Content uploaded by Martin Janecka
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Martin Janecka on May 20, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
57
Martin Janečka
Department of Czech Studies,
Faculty of Philosophy,
University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice
Particles with Evaluative and Postural Modality
as Possible Devices of Manipulation
Introduction
In previous work related to this topic I concerned mainly with 1)
the problem, how these expressions can be classified (concerning word
classes) depending on how they are involved in syntactic relations (see
Janečka, “Korpusová analýza výrazů,“); 2) the question of in which
concrete journalistic genres they occur, that means news report,
interview, review, but no matter who takes part the communication
situation (there were politicians, then people from show business, from
culture scene and also ordinary people interviewed in the street, see
Janečka, “Uplatnění částice bohužel.”)
I try to analyse expressions including evaluative and postural modality
in this paper, mainly the expressions bohužel and bohudík.
1
With help of
the Czech National Corpus SYN2013pub, including journalistic texts, I try
to prove the hypothesis that expressions bohužel and bohudík can acquire
the function of sentence equivalent in some contexts and the main aim of
this paper is to point out these particles as possible devices of
manipulation on examples from political discourse; according to my
hypothesis these particles can obscure a source or a recipient of modality,
which could otherwise be marked by different grammar categories.
1. Theoretical part
Basically I am concerned with critical discourse analysis of text. Although
this paper contains some data organized in tables, it does not concern
with quantitative, but rather qualitative analysis – I want to demonstrate,
how the concrete expression can influence its context and how these
utterances can be manipulative in that sense, they can for example hide
some important facts from the recipient.
1
Approximately bohužel = unfortunately and bohudík = fortunately, but there is no exact
equivalent in English for these expressions. In polish: bohužel = niestety and
naštěstí/bohudík = na szczęście / dzięki Bogu.
M. Janečka
58
The Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) can be defined as “a type of
discourse analytical research that primarily studies the way social power
abuse, dominance, and inequality are enacted, reproduced, and resisted
by text and talk in the social and political context. With such dissident
research, critical discourse analysts take explicit position, and thus want
to understand, expose, and ultimately resist social inequality” (according
Van Dijk, “Critical Discourse Analysis, 352.“).
It is obvious that some politicians (and, of course, not only politicians)
use special (language) tools to express the social inequality – but
describing this is not my aim, I rather use so called Context-Dependent
Variation in Interview Talk. “Interview talk is approached with very
different expectations from how we have learned, as members of culture,
to interpret people’s talk in everyday life. Participants’ accounts, or verbal
expressions, are not treated as descriptions of actual processes, behavior,
or mental events. Interview talk is by nature a cultural and collective
phenomenon. The meaning of an answer is not a straightforward matter
of external or internal reference, but also depends on the local and
broader discursive system in which the utterance is embedded”
(Wetherell and Potter, “Discourse analysis,“ 169.).
Considering terminology related to observed expressions I think it is
important to mention that in Karlík, Nekula and Pleskalová
(Encyklopedický slovník češtiny, 63–65.) these expressions belong to
evaluative particles and postural particles. Evaluative particles serve to
realization of positive or negative modality of sentence content.
Postural particles are described as expressions, with help of which
a language user expresses his or her subjective view to the sentence
content – as an example in the Karlík, Nekula and Pleskalová there is
construction with expression, on which I also focus in my paper:
Bohudík/Bohužel nepřišla. (Encyklopedický slovník češtiny, 65.)
Difference of postural particles and evaluative particles can be observed
in more complex system of classification of postural particles – it is
possible to distinguish for example postural particles with different
measure of certainty of expressing positive or negative evaluation. Pavel
je naštěstí (bohudík) zdráv (fortunatelly) versus Pavel je bohužel
(naneštěstí) nemocen (unfortunatelly); then there are particles with
different levels of emotional attitudes etc. (Karlík, Nekula and Pleskalová,
Encyklopedický slovník češtiny, 65.)
