Mood in Hungarian Casper de Groot ACLC - Universiteit van Amsterdam.
-
Upload
patience-simmons -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Mood in Hungarian Casper de Groot ACLC - Universiteit van Amsterdam.
Mood in Hungarian
Casper de GrootACLC - Universiteit van Amsterdam
ACLC - November 26, 2009
The three universal moods
● The basic illocution of a sentence can be defined as the conversational use conventionally associated with the formal properties of that sentence (cf. Sadock & Zwicky 1985), which together constitute a sentence type.
● By their very nature, basic illocutions are restricted to independent sentences and quotations.
● The most frequently attested basic illocutions in languages of the world are Declarative, Interrogative and Imperative (Sadock & Zwicky 1985).
● The declarative sentence in is conventionally associated with an assertion
● the interrogative with a question● the imperative with a command.
ACLC - November 26, 2009
The three universal moodsDeclarative
A lányok filmet láttak.the girls film.ACC they.saw‘The girls saw a movie.’
InterrogativeHódmezővásárhely Mayarországon fekszik?Hódmezővásárhely Hungary.in lies‘Is Hódmezővásárhely situated in Hungary?
ImperativeMen-j-etek haza!Go-SBJV-2PL home‘Go home!’
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Defining Mood
● The term mood is used in language descriptions for the morphological category that covers the grammatical reflections of a large semantic area. This area can be subdivided into two smaller ones:
● the first concerns the area of illocutionthe category of illocution is concerned with identifying sentences as instances of specific types of speech act
● the second concerns the area of modalitythe category of modality is concerned with the modification of the content of speech acts.
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Defining Mood
● Apart from the semantic differences, there are also formal reasons to distinguish between the two areas.
● In the expression of illocution the morphological category of mood has to compete with word order and intonation as markers of particular sub-distinctions
● whereas modality is expressed by mood markers only.
● These distinction is from S.C. Dik (1997) and P.C. Hengeveld (2004)
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Defining Mood
● A fourth parameter relevant to the discussion of mood in Hungarian is that of Factuality, i.e. the quality of the communicated content being actual (opposed to virtual) or based on fact.
● I will argue that the relations between the four parameters Mood, Illocution, Modality, and Factuality are the following
ACLC - November 26, 2009
The parameters defining Mood in Hungarian
Mood Indicative Subjunctive Conditional
Illocution Declarative Interrogative Behavioural
Modality Condition
Factuality Factual Non-factual
ACLC - November 26, 2009
The parameters defining Mood in Hungarian
Illocution Declarative Interrogative Behavioural
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Declarative
v
Mirative
Polar Interrogative
v
Content Interrogative
Imperative > Prohibitative
v v
Hortative > Dishortative
v
Admonitive
v
Supplicative
Assertive
Questioning
Behavioural
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Declarative
v
Mirative
Assertive
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Assertive
● Declarative
● MirativeThere is no distinct form to express Mirative as, for instance, in Albanian.
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Polar Interrogative
v
Content Interrogative
Questioning
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Questioning
● Polar InterrogativeBy using the Polar Interrogative, A Speaker requests an Addressee to tell whether a certain proposition is true or false.
● Content InterrogativeBy using the Content Interrogative, a Speaker requests an Addressee to identify or specify some part of a predication.
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Questioning
● Polar Interrogative
Szegeden voltál?Szeged.in you.were‘Were you in Szeged?’
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Questioning
● Polar Interrogative
Szegeden voltál?Szeged.in you.were‘Were you in Szeged?’
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Questioning● Modification of Polar Interrogative
vajon and the enclitic –e express some kind of doubt, desire, or uncertainty on the part of the Speaker. They do not create sub-types of illocutions; they belong to the area of modality.
Vajon jön(-e) Imre holnap?MOD come(-MOD) Imre tomorrow‘Will Imre come tomorrow?’
Gondolkozom, hogy jön-e Imre holnapI.wonder that come-MOD Imre tomorrow‘I wonder whether Imre will come tomorrow.’
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Questioning
● Content Interrogative
János mikor volt úszni? questionJános when was swim‘When was János off for a swim?’
