Author:

Abstract:

A considerable amount of literature has been published on discourse markers (henceforth DMs) and their contrastive analysis (Aijmer&Simon-Vandenbergen 2006, Taboada&Doval Suárez&González Álvarez 2013). This study aims to contribute to this growing area of research by exploring DMs in double perspective: internal, by contrasting DMs and homographic adverbials, and external, by tracing similarities and dissimilarities in the matter in English, Dutch, Polish, Russian, and Bulgarian. This paper discusses the case of a few contrastive DMs and their homographic time adverbials (Tab. 1). Even though the relation adverbial – DM is a much debated problem in recent literature (Virtanen 1992, Verstraete 2007, Hasselgård 2010) the nature of this relation remains unclear. As the study sets out to investigate it, a clear understanding of what an adverb and DM are is needed. In the study, I start from Wajszczuk’s division of parts of speech (2000). It allows for separating syntactically dependent and used for talking about the world adverbs from DMs that are used for talking about the act of speaking and about a speaker himself (fe. his epistemic states). Traditionally, usages of the units in question are divided into two groups: with time reference (1)-(3) and without (4)-(5). On the other hand, such division does not correspond with syntactic differences between (1), (2) and (3)-(5). (1) While at work she got a headache. (2) She got a headache while working. (3) She got a headache while he was out working. (4) While she often has headaches, she does not want to consult a doctor. (5) She got a headache while he was completely not affected by loud music played by their neighbors. There are undeniable differences between units chosen for examination but the main question remains: how many homographic units are there and how to separate them in a clear and precise way. Once they are separated, the question about a label identifying their features can be answered. The research data drawn from five parallel corpora: Dutch Parallel Corpus (DPC), PELCRA Multilingual (Polish-*) parallel corpus (CC-BY), OPUS, Polish-Russian Parallel Corpus (PRPC), Polish-Russian-Bulgarian Parallel Corpus. Possible translations (repeatable, single and accidental translations are not registered here) show which elements tend to get different translations depend on whether they serve as an adverbial or as a DM and which are translated by the same – bifunctional! – element in target language. Interestingly, in the case of Germanic languages the homographs can have the same transitional partners, see (6)-(7), (8)-(9). At the same time, there are units being a possible translation for only one of homographs (see tijdens in (10)). (6) She examined me while she ate her vegetable quiche. Ze bestudeerde me terwijl ze haar groentequiche at. [DPC] (7) Gross profit margin increased to 49%, from 45% in 3Q03, while EBITA margin improved to 18.9% from 10.5%. De brutowinstmarge steeg van 45% in het derde kwartaal van 2003 naar 49%, terwijl de EBITA-marge steeg van 10,5 % naar 18,9%. [DPC] (8) Yet retaining procedural autonomy while sacrificing political influence by remaining outside the core of the Lisbon Strategy is the greater danger currently facing the OMC/SPSI(…). De procedurele autonomie behouden, maar de politieke invloed opofferen door buiten de kern van de Lissabon-strategie te blijven, is het grootste gevaar voor de OCM/SBSI (…) [DPC] (9) While other musical heroes get their teeth fixed, date models and accept honours from the Queen, Morrissey remains proudly remote from the throng. Andere muziekidolen laten hun tanden een beurt geven, gaan uit met fotomodellen en worden door de Queen gelauwerd, maar Morrissey houdt zich ver van dat alles. [DPC] (10) Do not touch the damaged cable and pull the mains plug when the cable is damaged while working. Raak de beschadigde kabel niet aan en trek de stekker uit het stopcontact als de kabel tijdens de werkzaamheden wordt beschadigd. [DPC] For Slavic languages there is a greater specialization of translational counterparts. For example Pol. tymczasemDM is in most cases translated by introducing opposition a, see (11), Rus. тем временем is a good translational partner for Pol. tymczasemAdv, see (12), but in contexts of Pol. tymczasem that might be suspected of representing DM usages (like (13)) appears rarely. (11) Żąda się, by sama uczyniła wybór, tymczasem ona wybierać nie może, może tylko powiedzieć „tak” lub „nie”. Хотят, чтоб она сама выбирала, а она не может выбрать и только отвечает: да и нет. [PRPC] It is expected that she decides for herself, while she cannot decide, she can only say „yes” or „no”. (12) Lud cierpi nędzę albo buntuje się, wojska mało, skarb pusty, a tymczasem o parę miesięcy od nas jak ciasto na drożdżach rośnie Asyria (...). Народ терпит нужду или бунтует, армия мала, казна пуста, а тем временем в нескольких месяцах пути от нас, как тесто на дрожжах, поднимается Ассирия (...)! [PRPC] People suffer from poverty and rebel, the army is small, the treasury is empty, while there is Assyria growing rapidly just a few months away from us. (14) Namiestnik przypatrywał się z ciekawością temu życiu rzecznemu, a tymczasem bajdaki jego mknęły szybko ku Kudakowi. Наместник с любопытством оглядывался вокруг, а тем временем его байдаки быстро мчались в Кудак. [PRPC] The governor was watching the river life with interest while baidaks were sailing fast towards Kodak fortress. In a more detailed analysis during the conference these and other differences will be examined and explained. The study offers some important insights into such phenomena as 1. polysemy (approached from reductionism point of view with usage of Ockham razor); 2. DM’s development and probable pattern Adv > DM; 3. word order, especially a correlation between DM’s position in a sentence and its meaning; and also 4. terminological issues (cf. “adverbial conjunction”). In consequence, it ensures to deliver a better understanding of the relation discussed. The paper does not, on the other hand, engage with discussion on contrastive DM in general (cf. Lamiroy&Van Belle 1995, Umbach 2005, Olmos&Ahern 2009, Fraser 2013). References Aijmer, K., & Simon-Vandenbergen, A-M. (eds.) 2006. Pragmatic markers in contrast. Oxford: Elsevier. Fraser, B. (2013). Combinations of contrastive discourse markers in English. International Review of Pragmatics, 5, 318-340. Hasselgård, H. (2010). Adjunct Adverbials in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lamiroy, B., & Van Belle, W. (1995). Connectives of contrast and concession in Dutch and French. Leuvense bijdragen: tijdschrift voor Germaanse filologie, 84/ 3, 397-418. Olmos, S., & Ahern, A. (2009). Contrast and propositional attitude: A relevance theoretic analysis of contrast connectives in Spanish and English. Lingua, 119, 51-66. Taboada, M., Doval Suárez, S., & González Álvarez, E. (eds.) (2013). Contrastive discourse analysis: functional and corpus perspectives. Sheffield: Equinox. Umbach, C. (2005). Contrast and information structure: a focus-cased analysis of but. Linguistics, 43:1, 207-232. Verstraete, J.-Ch. (2007). Rethinking the coordinate-subordinate dichotomy: interpersonal grammar and the analysis of adverbial clauses in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Virtanen, T. (1992). Discourse functions of adverbial placement in English. Åbo: Åbo Akademi University Press. Wajszczuk, J. 2000. Can a division of lexemes according to syntactic criteria be consistent? Biuletyn Polskiego Towarzystwa Językoznawczego, LV, 19-38.