Abstract

In this study, we argue that the increasingly popular concept of subjectivity is in need of a more fine-grained analysis, and we make an attempt to set up a typology of distinct sub-categories. We first discuss a number of problems that emerge from the literature, such as the conflicting views on the nature of subjectivity, and the general vagueness of the way speaker-involvement is defined in order to detect subjectivity. On the basis of two case studies, we then propose to distinguish between at least three types of subjectivity, one pragmatic type relating to the use of an expression, and two semantic types where speaker-involvement pertains to the meaning of an expression. The distinction between the latter two types is based on syntactic criteria, and semantically relates to whether a particular item functions in the build-up of the content of a message, or in the enactment of the speaker's position with respect to this content.