The Handbook of Discourse Analysis
The Handbook of Discourse Analysis The Handbook of Discourse Analysis
168 John Myhill These data have been taken from languages which are generally verb-initial (Biblical Hebrew and Chamorro), SVO (Spanish), and where the verb most often follows both the subject and the object (Ute) (see other studies in Givón 1983a showing a similar pattern); thus there is reason to suppose this may be a universal pattern. At first this appears surprising, because an often-repeated theme of functional linguistics is that “old information precedes new information” (e.g. Contreras 1978), whereas the data in table 8.2 suggest the reverse, that arguments are more likely to precede the verb if their RD is higher, so that they represent newer information. However, it is possible to suggest a resolution to this apparent contradiction (although this is speculative and should be checked against more data). Claims that old information generally precedes new information have been made on the basis of data from European languages which are generally SVO, using an existential-presentative construction like On the roof stood a chimney, where the preverbal roof is old information and the postverbal chimney is new information. It is possible that the distinctive use of VS order in this existential-presentative construction is specific to SVO languages, that such constructions constitute the only basis for the general claim that “old information precedes new information,” and that if these constructions in these SVO languages are excluded, the reverse is generally true, and “new information precedes old information,” as suggested by the data in table 8.2. Supporting this idea is the fact that in the data from the only SVO language here, Spanish, the researcher specifically excluded existential-presentative constructions from the counts (see Bentivoglio 1983); if these constructions are included, the picture changes, as the postverbal subjects have a higher RD (11.99, N = 141) than the preverbal ones (8.22, N = 180). 2 2.2 Temporal sequencing Another criterion for categorizing discourse function in different languages is temporal sequencing or foregrounding. Introduced in Labov (1972) (as the concept “narrative clause”), this was first extended to data in a variety of languages in Hopper (1979). According to this criterion, a clause is temporally sequenced if it has past time reference and refers to the next event in a story line (e.g. the second clause, but not the first, in I was reading in the library and this guy came up to me . . . ). The sequencing function has been related to alternations in word order, voice, and verb form. For example, Schiffrin (1981) shows that the English historical present is associated with temporally sequenced clauses, while Hopper (1979) shows that temporal sequencing is associated with the use of the verbal forms with a di-prefix in Malay. Myhill (1992) argues that, in languages with a relatively high frequency of VS order, sequencing is particularly associated with VS word order, while SV order is associated with unsequenced clauses. On the other hand, in languages with a lower frequency of VS order, this correlation is not found. This is shown by the data in table 8.3 (see also data from Old English in Hopper 1979). The Biblical Hebrew data here are particularly striking, in that they show that when the language changed to a lower frequency of VS order, the association between temporal sequencing and VS order disappeared. The concept of temporal sequencing therefore makes it possible to make a typological generalization regarding word order type.
