/LING
|
Update: February 24, 2023 The new version of Termout.org is now online, so this web site is now obsolete and will soon be dismantled. |
Lista de candidatos sometidos a examen:
1) epistemic (*)
(*) Términos presentes en el nuestro glosario de lingüística
1) Candidate: epistemic
Is in goldstandard
1
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines282 - : When other voices are entertained, the preferred structure used is It is + epistemic relational/cognitive mental process to express the evaluation, with a highly impersonal, untraceable voice, as shown in the following examples:
2
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines283 - : When other voices are entertained, the preferred structure used is It is + epistemic relational/cognitive mental process to express the evaluation, with a highly impersonal, untraceable voice, as shown in the following examples:
3
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines378 - : “while an evidential supplement can always be seen in an epistemic marker, the opposite does not always hold: not all evidential markers are modal in that they do not all necessarily imply an epistemic judgment” .
4
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines519 - : This paper explores a discourse pattern found in responses to assertions. The pattern includes a particle that stresses agreement (e.g., Sp. claro, por supuesto, evidentemente) followed by a segment where the second speaker elaborates on the information provided by the first. It is argued that, in the contexts analysed here, these particles index epistemic incongruence: although the second speaker shows agreement with the semantic content proposed by the first, the content is known or even obvious for the second speaker and the assertion is therefore, in a sense, problematic . Drawing from this analysis, a distinction is proposed between two levels within the general category of (dis)agreement: one level relates to content and the other relates to the assumptions about the epistemic configuration that are carried in an assertive speech act itself.
5
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines565 - : ^6Cita completa: “Intersubjectivity is the explicit expression of the SP/ W’s [speaker/writer] attention to the ‘self ’ of the addressee/ reader in both an epistemic sense (paying attention to their presumed attitudes to the content of what is said), and in a more social sense (paying attention to their ‘face’ or ‘image needs’ associated with social stance and identity)” (^[189]Traugott, 2003: 18, citado en ^[190]De Cock 2013: 14 ).
6
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines577 - : problems in society. Also recurring were verbal phrases containing core modals, semi-modals or periphrastic modals, containing first person pronoun references, denoted epistemic possibility and volition, necessity, obligation and certainty meanings. The range of modal meanings conveyed in the texts recalls the use of modality in the conversational register, differing notably from the deployment of modality in formal academic written texts, where degrees of tentativeness are expressed through the modals ‘may’ and ‘might’ (^[127]Biber et al., 1999). ^[128]Leech et al. (2009) explain that the semi-modal ‘have to’, an epistemic variant of the obligation modal ‘must’, expresses strong obligation but does so “in a less authoritarian way”, thus making a “less face-threatening impression” (^[129]Leech, 2009: 115 ). However, the corpus data did show that even the Spanish semi-modal tener que used in some of the verb phrases did not fully function as a less face-threatening variant of the modal
7
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines598 - : Our notion of epistemic modality in this paper follows that of ^[119]Nuyts (2001: 21), which is as follows: epistemic modality refers to the “evaluation of the chances that a certain hypothetical state of affairs under consideration (or some aspect of it ) will occur, is occurring or has occurred in a possible world”. This sense of evaluation is also highlighted by ^[120]Cornillie (2009: 47) as an epistemic modal device hedging a proposition, “epistemic modality evaluates the likelihood that this proposition is true”.
