Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Politeness-induced semantic change: The case of quand même
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Politeness-induced semantic change: The case of quand même
Do you wish to request the book?
Politeness-induced semantic change: The case of quand même
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Politeness-induced semantic change: The case of quand même
2005
Overview
This article contributes to a growing body of theory that posits
language-external, social factors as a primary motor in diachronic change.
Politeness theory and the use of variationist approaches enable us to
posit, and test, the hypothesis of a type of pragmaticalization, which I
call Politeness-Induced Semantic Change (PISC). Historical data on
quand même are presented that give tentative credence to
such a model. Moeschler and de Spengler's (1981) and Waltereit's (2001) speech-act theoretic analyses of quand
même are reinterpreted within the framework of politeness
theory and sociopragmatics. The ensuing corpus investigation of the
grammaticalization and pragmatico-semantic evolution of quand
même from 1500–2000 highlights the fact that not only the
innovation but also the propagation of a new form–function
configuration depend on social factors; politeness theory may have
explanatory power in capturing the ever-changing social patterning of
linguistic features and the conditions that favor the spread of
innovation.I wish to acknowledge the very
helpful and detailed comments of Maj-Britt Mosegaard Hansen and anonymous
reviewers from Language Variation and Change on a draft version
of this article. Remaining inadequacies are, of course, entirely my own. I
also recognize a debt of gratitude to the Research Committee of the
Faculty of Humanities, Languages and Social Sciences of the University of
the West of England, Bristol, who granted me the research leave required
to complete the article.
