us to document general and variable behaviour patterns. Focusing on the first of those subfunctions, this paper analyses the appearance of contact control question tags in the Colombian immigrant sub-corpus of the Dynamic Corpus of Immigrant Spanish (Corpus Dinámico del Español de la Inmigración –CORDIESIN). The results provide us with a first approximation to which verbal resources (question tags) are most commonly used by Colombians resident in Madrid and how they function. They also permit us to make some comparison with the corresponding state of affairs in the speech of Spanish Madrilenians, the upshot being that there is convergence with the host community.
Desde comienzos del siglo XX se viene mencionando la existencia de una función fática o de contacto en la comunicación humana, aunque hasta recientemente no se ha emprendido su estudio en profundidad. Dicha función se realiza mediante la utilización de distintos recursos verbales y no verbales que cumplen determinadas subfunciones específicas: asegurarse de que el canal de comunicación está abierto y funciona; establecer, prolongar o terminar la comunicación, y llamar la atención del interlocutor. Con la pretensión de profundizar en el conocimiento del funcionamiento de los recursos fáticos, de las funciones que cumplen y de la incidencia que tienen en su uso determinados factores sociales (sexo, edad y nivel de instrucción) y geolectales, estamos llevando a cabo una investigación sociopragmática, enmarcada en el “Proyecto para el Estudio Sociolingüístico del Español de España y América (PRESEEA)”, que permitirá documentar patrones de comportamiento generales y variables. En esta ocasión, nos hemos centrado en la primera de las subfunciones apuntadas y hemos efectuado análisis cualitativos y cuantitativos de una muestra de interacciones semidirigidas con objeto de establecer las variables y variantes principales para su estudio; además, ofrecemos una primera aproximación sobre cuáles son los recursos verbales (apéndices interrogativos de control de contacto) que más comúnmente utilizan los madrileños y cómo funcionan, así como cierta comparación con lo que acontece en otras zonas de habla hispana.
Original recibido: 2018/06/22
Dictamen enviado al autor: 2018/09/24
Aceptado: 2018/09/27
En el presente trabajo se estudia el valor atenuante de los marcadores conversacionales de control de contacto en el corpus de entrevistas PRESEEA en dos ciudades de España (Valencia y Madrid) y dos de México (Monterrey y México D. F.). A partir de la inclusión de las intervenciones tanto del entrevistador como del entrevistado, se observan una serie de tendencias que resultan comunes en estas dos variedades geográficas. Los resultados muestran que el entrevistado atenúa para proteger su imagen, mientras que el entrevistador utiliza esta estrategia pragmática como medio para conseguir información de su interlocutor. Esta recopilación de datos se puede dar a través de la petición directa de información al entrevistado, donde se intenta proteger la imagen de este último o a través de la expresión de opiniones propias en las que el entrevistador protege su imagen.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.