In case of negative evaluation, the expression bohužel is
the primary choice (naneštěstí is a possible synonym), in case of positive
Particles with Evaluative and Postural Modality…
59
evaluation, the expression naštěstí is the primary choice (and bohudík is
possible synonym). This fact may correlate with frequency of given
expressions.
Analysed expressions are mentioned in connection with sentence
adverbs or modal adverbs – they differ from real adverbs in that way that
they do not express any kind of adverbial (manner, place, time etc.) and
they do not represent any sentence element.
Uličný (“Pražský závislostní korpus,“ 153.) claims that particles (and
other evaluative expressions) do not necessarily relate only to predicate,
but to the whole proposition; if I want to strive (for some reason) for
more detailed classification, I can say on the basis of corpora research
that particles are related to object, noun phrase or adverbial. If I mention
proposition (or propositional content), I mean material sentence content
(according to two-level valence syntax, see Karlík, “Hypotéza
modifikované valenční teorie.“)
The sentence adverbials are divided into two basic types: a) local or
temporal adverbials b) adverbials expressing view of language user. The
type b) can be semantically divided into two groups: epistemic sentence
adverbs (asi, určitě, podle všeho) and evaluative sentence adverbs
(bohužel, naštěstí etc.).
Since it is possible to consider expressions like bohužel or bohudík as
so called sentence adverbs (or sentence adverbials, according to different
sources, see e. g. Karlík, Nekula and Pleskalová (Encyklopedický slovník
češtiny, 26.) with the ability of absorbing of meaning of whole
proposition or as expressions with weakened sentence validity, it is
possible to look at them as sentence equivalents, whose essence lies in
the fact that they are conventional expressions to a certain extent, and
with respect to communication view they are equivalent with sentences
(with finite verbs) in various measures.
In some situations, when issuer of message preserves an information
for its future interpretation (e. g. he/she writes) and he/she does not
count on active role of communication context, properties of language
system are used optimally, which means utterances are built on complete
syntactic-semantic structures, so they are also – to a large extent –
interpretable without context. If such explicit utterances are also used in
semiotic active context, they are perceived as redundant, in opposition of
which stands the concept of language economy (see Daneš et al.,
Mluvnice češtiny 3, 436.)
M. Janečka
60
1.1 Diachronic view
Considering diachronic facet, in bohužel and also in bohudík we can see
dative from bůh [god], or more likely word-formant component founding
many compound words (bohu-), in bohužel was however the old
bohemian adverb žiel, for example jest mi žiel = je mi líto = I regret sth
(so it was bohužiel in the past) – separate žel is not so frequent at the
present time (1944 tokens in SYN2013pub) and it is not involved in
syntactic relations – compared to separate dative preposition díky (from
díkybohu) with its frequency 345525 tokens – in corpora SYN2013pub
with 935 million words.
Considering various etymological dictionaries of Czech, Kopečný and
Holub (Etymologický slovník jazyka českého, 81.) present that
the expression bůh “often declines to formal expression“: in greetings,
sayings (bohužel, bohudík, bůhvíkdo atd.), adverbs (zbůhdarma) and in
interjections (bože, probůh, přisámbohu etc.). This postulate correlates
with statement in Karlík, Nekula and Pleskalová (Encyklopedický slovník
češtiny, 65.) that weakening or loss of original meaning of expressions
mentioned above is considered as one of the most important features of
particularization.
2. Interpretation of corpus data
Table 1. Frequency of observed expressions in spoken corpora of Czech.
The frequency of observed particles, or generally evaluative and postural
expressions bohužel and bohudík, is shown in tables above: It is possible
to detect that the disproportion between bohužel and bohudík for spoken
and written texts and also the disproportion of their synonyms is very
remarkable.