Evaluando al candidato epistemic:
1) modality: 5 (*)
4) evaluation: 4 (*)
5) modal: 4 (*)
6) obligation: 3 (*)
7) modals: 3
9) attention: 3
10) agreement: 3 (*)
12) speaker: 3 (*)
epistemic
Lengua: eng
Frec: 80
Docs: 24
Nombre propio: / 80 = 0%
Coocurrencias con glosario: 6
Puntaje: 6.798 = (6 + (1+4.85798099512757) / (1+6.33985000288463)));
Candidato aceptado
Referencias bibliográficas encontradas sobre cada término
(Que existan referencias dedicadas a un término es también indicio de terminologicidad.)| epistemic |
: Alonso-Almeida, F. & Álvarez-Gil, F. J. (submitted). Developing argumentation in history texts: Epistemic modality and evidentiality. Pragmalingüística. : Carrió-Pastor, M. L. (2012). A contrastive analysis of epistemic modality in scientific English. Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, 18, 115-132. : Coates, J. (2003). The role of epistemic modality in women’s talk. In R. Facchinetti, M. Krug & F. Palmer (Eds.), Modality in contemporary English (pp. 331-348). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. : Cornillie, B. (2007). Evidentiality and epistemic Modality in Spanish (semi-) auxiliaries. A cognitive-functional approach. Berlín: Mouton de Gruyter. : Cornillie, B. (2009). Evidentiality and Epistemic Modality. On the Close Relationship Between Two Different Categories. Functions of Language, 16(1), 44-62. : De Haan, F. (1999). Evidentiality and epistemic modality: Setting boundaries. Southwest Journal of Linguistics, 18, 83-101. : García-Ramón, A. (2018a). Indexing epistemic incongruence: Uy as a formal sign of disagreement in agreement sequences in Spanish. Journal of Pragmatics, 131, 1-17. : Greco, P. (2018). Evidentiality and epistemic modality in witness testimony in the context of Italian criminal trials.Journal of Pragmatics, 128, 128-136. : Grzech, K. (2016). Discourse enclitics in Tena Kichwa: A corpus-based account of information structure and epistemic meaning. Tesis doctoral, SOAS University of London, Londres, Reino Unido. : Hennemann, A. (2012). The epistemic and evidential use of spanish modal adverbs and verbs of cognitive attitude. Folia Linguistica, 46(1), 133-170. : Heritage, J. & Raymond, G. (2005). The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Talk-in-Interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68(1), 15-38. : Heritage, J. (2013a). Action formation and its epistemic (and other) backgrounds. Discourse Studies, 15(5), 551-578. : Kranich, S. (2009). Epistemic Modality in English Popular Scientific Texts and their German Translations. Trans-kom, 2(1), 26-41. : Martín Martín, P. (2000). Epistemic modality in English and Spanish psychological texts. LFE. Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, 7-8, 196-208. : Marín Arrese, J. I. (2009). Effective vs. epistemic stance, and subjectivity/intersubjectivity in political discourse. A case study. In A. Tsangalidis & R. Facchinetti (Eds.), Studies on English modality. In honour of Frank R. Palmer (pp. 23-52). Bern: Peter Lang . : Nuyts, J. (2001). Epistemic modality, language, and conceptualization: A cognitive-pragmatic perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins . : Nuyts, J. (2001). Subjectivity as an evidential dimension in epistemic modal expressions. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(3), 383-400. : Pic, E. & Furmaniak, G. (2012). A study of epistemic modality in academic and popularised discourse: The case of possibility adverbs perhaps, maybe and possibly. Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, 18, 13-44. : Piqué-Angordans, J., Posteguillo, S. & Andreu-Besó, J. V. (2002). Epistemic and deontic modality: A linguistic indicator of disciplinary variation in academic English. LSP & Professional Communication, 2(2), 49-65. : Salager-Meyer, F., Defives, G. & Hamelynck, M. (1996). Epistemic modality in 19th and 20th century medical English written discourse: A principal component analysis. Interface. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10, 163-199. : Sauerland, U. & Stateva, P. (2007). Scalar vs. epistemic vagueness. En M. Gibson & T. Friedman (Eds.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory. Ithaca: CLC Publications . : Sidnell, J. (2012). Who knows best? Evidentiality and epistemic asymmetry in conversation. Pragmatics and Society, 3(2), 294-320. : Thompson, S. & Mulac, A. (1991). A quantitative perspective on the grammaticization of epistemic parentheticals in English. En E. Traugott & B. Heine (Eds.), Approaches to grammaticalization (pp. 313-339). Amsterdam: Benjamins. : Uclés, G. (2020). Epistemic (a)Symmetries and Mitigation in the Description of Conversational Markers: The Case of Spanish ‘¿no?’ Corpus Pragmatics, 4(1), 107-131. [200]https://doi.org/10.1007/s41701-019-00068-7 : Vold, E. (2006). Epistemic modality markers in research articles: A cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary study. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 16(1), 61-87. |