János ma volt úszni. answerJános today was swim‘János was off for a swim TODAY.’
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Questioning
● Content Interrogative
János mikor volt úszni? questionJános when was swim‘When was János off for a swim?’
János ma volt úszni. answerJános today was swim‘János was off for a swim TODAY.’
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Imperative > Prohibitative
v v
Hortative > Dishortative
v
Admonitive
v
Supplicative
Behavioural
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Behavioural Illocution in HungarianÖl-j-ek ‘Let me kill.’Öl-j-él ‘Kill!’Öl-j-ön ‘Kill!’, ‘Let him/her kill.’Öl-j-ünk ‘Let us kill.’Öl-j-etek ‘Kill!’Öl-j-enek ‘Kill!’, ‘Let them kill.’
Öl-j-em ‘Let me kill it.’Öl-j-ed ‘Kill it!’Öl-j-e ‘Kill it!’, ‘Let him/her kill it’Öl-j-ük ‘Let us kill it.’Öl-j-étek ‘Kill it!’Öl-j-ék ‘Kill it!’, ‘Let them kill it.’
Öl-j-elek ‘Let me kill you.’
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Behavioural Illocution in HungarianÖl-j-ek ‘Let me kill.’Öl-j-él ‘Kill!’Öl-j-ön ‘Kill!’, ‘Let him/her kill.’Öl-j-ünk ‘Let us kill.’Öl-j-etek ‘Kill!’Öl-j-enek ‘Kill!’, ‘Let them kill.’
Öl-j-em ‘Let me kill it.’Öl-j-ed ‘Kill it!’Öl-j-e ‘Kill it!’, ‘Let him/her kill it’Öl-j-ük ‘Let us kill it.’Öl-j-étek ‘Kill it!’Öl-j-ék ‘Kill it!’, ‘Let them kill it.’
Öl-j-elek ‘Let me kill you.’
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Imperative > Prohibitative
v v
Hortative > Dishortative
v
Admonitive
v
Supplicative
Behavioural
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Behavioural: Imperative● Imperative
The Speaker commands an Addressee to perform some action. The Addressee may be singular or plural. There is an informal and a polite form.
2 pers. sing. várj(ál) ‘Wait!’ [informal singular]3 pers. sing. várjon ‘Wait!’ [polite singular]2 pers. pl. várjatok ‘Wait!’ [informal plural]3 pers. pl. várjanak ‘Wait!’ [polite plural]
2 pers. sing. vár(ja)d Pált ‘Wait for Paul!’ [informal singular]
3 pers. sing. várja Pált ‘Wait for Paul!’ [polite singular]2 pers. pl. várjátok Pált ‘Wait for Paul!’ [informal plural]3 pers. pl. várják Pált ‘Wait for Paul!’ [polite plural]
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Behavioural: Imperative● Modification of the Imperative
When the Imperative is used, the perfectivizing prefix is standard as a default and is placed after the verb. The Imperative may be modified. It may be reinforced and becaome a ‘threat’ if the verbal prefix is placed in front of the verb.
Zsuzsát vár-j-ad meg az állomáson.Zsuzsa.ACC wait-SBJV-2p ASP the station.at‘Go to meet Zsuzsa at the station’
Zsuzsát meg-vár-j-ad az állomáson.Zsuzsa.ACC ASP-wait-SBJV-2p the station.at‘Go to meet Zsuzsa at the station, or ….’
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Imperative > Prohibitative
v v
Hortative > Dishortative
v
Admonitive
v
Supplicative
Behavioural
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Behavioural: Hortative● Hortative
The interpretation of Hortative occurs in all person distinctions in the verbal paradigm.
Men-j-ünk tovább.Go-SBJV-1PL further‘Let’s go on.’
Válassz, melyikkel öl-j-elek meg!choose.SBJV.2SG which.with kill-SBJV.1SG.2SG/PL ASP‘Choose the one I kill you with.’
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Imperative > Prohibitative
v v
Hortative > Dishortative
v
Admonitive
v
Supplicative
Behavioural
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Behavioural: Prohibitive● Prohibitive
Utterances used as an Imperative together with a negation yield a Prohibitive interpretation.