Corpus
PMK
BMK
ORAL2006
ORAL 2008
SCHOLA
2010
ORAL2013
NEGATIVE
BOHUŽEL
181
49
75
67
82
186
ŽELBOHU
0
0
0
0
0
0
ŽEL
0
0
0
1
2
0
NANEŠTĚSTÍ
1
0
2
0
1
0
POSITIVE
BOHUDÍK
0
0
2
1
0
1
BOHUDÍKY
1
0
0
0
0
0
DÍKYBOHU
0
1
1
0
0
0
NAŠTĚSTÍ
27
19
51
54
12
174
Particles with Evaluative and Postural Modality…
61
Corpus
SYN2000
SYN2005
KSK-
DOPISY
SYN2006
pub
SYN2009
pub
SYN2010
SYN2013
pub
NEGATIVE
BOHUŽEL
10383
9161
263
35436
102913
12082
158873
ŽELBOHU
19
34
1
34
32
22
49
ŽEL
497
274
4
1189
822
389
1944
NANEŠTĚSTÍ
265
538
5
458
903
519
1245
POSITIVE
BOHUDÍK
161
122
8
273
592
106
856
BOHUDÍKY
49
107
0
80
95
64
147
DÍKYBOHU
72
124
0
104
180
262
372
NAŠTĚSTÍ
4899
6103
173
21098
63079
7122
89466
Table 2. Frequency of observed expressions in written corpora of Czech.
From the Table 1., which describes frequency of postural and
evaluative expressions in spoken corpora, is obvious that the primary tool
for representation of negative modality is the expression bohužel, while
the primary tool for representation of positive modality is the expression
naštěstí – frequency of synonyms and antonyms of expressions bohužel
and naštěstí are insignificant, which is surprising mainly by different
formal modifications of the expression bohudík; absence of frequency
(mainly archaic) synonyms of bohužel can be considered as quite
predictable.
From the Table 1. further follows, why I did not explore data from
spoken corpora – I wanted to analyse the couple of antonyms bohužel
and bohudík (because they have the same word-forming base), but the
frequency of bohudík in spoken corpora is from 0 to 2 token); so I worked
with the written corpus SYN2013pub – there are manifestations of
updating and of spoken language in journalistic texts, so I assume that
texts in this corpora reflect very clearly the development tendencies in
contemporary Czech.
For texts from corpus SYN 2013pub is typical using of expression
bohužel in some situations, when is necessary to keep the so called
information objectivity – from this expression it is impossible to identify
M. Janečka
62
grammar categories of person and number (I, you, they), from which
the postural modality follows – in this case the negative one. This
possible absorbing of many different expressions or constructions leads
to its semantic shift, overuse and subsequently to semantic emptying.
Another possible fact for using bohužel is so called language economy –
that means an effort of language user to express something in the shortest
construction – that means using of bohužel or bohudík instead of
construction with proposition of the same or at least similar meaning.
In other words – indexical language elements would be used (that
means personal or demonstrative pronoun, finite form of verb etc.)
instead of elements of symbolic nature (that means bohužel, bohudík
etc.) with very vague reference. Index is also always related to an
individual while bohužel or bohudík are not. According to Čermák
(“Index a indexálnost,“ 121.), it is possible to mention some basic
functions of index and indexicality in language: one of them is that
indexes help to create text coherency by connecting text components.
3. Analytical part
3.1 Establishing hypothesis
I try to point out on tokens
2
form corpus SYN2013pub, how the issuer of
message chooses the symbolic expression (bohužel/bohudík) instead of for
example multi-word construction, which could be more explicit in pointing
out the source or recipient of modality. An issuer is a politician or journalist,
who is responsible for processing of politician’s utterance in an article.
For my assumption I find the supporting view e.g. in Karlík, Nekula
and Pleskalová (Encyklopedický slovník češtiny, 26); the authors claim
that some postural and evaluative particles dispose of some potential to
absorb the proposition of whole utterance, which can lead to a) covering
the source of modality (or its identification after consideration of context)
or b) covering the recipient of modality. I also work on the general
presumption that particles are getting from spoken language to written
language (according to Hoffmannová and Čmejrková, Mluvená čeština).
I identify the expression bohužel in some contexts, where it is required
to express the negative attitude to the sentence content in some way.
2
It was necessary to find these contexts manually, because there has not been any tool for
automatic detection of interviews in the Czech National Corpus yet. Texts from the corpus
SYN2013pub (presented below) were not checked considering their grammar,
orthography and stylistics.
