Scott A. Schwenter

Defaults and indeterminacy in temporal grammaticalization: The ‘perfect’ road to perfective

ABS T R AC T Adopting a grammaticalization path perspective on the envelope of variation, that is, the range of grammatical functions along the cross-linguistic perfect-to-perfective path, and employing the variationist comparative method, we compare use of the Present Perfect and Preterit in Mexican and Peninsular Spanish to identify the default past perfective form in each dialect. The linguistic conditioning of the variability provides evidence that the Present Perfect is becoming the default exponent of past perfective in Peninsular Spanish; in empirical terms, the default expression is the one appearing more frequently (combined effect of corrected mean and factor weight) in the most frequent and, crucially, the least specified contexts. The quantitative analysis of natural speech production—rather than elicited—data also suggests a different trajectory for perfect-to-perfective grammaticalization than the commonly assumed route via remoteness distinctions: the Present Perfect’s shift from hodiernal to general perfective advances in temporally indeterminate past contexts.

Discourse markers and the PA/SN distinction

Many languages have two types of adversative sentence conjunctions (e.g. Spanish, German). These are normally referred to as PA and SN conjunctions. However, while PA conjunctions can be used as discourse markers (DMs) in dialogal discourse, SN conjunctions such as those found in Spanish and German cannot be used in dialogues. Thus the PA/SN distinction does not extend fully to the dialogal realm. Using data from another Spanish DM, I argue that the PA/SN distinction can be extended beyond the monologal realm of sentence conjunction to the realm of adversative discourse markers employed in dialogal discourse. The findings have implications for the question of functional equivalence across different types of discourse.

No and tampoco : a pragmatic distinction in Spanish negation

Abstract Cases of variation between canonical and non-canonical negative forms are widespread across the worlds languages. Typically, the difference between the forms is characterized as regulated by pragmatic factors, albeit fuzzy or undefined, such as “emphasis”: the non-canonical form conveys an “emphatic” meaning while the canonical form does not. In this paper I examine in depth one of these cases, heretofore unmentioned in the literature on negation: the distinction between the canonical negator no and non-canonical tampoco in mainly spoken Spanish. It is shown that the distinction between the two expressions is not regulated by “emphasis” at all, but instead constrained by a more specific set of pragmatic considerations. These are, first of all, the argumentatively de-realizing (Ducrot, Oswald, 1995. Les modificateurs derealisants. Journal of Pragmatics 24, 145–165 nature of tampoco versus the argumentative neutrality of no. And second, the special information-structural requirements of tampoco, requirements not shared by no: tampoco, as opposed to no, can only be used in denials of discourse-accessible propositions. From a theoretical perspective, the analysis illustrates how tools from modern pragmatic approaches can be employed to go beyond commonsense explanations based in intuitive notions like “emphasis”.