Typology and Discourse Analysis 169 Table 8.3 Word order and temporal sequencing Tzotzil EBH Chorti Spanish LBH Romanian All 80 (899) 65 (1099) 51 (184) 44 (2000) 40 (420) 31 (554) Sequenced 92 (244) 80 (546) 72 (320) 58 (316) 20 (85) 22 (113) Unsequenced 76 (655) 49 (553) 47 (152) 41 (1684) 46 (335) 33 (441) Notes: Numbers are VS% (N-size). EBH = Early Biblical Hebrew, LBH = Late Biblical Hebrew. Data sources: Givón (1977) (Hebrew); Myhill (1984) (others) 2.3 Other types of text-counts Linguists have proposed other types of text-counts which can be useful in giving a profile of the discourse function of a construction. Myhill and Xing (1996) propose a definition of the term “contrast” which can be objectively applied to naturally occurring usages so as to categorize individual clauses as contrastive or not (and also to distinguish between different subtypes of contrast), so that one or another contrastive function can be shown to be statistically associated with the use of a certain word order, intonation pattern, or particle (e.g. Japanese wa, Korean -(n)In). In Forrest’s (1994) study of voice alternations in Bella Coola, in addition to counts associated with NP information status such as RD and TP, she also uses a text-count distinguishing between NPs which refer to major characters in a story and those which do not, and shows that variation on this parameter correlates with the use of one or other voice construction. A related and more objective and universally applicable (though also more time-consuming) type of measure is Topicality Quotient, described in Thompson (1989). To determine this, one counts the number of clauses in which a referent is referred to in an entire text, divides this by the number of total clauses in the text, and then assigns this score to every mention of this referent. Other possible counts categorize referents according to their humanness, animacy, number, referentiality, function in previous clause, form (e.g. pronoun, unmodified noun, modified noun, common noun, proper noun, etc.), or, for that matter, anything else the linguist thinks is important which can be coded objectively. 3 Translation Data Translation provides another means of comparing discourse functions in different languages. It is useful in that it gives some idea of the functional similarity or difference between constructions in different languages. For example, in Dryer’s (1994) study of voice in Kutenai, he asked a bilingual Kutenai–English speaker to translate a Kutenai text into English. He found that, out of 70 clauses using a certain Kutenai construction clearly associated with highly topical Patients, only nine were translated into English as passives, the rest being translated as actives, suggesting that this Kutenai construction is functionally like an inverse rather than a passive.
- Page 140 and 141: 118 Diane Blakemore Unger, C. (1996
- Page 142 and 143: 120 Gregory Ward and Betty J. Birne
- Page 144 and 145: 122 Gregory Ward and Betty J. Birne
- Page 146 and 147: 124 Gregory Ward and Betty J. Birne
- Page 148 and 149: 126 Gregory Ward and Betty J. Birne
- Page 150 and 151: 128 Gregory Ward and Betty J. Birne
- Page 152 and 153: 130 Gregory Ward and Betty J. Birne
- Page 154 and 155: 132 Gregory Ward and Betty J. Birne
- Page 156 and 157: 134 Gregory Ward and Betty J. Birne
- Page 158 and 159: 136 Gregory Ward and Betty J. Birne
- Page 160 and 161: 138 Laurel J. Brinton 7 Historical
- Page 162 and 163: 140 Laurel J. Brinton of particular
- Page 164 and 165: 142 Laurel J. Brinton Shakespeare,
- Page 166 and 167: 144 Laurel J. Brinton argues that i
- Page 168 and 169: 146 Laurel J. Brinton typical of th
- Page 170 and 171: 148 Laurel J. Brinton 1 What is the
- Page 172 and 173: 150 Laurel J. Brinton politeness. 1
- Page 174 and 175: 152 Laurel J. Brinton that this are
- Page 176 and 177: 154 Laurel J. Brinton functions; -s
- Page 178 and 179: 156 Laurel J. Brinton Linguistics,
- Page 180 and 181: 158 Laurel J. Brinton Kastovsky, Di
- Page 182 and 183: 160 Laurel J. Brinton semantic-prag
- Page 184 and 185: 162 John Myhill verb, and direct ob
- Page 186 and 187: 164 John Myhill refer to a supposed
- Page 188 and 189: 166 John Myhill (2) Binasa ng lalak
- Page 192 and 193: 170 John Myhill Sometimes, translat
- Page 194 and 195: 172 John Myhill text-count methodol
- Page 196 and 197: 174 John Myhill Sun, Chaofen and Ta
- Page 198 and 199: 176 Douglas Biber and Susan Conrad
- Page 200 and 201: 178 Douglas Biber and Susan Conrad
- Page 202 and 203: 180 Douglas Biber and Susan Conrad
- Page 204 and 205: 182 Douglas Biber and Susan Conrad
- Page 206 and 207: 184 Douglas Biber and Susan Conrad
- Page 208 and 209: 186 Douglas Biber and Susan Conrad
- Page 210 and 211: 188 Douglas Biber and Susan Conrad