Particles with Evaluative and Postural Modality…
63
The expression is very suitable for this, because it does not carry
grammar categories (for example person or number), which can facilitate
identification of the source or recipient of modality; considering
the antonym expression bohudík, an intention to cover the source or
recipient of positive modality is verifiable with difficulties.
4. Typology of observed constructions
In the next part I classify tokens containing expressions bohužel and
bohudík into two categories according to the way the issuer of message
shows himself, considering the reality expressed by given utterance: a)
explicit speaker in the first person singular speaking for himself, b)
explicit speaker in the first person plural speaking for himself or for
group of people (deputies, employees of a company etc.).
As my tokens are from corpus of written journalism, I do not assume
inverse modality, which means a situation, when language user means
the opposite by saying bohužel – such a situation is in the spoken
language recognizable from the voice color, in personal communication
also from nonverbal elements like gestures and facial expressions. On the
contrary, it is necessary to trust a journalist that the written form of
utterance has really been performed this way.
4.1 Corpus tokens: types of constructions with bohužel
Type a) explicit speaker in the first person singular speaking for himself
(1) Především proto, že jako důkazy sloužily například i projevy, které pro
vedoucí funkcionáře NPD psali nastrčení policejní agenti. Zákaz této
strany má však i své odpůrce." Takový krok by byl špatný. Tyto útoky jsou
možné i v případě takového zákazu. Bohužel," říká premiér německé
země Bádensko-Württembersko Günther Oettinger. Předseda NPD Udo
Voigt se včera snaze o zákaz své partaje vysmál." Ještě se neví, kdo je
pachatel, a už se ozývají hlasy po zákazu," popsal v prohlášení.
(The important part of this context in English: “These attacks are also
possible in case of such prohibition. Unfortunately,” says Prime
Minister of German republic Baden-Würtenberg, Günther Oettinger.)
(2) Takže ani nevyklidíme ucpané a zaneřáděné ulice Starého Města.
M. Janečka
64
Termiti Jenže podzemní garáže si stavíte i vy, senátoři, jak ukázala slavná
televizní reportáž o termitech. Já jsem proti těm garážím protestoval.
Bohužel to bylo v době, kdy jsem nastupoval do Senátu. A bohužel už
byl na to schválený rozpočet. Snažil jsem se udělat maximum, bohužel
se to nepodařilo zastavit. Ty senátní garáže jsou podle mne naprostý
nesmysl, jsou to vyhozené stamiliony. Nejde jen o garáže. I kvůli vám se
stává Malá Strana jakýmsi politickým a úřednickým skanzenem.
(The important part of this context in English: “I tried to do my best,
unfortunately it was not possible to stop it,” says Martin Mejstřík,
member of Senate of Czech Republic.)
(3) Přestože výměnu vedení nemocnic začátkem prosince zdůvodňoval
Mišák takto tvrdými slovy, žádné právní kroky zatím kraj vůči bývalému
vedení nechystá. A to přesto, že se prý podle hejtmana podezření ukázalo
jako opodstatněné." Bohužel se to potvrdilo. Protože ale probíhají
forézní audity, tak budu schopen říct víc až po jejich závěru," řekl Mišák.
V Kroměříži si museli půjčit na výplaty, tvrdí hejtman.
(The important part of this context in English: “Unfortunately
the suspicion of management of hospital in Kroměříž was legitimate,”
says Mišák, county representative of region Zlín.)
In these tokens some efforts to cover the source or recipient of
negative fact using the expression bohužel are evident; source or
recipient of negative fact expressed by given utterance is in these tokens
the issuer of message himself or herself. There is no obvious “assumption
of responsibility” expressed by given utterance from the position of issuer
of message, that means for example by using a construction containing
demonstrative elements of indexical nature (demonstrative pronoun or
finite verb form) like je mi líto, ale…/ (já) lituji, ale… (in English: I'm
sorry about it. I regret to say. I regret something).
