Might Interjections Encode Concepts? More Questions than Answers
This paper reflects on the conceptual nature of interjections. Although there are convincing reasons to claim that interjections do not encode concepts, arguments can be adduced to question such claim. In fact, some pragmatists have contended that they may be conceptual elements. After reviewing both the non-conceptualist and conceptualist approaches to interjections, this paper discusses some reasons that can be given to reconsider the conceptuality of interjections. Nevertheless, it adopts an intermediate standpoint by arguing that the heterogeneity of interjections, with items incorporated from other lexical categories, and the openness of the word class they constitute, which results in the coinage of certain interjections or the innovative usage of some elements, could indicate the existence of a continuum of more and less conceptual items. In any case, this paper suggests that those items with conceptual content would not encode full concepts, but some schematic material requiring subsequent pragmatic adjustments.
References
Aijmer, Karin. 2004. "Interjections in a contrastive perspective." In Emotion in Dialogic Interaction: Advances in the Complex, edited by Weigand Edda, 99-120. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.248.09aijSearch in Google Scholar
Alcaide Lara, Esperanza. 1996. "La interjección." In La Expresión de la Modalidad en el Habla de Sevilla, edited by Catalina Fuentes Rodríguez and Esperanza Alcaide Lara. Seville: Servicio de Publicaciones del Ayuntamiento de Sevilla.Search in Google Scholar
Ameka, Felix K. 1992a. "Interjections: The universal yet neglected part of speech." Journal of Pragmatics 18: 101-118, doi: 10.1016/0378-2166(92)90048-G.10.1016/0378-2166(92)90048-GSearch in Google Scholar
Ameka, Felix K. 1992b. "The meaning of phatic and conative interjections." Journal of Pragmatics 18: 245-271, doi: 10.1016/0378-2166(92)90054-F.10.1016/0378-2166(92)90054-FSearch in Google Scholar
Ameka, Felix K. 2006. "Interjections." In Encyclopaedia of Language and Linguistics, edited by Keith Brown, 743-746. Amsterdam: Elsevier.10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/00396-5Search in Google Scholar
Barsalou, Lawrence W. 1987. "The instability of graded structure in concepts." In Concepts and Conceptual Development: Ecological and Intellectual Factors in Categorization, edited by Ulric Neisser, 101-140. New York: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Blakemore, Diane. 1987. Semantic Constraints on Relevance. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar
Blakemore, Diane. 1992. Understanding Utterances. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar
Blakemore, Diane. 2002. Relevance and Linguistic Meaning. The Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486456Search in Google Scholar
Blass, Regina. 1990. Relevance Relations in Discourse: a Study with Special Reference to Sissala. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511586293Search in Google Scholar
Bolly, Catherine and Liesbeth Degand. 2009. "Grammaticalisation of discourse markers: From conceptual to procedural meaning?" Paper presented at the International Conference Procedural Meaning. Problems and Perspectives. Madrid.Search in Google Scholar
Buridant, Claude. 2006. "L'interjection: Jeux et enjeux." Languages 161: 3-9.Search in Google Scholar
Calvo Pérez, Julio. 1996. "¡¡Interjecciones!!" In Panorama de la Investigación Lingüística a l'Estat Espagnol. Actes del I Congrés de Lingüística General, III, edited by Enric Serra et al., 85-98. Valencia: Universitat de València.Search in Google Scholar
Carston, Robyn. 1996. "Enrichment and loosening: complementary processes in deriving the proposition expressed." UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 8: 61-88.Search in Google Scholar
Carston, Robyn. 2002a. Thoughts and Utterances. The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.10.1002/9780470754603Search in Google Scholar
Carston, Robyn. 2002b. "Metaphor, ad hoc concepts and word meaning — more questions than answers." UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 14: 83-105.Search in Google Scholar
Clark, Billy and Tim Wharton. 2009. "Prosody and the interaction of procedural meaning." Paper presented at the International Conference Procedural Meaning. Problems and Perspectives. Madrid.Search in Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. and Jean. E. Fox Tree. 2002. "Using uh and um in spontaneous speaking." Cognition 84: 73-111, doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00017-3.10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00017-3Search in Google Scholar
Cueto Vallverdú, Natalia and María Jesús López Bobo. 2003. La Interjección. Semántica y Pragmática. Madrid: Arco Libros.Search in Google Scholar
Curcó, Carmen and Chantal Melis. 2009. "Diachronic change and procedural meaning in the emergence of discourse markers: a proposal." Paper presented at the International Conference Procedural Meaning. Problems and Perspectives. Madrid.Search in Google Scholar
Damasio, Antonio. 1994. Descartes' Error: Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain. New York: Avon.Search in Google Scholar