- Page 212 and 213: 190 Douglas Biber and Susan Conrad
- Page 214 and 215: 192 Douglas Biber and Susan Conrad
- Page 216 and 217: 194 Douglas Biber and Susan Conrad
- Page 218 and 219: 196 Douglas Biber and Susan Conrad
- Page 221 and 222: Nine Ways of Looking at Apologies 1
- Page 223 and 224: Nine Ways of Looking at Apologies 2
- Page 225 and 226: Nine Ways of Looking at Apologies 2
- Page 227 and 228: Nine Ways of Looking at Apologies 2
- Page 229 and 230: Nine Ways of Looking at Apologies 2
- Page 231 and 232: Nine Ways of Looking at Apologies 2
- Page 233 and 234: Nine Ways of Looking at Apologies 2
- Page 235 and 236: Nine Ways of Looking at Apologies 2
- Page 237 and 238: Interactional Sociolinguistics 215
- Page 239 and 240: Interactional Sociolinguistics 217
Typology and <strong>Discourse</strong> <strong>Analysis</strong> 169<br />
Table 8.3<br />
Word order and temporal sequencing<br />
Tzotzil EBH Chorti Spanish LBH Romanian<br />
All 80 (899) 65 (1099) 51 (184) 44 (2000) 40 (420) 31 (554)<br />
Sequenced 92 (244) 80 (546) 72 (320) 58 (316) 20 (85) 22 (113)<br />
Unsequenced 76 (655) 49 (553) 47 (152) 41 (1684) 46 (335) 33 (441)<br />
Notes: Numbers are VS% (N-size). EBH = Early Biblical Hebrew, LBH = Late Biblical Hebrew.<br />
Data sources: Givón (1977) (Hebrew); Myhill (1984) (others)<br />
2.3 Other types <strong>of</strong> text-counts<br />
Linguists have proposed other types <strong>of</strong> text-counts which can be useful in giving a<br />
pr<strong>of</strong>ile <strong>of</strong> the discourse function <strong>of</strong> a construction. Myhill and Xing (1996) propose a<br />
definition <strong>of</strong> the term “contrast” which can be objectively applied to naturally occurring<br />
usages so as to categorize individual clauses as contrastive or not (and also to<br />
distinguish between different subtypes <strong>of</strong> contrast), so that one or another contrastive<br />
function can be shown to be statistically associated with the use <strong>of</strong> a certain word<br />
order, intonation pattern, or particle (e.g. Japanese wa, Korean -(n)In). In Forrest’s<br />
(1994) study <strong>of</strong> voice alternations in Bella Coola, in addition to counts associated with<br />
NP information status such as RD and TP, she also uses a text-count distinguishing<br />
between NPs which refer to major characters in a story and those which do not, and<br />
shows that variation on this parameter correlates with the use <strong>of</strong> one or other voice<br />
construction. A related and more objective and universally applicable (though also<br />
more time-consuming) type <strong>of</strong> measure is Topicality Quotient, described in Thompson<br />
(1989). To determine this, one counts the number <strong>of</strong> clauses in which a referent<br />
is referred to in an entire text, divides this by the number <strong>of</strong> total clauses in the text,<br />
and then assigns this score to every mention <strong>of</strong> this referent. Other possible counts<br />
categorize referents according to their humanness, animacy, number, referentiality,<br />
function in previous clause, form (e.g. pronoun, unmodified noun, modified noun,<br />
common noun, proper noun, etc.), or, for that matter, anything else the linguist thinks<br />
is important which can be coded objectively.<br />
3 Translation Data<br />
Translation provides another means <strong>of</strong> comparing discourse functions in different<br />
languages. It is useful in that it gives some idea <strong>of</strong> the functional similarity or difference<br />
between constructions in different languages. For example, in Dryer’s (1994)<br />
study <strong>of</strong> voice in Kutenai, he asked a bilingual Kutenai–English speaker to translate a<br />
Kutenai text into English. He found that, out <strong>of</strong> 70 clauses using a certain Kutenai<br />
construction clearly associated with highly topical Patients, only nine were translated<br />
into English as passives, the rest being translated as actives, suggesting that this<br />
Kutenai construction is functionally like an inverse rather than a passive.