Type b) explicit speaker in the first person plural speaking for himself or
a group of people
(4) Návštěvnost je velká, z té by měl radost každý starosta. Současně mě
ale trápí, že nemáme peníze na to, dokončit opravu celého zámku," řekla
nižborská starostka. Velkým problémem zejména při akcích na zámku je
Particles with Evaluative and Postural Modality…
65
nedostatek parkovacích míst v okolí." Bohužel nemáme peníze na řešení
této složité situace. Budujeme kanalizaci a nezbývají nám peníze už na nic
jiného. Věřím, že v budoucnu se nám tento problém, kterého jsem si
vědoma, podaří vyřešit," doplnila Kateřina Zusková.
(The important part of this context in English: “Unfortunately we have
no money for solving this difficult situation of reconstruction of the whole
castle,” says mayor of Nižbor, Kateřina Zusková.)
(5) Národní dálniční společnost (NDS) sice vybudovala 2,5kilometrový
úsek dálnice D4, který spojuje Bratislavu s hranicemi, už před dvěma lety,
nápor dopravy ho ale čeká až nyní." Hlavní tahy se sbíhají v Bratislavě
a odtud pokračují do zahraničí. Bohužel starosti nám dělá tranzitní
doprava. Tvoří téměř polovinu dopravy přes hlavní město. Zatím ji
nemáme kam odklonit. Pokud nepostavíme obchvat, problém
nevyřešíme," upozorňuje předseda Bratislavského samosprávního kraje
Vladimír Bajan.
(The important part of this context in English: “Unfortunately we are
worried about transit transportation. We have no chance to reroute it,”
says president of Bratislava region, Vladimír Bajan.)
Tokens of type b) are partly identical with examples of previous type
a); there is again some covering of source or recipient of negative facts
expressed by given utterance using the expression bohužel. The attitude
of referent (that means individual or collective) to a fact could be
expressed by elements of demonstrative (or indexical) nature.
4.2 Corpus tokens: types of constructions with bohudík
Type a) explicit speaker in the first person singular speaking for himself
(6) Na takovou situaci nebyla připravená ani rozpočtová varianta, která
vzešla z pesimistických kalkulací." S poklesem jsme počítali, měli jsme
proto rozpočet podhodnocený. Nebudeme kvůli tomu muset zastavovat
žádné rozběhnuté investiční akce, protože, a v tomto případě musím
říct bohudík, došlo k odsunutí některých investic z důvodů jiných, než je
ekonomická krize," uvedl primátor Roman Onderka. V rozpočtu se
například počítá se 45 miliony korun na výstavbu cyklostezek v Brně.
M. Janečka
66
Jenže městu se letos nepodaří vykoupit všechny pozemky.
(The important part of this context in English: “There is no need to stop
ongoing investment operations, because, and I have to say fortunately
in this case, several investments were delayed because of other reasons,”
says city mayor of Brno, Roman Onderka.)
(7) Skupina rebelujících poslanců se původně chystala na jednání
napadnout také předsedu klubu Petra Tluchoře. K tomu se ale poslanci
nakonec nedostali." Bohužel můj návrh, aby se klub zabýval
podrobnostmi celé kauzy a účastí pana Tluchoře na ní a potažmo
premiéra, neuspěl. Mám pocit, že tím diskuse o problému v klubu
skončila. Nikdo na ní nemá zájem. Pouze padl nejasný návrh, že by se tím
měla zabývat komise pro kontrolu BIS, jejímž jsem, bohudík, členem.
Nemyslím si, že v tom byl jen pan Morava," uvedl Juraj Raninec. Ze
sněmovny zatím odešel poslanec Jan Morava. Tlustý, který se z jednání
omluvil kvůli dovolené v Portugalsku, ale odstoupit nehodlá.
(The important part of this context in English: “There was just an unclear
proposal that the commission for supervision of BIS (Czech security
information service) should deal with it, and I am member of this
commission, fortunately,” says deputy Juraj Raninec.)