Escandell Vidal, María Victoria. 1998. "Intonation and procedural encoding: The case of Spanish interrogatives." In Current Issues in Relevance Theory, edited by Villy Rouchota and Andreas H. Jucker, 169-204. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.58.09escSearch in Google Scholar
Fischer, Kerstin and Martina Drescher. 1996. "Methods for the description of discourse particles: Contrastive analysis." Language Sciences 18. 3-4: 853-861, doi: 10.1016/S0388-0001(96)00051-4.10.1016/S0388-0001(96)00051-4Search in Google Scholar
Fodor, Jerry. 1981. Representations. Hassocks: Harvester Press.Search in Google Scholar
Fraser, Bruce. 2004. "An account of discourse markers." In Current Trends in Intercultural, Cognitive and Social Pragmatics, edited by Pilar Garcés Conejos, Reyes Gómez Morón, Lucía Fernández Amaya and Manuel Padilla Cruz, 13-34. Seville: Research Group Intercultural Pragmatics.Search in Google Scholar
Fraser, Bruce. 2006. "On the conceptual-procedural distinction." Style:http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2342/is_1-2_40/ai_n17113874Search in Google Scholar
Fretheim, Thorstein. 1998. "Intonation and the procedural encoding of attributed thoughts: The case of Norwegian negative interrogatives." In Current Issues in Relevance Theory, edited by Villy Rouchota and Andreas H. Jucker, 205-236. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.58.10freSearch in Google Scholar
Goleman, Daniel. 1995. Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.Search in Google Scholar
Greenbaum, Sidney. 2000. The Oxford Reference Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Grice, Herbert P. 1957. "Meaning." Philosophical Review 66: 377-388.10.2307/2182440Search in Google Scholar
Grice, Herbert P. 1975. "Logic and conversation." In Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 3: Speech Acts, edited by Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan. New York: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar
Itani, Reiko. 1998. "A relevance-based analysis of hearsay particles: With special reference to Japanese sentence-final particle tte." In Relevance Theory. Applications and Implications, edited by Robyn Carston and Seiji Uchida, 47-68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.37.05itaSearch in Google Scholar
Kleiber, Georges. 2006. "Sémiotique de l'interjection." Langages 161: 10-23.Search in Google Scholar
Meng, Katharina and Susanne Schrabback. 1999. "Interjections in adult-child discourse: The cases of German HM and NA." Journal of Pragmatics 31: 1263-1287, doi: 10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00105-2.10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00105-2Search in Google Scholar
Montes, Rosa Graciela. 1999. "The development of discourse markers in Spanish: Interjections." Journal of Pragmatics 31: 1289-1319, doi: 10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00106-4.10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00106-4Search in Google Scholar
Nicole, Steve and Billy Clark. 1998. "Phatic interpretations: Standardisation and conventionalisation." Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 11: 183-191.10.14198/raei.1998.11.14Search in Google Scholar
Nicoloff, Frank. 1990. "How so/such/what/how exclamatories mean." Grazer Linguistische Studien 33-34: 207-225.Search in Google Scholar
Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. Available online at http://www.oed.com/Search in Google Scholar
Padilla Cruz, Manuel. 2005. "Relevance theory and historical linguistics: Towards a pragmatic approach to the morphological changes in the preterite from Old English to Middle English." Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses 51: 183-204.Search in Google Scholar
Padilla Cruz, Manuel. 2009. "Towards an alternative relevance-theoretic approach to interjections." International Review of Pragmatics 1(1): 182-206.10.1163/187731009X455884Search in Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech and Jan Svartvik. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar
Rosier, Laurence. 2000. "Interjection, subjectivité, expressivité et discourse rapporté à l'écrit: Petits effets d'un petit discourse". Cahiers de Praxématique 34: 19-49.Search in Google Scholar
Schourup, Lawrence. 2001. "Rethinking well." Journal of Pragmatics 33: 1025-1060, doi: 10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00053-9.10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00053-9Search in Google Scholar
Searle, John. 1969. Speech Acts. An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139173438Search in Google Scholar
Sierra Soriano, 1999. Ascención. "L'interjection dans la BD: Réflexions sur sa traduction." Meta 44: 582-603.10.7202/004143arSearch in Google Scholar