Ne men-j el.NEG.SBJV go-SBJV-2SG ASP‘Don’t go away!’
● Note the use of the negative ne instead of nem. The negation element used with the Subjunctive is always ne, glossed as NEG>SBJV, whereas nem is used with the Indicative and Conditional.
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Imperative > Prohibitative
v v
Hortative > Dishortative
v
Admonitive
v
Supplicative
Behavioural
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Behavioural: Dishortative● Dishortative
The Hortative use of the behavioural together with a negation yield the Dishortative interpretation.
Téged, kedves ellenség, meg ne öl-j-elek !you.ACC dear enemy ASP NEG.SBJV kill-SBJV-I.You‘You, dear enemy, I do not kill !’
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Imperative > Prohibitative
v v
Hortative > Dishortative
v
Admonitive
v
Supplicative
Behavioural
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Behavioural: Admonitive● Admonitive
There are no clear examples of the Bahavioural with the interpretation of the Admonitive.
This would then constitute a counter example against the idea that the implicational relations between the subtypes of illocutions also apply to the interpretations, because the Supplicative interpretation does occur in Hungarian.
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Imperative > Prohibitative
v v
Hortative > Dishortative
v
Admonitive
v
Supplicative
Behavioural
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Behavioural: Supplicative● Supplicative
With the form hadd it is possible to express a request for permission
Hadd men-j-ek a moziba!Let.SBJV.2SG go-SBJV-1SG the movie.to‘Please, let me go to the movies.’
Hadd beszél-j-enek tovább!Let.SBJV.2SG speak-SBJV-3PL further‘Please, let them speak further.’
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Imperative > Prohibitative
v v
Hortative > Dishortative
v
(Admonitive)
v
Supplicative
Behavioural
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Declarative
v
(Mirative)
Polar Interrogative
v
Content Interrogative
Imperative > Prohibitative
v v
Hortative > Dishortative
v
(Admonitive)
v
Supplicative
Assertive
Questioning
Behavioural
ACLC - November 26, 2009
The parameters defining Mood in Hungarian
Mood Indicative Subjunctive Conditional
Illocution Declarative Interrogative Behavioural
Modality Condition
Factuality Factual Non-factual
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Conditional● Condition
Hungarian distinguishes a Conditional Mood. The Conditional is marked by the suffix –n on the verbal stem.
Bár / Ha / Bárha tud-ná-nak olvasni!Though / If know-COND-3PL read.INF‘If they could read!.’
● The Conditional is used in both the protasis and apodosis.
Jó lenne, ha többet lát-n-ám!good be-COND if more.ACC see-COND-1SG‘It would be good, if I could see him/her/it more.’
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Conditional● Counter factuals
Past tense Conditionals form counter factuals.
Jó lett volna, ha többet láttam volna.good be.PST COND if more.ACC see.PST.1SG COND‘It would have been good, if I had seen more.’
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Conditional● Conditional sentence
Ha nem / *ne késztél volna el …If not / NEG.SBJV be-PST.2SG COND ASP‘If you had not been late, ….’
● Optative sentence
Bárcsak ne / *nem késztél volna el!if.only NEG.SBJV / not be-PST.2SG COND ASP‘If only you had not been late!’
ACLC - November 26, 2009
The location of the Optative
Mood Indicative Subjunctive Conditional
Illocution Declarative Interrogative Behavioural
Modality Condition
Factuality Factual Non-factual
ACLC - November 26, 2009
The location of the Optative
Mood Indicative Subjunctive Conditional
Illocution Declarative Interrogative Behavioural
Modality Condition
Factuality Factual Non-factual
Ne COND
ACLC - November 26, 2009
Conclusions● Mood covers the areas of Illocution and Modality ● Illocution uses word order and intonation as markers in
competition with other sub-distionctions● Modality uses special markers only● Intonation● Word order: the position of the particle● Negation marker: nem versus ne● Optative construction
[email protected]://home.medewerkers.uva.nl/c.degroot