Type b) explicit speaker in the first person plural speaking for himself or
a group of people
3
(8) U některých potřebujeme hodně trpělivosti a občas i kousíček toho
štěstíčka," podotkl starosta. To Rohov může mluvit o štěstí. Dluhy
nevymáhá, protože nemusí." Převážná část občanů platí stanovené
poplatky až na výjimky včas, ty výjimky jsou ojedinělé. S tímto
problém bohudík nemáme a věřím, že mít nebudeme," řekl rohovský
starosta Daniel Procházka.
(The important part of this context in English: “We do not collect debts,
because we do not have to. Fortunately, we have no problems with
debts and I believe that we will not have,” says mayor of Rohov, Daniel
Procházka.)
3
Like deputies, employees of a company etc.
Particles with Evaluative and Postural Modality…
67
It is obvious from tokens for demonstrating contexts containing
the expression bohudík in the corpus SYN2013pub that the expression
bohudík (and its formal modifications) occur primarily only in
interviews, that means in genres, where a lot of space is devoted to
respondent’s opinion – most of the tokens would correspond with
the types a) and b).
It is interesting that by searching for contexts containing expression
bohudík I identified quite a lot of coexistence of expression bohužel next
to bohudík (usually separated only with the conjunction nebo = or).
These examples I had to separate from further analysis considering
ambivalent modality.
Example from corpus SYN2013pub on ambivalent modality
(9) Širší definice OECD zahrnuje všechny počítačové specialisty a dále
uživatele IT, u kterých jsou vyžadovány pokročilé IT znalosti (matematici,
statistici, vrcholoví manažeři, finanční specialisté a mnozí další). Ani výše
uvedené skupiny však neuvažují profesi "obchodník IT", která je ale
v současnosti velmi žádaná a šlo by ji také zařadit do skupiny IT
odborníků. Lidské zdroje... Spočítejme je neprodleně. Současné
technologie bohužel (nebo bohudík) nepokročily tak daleko, aby bylo
možné na území ČR sečíst všechny informatiky na základě informací
uložených v čipech, které by tito odborníci měli implantovány pod kůži.
Musíme si proto vystačit s jinými statistickými metodami.
(The important part of this context in English: “Current technologies are
unfortunately (or fortunately) not so developed to count all people
from IT on the basis of information saved in their implanted
microchips.”)
Conclusion
The interview analysis shows some specific problems of using particles
bohužel and bohudík concerning covering of source or recipient of
modality, which can lead to influencing of readers of politician’s
interviews. I chose a specific area of journalism to verify my general
assumptions – that means interview talk, where I traced continuity – that
means how politician’s answers follow journalist’s questions.
Analysed tokens from the corpus SYN2013pub indicate that
M. Janečka
68
the expression bohužel, which has a potential to absorb the proposition of
the whole utterance, is applied in cases, when it is necessary (for more or
less obvious reasons) to cover the source or recipient of modality realized
by certain utterance, where in most cases the source or recipient of this
modality is an issuer of message himself or herself. It is possible that this
expression is plentifully applied in these situations, because from
the diachronic point of view it is relatively nontransparent and its
semantic emptying is connected with it.
As it is possible to derive from above mentioned contexts from the
corpus SYN2013pub, there are no explicitly expressed grammar
categories (particularly person, number etc.) by the issuer of message or
referent, which means that it is very difficult to discover the source
and/or recipient of modality expressed by given utterance. This kind of
“camouflage expressions” is, of course, used also in other spheres of
human communication (that means not only in politics, but also in sport,
culture, health service, economy etc.), but according to my opinion it can
be unsafe only in politics considering possible misunderstanding (or
influencing “common” people) arising because of these expressions.
From contextual analysis of expression bohužel it is also evident that
bohužel infiltrates from primarily spoken journalistic genres into written
genres as for example news report to a large extent.
The covering of source or recipient of positive modality using
the expression bohudík (and its modifications) is not as usual as in
the case of expression bohudík. Either this source or recipient is
unknown for different reasons, or some indexical elements are present
next to the expression bohudík and these indexical elements can
explicitly realize a source or a recipient of positive modality. Low
frequency of bohudík also indicates that this expression is used only
marginally for realizing some positive facts and that spoken corpora
almost have not registered these expressions yet – diachronic
transparency of this expression possibly plays some role.