Smidt, Kristian. 2002. "Ideolectic characterisation in A Doll's House." Scandinavia. An International Journal of Scandinavian Studies 41 (2): 191-206.Search in Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan. 2005. "Modularity and relevance: How can a massively modular mind be flexible and context dependent?" In The Innate Mind: Structure and Content, edited by Peter Carruthers, Stephen Laurence and Stephen Stich, New York: Oxford University Press, 53-68, doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195179675.003.0004.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195179675.003.0004Search in Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan. and Deirdre Wilson. 1986. Relevance. Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Search in Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan. and Deirdre Wilson. 1995. Relevance. Communication and Cognition. 2nd edition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Search in Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan. and Deirdre Wilson. 1997. "The mapping between the mental and the public lexicon." UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 9: 107-125.Search in Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan. and Deirdre Wilson. 2008. "A deflationary account of metaphors." In The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought, edited by Raymond W. Gibbs, 84-105. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511816802.007Search in Google Scholar
Światkowska, Marcela. 2006. "L'interjection: Entre deixis et anaphore". Langages 161: 47-56.10.3406/lgge.2006.2704Search in Google Scholar
Torres Sánchez, M. Ángeles. 2000. La interjección. Cádiz: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Cádiz.Search in Google Scholar
Vassileva, Albena. 1994. "Vers un traitement modal de l'interjection: Traduction de la modalité injonctive par les interjections en français." Studi Italiani di Linguistica Teorica e Applicata 23 (1): 103-110.Search in Google Scholar
Vassileva, Albena. 2007. "Sur le traitment de la forme du signifié interjectionnel." Langages 165: 115-122.10.3917/lang.165.0115Search in Google Scholar
Wałaszewska, Ewa. 2004. "What to do with response cries in relevance theory?" In Relevance Studies in Poland. Volume I, edited by Ewa Mioduszewska, 119-129. Warsaw: University of Warsaw.Search in Google Scholar
Wharton, Tim. 2000. "Interjections, evolution and the ‘showing’/‘saying’ continuum." Paper presented at The Evolution of Language Conference. Université de Paris.Search in Google Scholar
Wharton, Tim. 2001. "Natural pragmatics and natural codes." UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 13: 109-161, doi: 10.1111/1468-0017.00237.10.1111/1468-0017.00237Search in Google Scholar
Wharton, Tim. 2003. "Interjection, language, and the ‘showing/saying’ continuum." Pragmatics and Cognition 11: 39-91, doi: 10.1075/pc.11.1.04wha.10.1075/pc.11.1.04whaSearch in Google Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1991. Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: The Semantics of Human Interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783112329764Search in Google Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1992. "The semantics of interjection." Journal of Pragmatics 18: 159-192, doi: 10.1016/0378-2166(92)90050-L.10.1016/0378-2166(92)90050-LSearch in Google Scholar
Wilkins, David P. 1992. "Interjections as deictics." Journal of Pragmatics 18: 119-158, doi: 10.1016/0378-2166(92)90049-H.10.1016/0378-2166(92)90049-HSearch in Google Scholar
Wilkins, David P. 1995. "Expanding the traditional category of deictic elements: Interjection as deictics". In Deixis in Narrative. A Cognitive Science Perspective, edited by Judith F. Duchan, Gail A. Bruder and Lynne E. Hewitt, 359-386. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.Search in Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre. 1997. "Linguistic structure and inferential communication." Paper presented at the 16th International Congress of Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre. 2009. "The conceptual-procedural distinction: past, present and future." Paper presented at the International Conference Procedural Meaning. Problems and Perspectives. Madrid.Search in Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre and Robyn Carston. 2007. "A unitary approach to lexical pragmatics: Relevance, inference and ad hoc concepts." In Advances in Pragmatics, edited by Noel Burton-Roberts, 230-260. London: Palgrave.10.1057/978-1-349-73908-0_12Search in Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre and Dan Sperber. 1993. "Linguistic Form and Relevance." Lingua 90: 1-26, doi: 10.1016/0024-3841(93)90058-5.10.1016/0024-3841(93)90058-5Search in Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre and Dan Sperber. 2002. "Relevance theory." UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 14: 249-287.Search in Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre and Dan Sperber. 2004. "Relevance theory". In The Handbook of Pragmatics, edited by Lawrence R. Horn and Gregory L. Ward, 607-632. Oxford: Blackwell, doi: 10.1002/9780470756959.ch27.10.1002/9780470756959.ch27Search in Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre and Tim Wharton. 2006. "Relevance and prosody". Journal of Pragmatics 38: 1559-1579, doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2005.04.012.10.1016/j.pragma.2005.04.012Search in Google Scholar
Žegarac, Vladimir. 1998. "What is phatic communication?" In Current Issues in Relevance Theory, edited by Villy Rouchota and Andreas H. Jucker, 327-361. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.58.14zegSearch in Google Scholar
This content is open access.