Considering frequency of the expression bohudík in written corpora,
mainly in SYN2013pub, I can claim that bohudík is often used in non-
formal contexts (interviews with athletes, actors or with common
people); however, its higher frequency in political discourse was not
proved in my analysis. When a speaker uses the expression bohudík, he
also has a tendency to add the semantically opposite expression bohužel
to create an indistinct modality (neither positive nor negative) – however
the exact reason remains unknown so far.
Particles with Evaluative and Postural Modality…
69
References
Čermák, František. 2000. “Index a indexálnost v jazyce: některé poznámky”. In Čeština,
univerzália a specifika 2, editored by Zdena Hladká and Petr Karlík, 115–121. Brno:
Masarykova univerzita.
Daneš, František et al. 1987. Mluvnice češtiny 3. Praha: Academia.
Hoffmannová, Jana, and Světla Čmejrková. 2011. Mluvená čeština: hledání funkčního
rozpětí. Praha: Academia.
Janečka, Martin. 2012. “Uplatnění částice bohužel (a bohudík) v současné psané
publicistice”. In Vol. 3 of KORPUS – GRAMATIKA –AXIOLOGIE, 10–19. Hradec
Králové : Univerzita Hradec Králové, Pedagogická fakulta.
Janečka, Martin. 2014. “Korpusová analýza výrazů vyjadřujících postojovou a evaluativní
modalitu k propozici výpovědi”. In Lingvistika Praha 2014 (12 Apr 2014).
Cit. 21. 9. 2016. http://lingvistikapraha.ff.cuni.cz/sbornik.
Karlík, Petr. 2000. “Hypotéza modifikované valenční teorie”. In Vol. 61 of Slovo
a slovesnost, 170–189. Praha: Ústav pro jazyk český AV ČR.
Karlík, Petr, Marek Nekula and Jana Pleskalová. 2002. Encyklopedický slovník češtiny.
Praha: NLN.
Kopečný, František, and Josef Holub. 1952. Etymologický slovník jazyka českého. Praha:
SNU.
Talja, Sanna. 1999. “Analyzing Qualitative Interview Data: The Discourse Analytic
Method”. In Vol. 21 of Library and Information Science Research, 459–477.
Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Uličný, Oldřich. 2010. “Pražský závislostní korpus – nová příležitost pro popis české
syntaxe?” Vol. 2 of Bohemica Olomucensia, 151–161. Olomouc: Univerzita Palackého.
Van Dijk, Teun A. 2001. “Critical Discourse Analysis”. In The Handbook of Discourse
Analysis, editored by Deborah Schiffrin, Deborah Tannen and Heidi E. Hamilton
(Eds.), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, 352–371. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Wetherell, Margaret, and Jonathan Potter. 1988. “Discourse analysis and the
identification of interpretative repertoires”. In Analysing everyday experience:
A casebook of methods, editored by Charles Antaki, 168-183. London: Sage.
Český národní korpus - SYN2013PUB. Ústav Českého národního korpusu FF UK, Praha
2013. Dostupný z WWW: <http://www.korpus.cz>.
Abstract
This paper tries to analyse expressions including evaluative and postural modality, mainly
the expressions bohužel and bohudík (and their synonyms), which are commonly
classified as particles. With help of the Czech National Corpora SYN2013pub, including
journalistic texts, I try to prove the hypothesis that expressions bohužel and bohudík can
acquire the function of sentence equivalent in some contexts, in spite of some evaluations,
which claim the opposite. I try to analyse qualitative and quantitative disproportion
between bohužel and bohudík considering the diachronic characteristics of these
expressions. The main aim of this paper is to point out these particles as possible devices
of manipulation on examples from political discourse; according to my hypothesis these
particles can obscure a source or a recipient of modality, which could otherwise be
marked by different grammar categories.
Keywords: modality, manipulation, particle, grammar category, corpus study
