The functions of extraposition in English texts

Herriman, Jennifer

doi:10.1075/fol.7.2.03her

Cited by 43 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…7 So-called dummy subject constructions have received a lot of attention, both from an English and a Norwegian perspective (e.g. Collins 1991, Herriman 2000, Kaltenböck 2003, Leira 19701992, Søfteland 2014, as well as from a cross-linguistic perspective (e.g. Ebeling 2000, Gundel 2002, Chocholoušová 20072008, Herriman 2013.…”

Section: Previous Studies Of the Patternsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Or, as Lemke puts it, this is one of the "[l]exicogrammatical resources [that] enable us to construct attitudinal stances " (1998: 33). Within the framework of Systemic Functional Linguistics, Herriman (2000) discusses and analyses the functional properties of extraposition across different text types in relation to the three metafunctions of language: experiential, interpersonal and textual.…”

Section: 1mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a bottom-up approach, a bidirectional translation corpus -the English-Norwegian Parallel Corpus+ -is investigated to establish the potential of the corpus in uncovering semantic, cross-linguistic networks of attitudinal meaning. Drawing on insights from Herriman (2000Herriman ( , 2013, in particular, it is hypothesised that modal adverbs and modal verbs will feature in such networks. The paper is organised as follows.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Exploring cross-linguistic congruence: The case of two stance frames in English and Norwegian

Ebeling

2018

BeLLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explores the degree of congruence between two closely related languages -English and Norwegian -in a case study of the two stance frames it BE * that and det VAERE * at. It is first established that the open slot in the frames is most typically occupied by an adjective, thus steering this investigation towards a more detailed comparison of it BE ADJ that and det VAERE ADJ at. The adjective determines the evaluative orientation of the frames, and, following Lemke (1998), the present study operates with seven categories to establish the attitudes and evaluations present in the frames. The study, which draws on material from a bidirectional translation corpus -the English-Norwegian Parallel Corpus+, reveals that the degree of congruence between the frames to some extent seems to depend on the attitude/evaluation expressed. Furthermore, the study reveals that there is 45% non-congruence between the languages. The translational correspondence network of the English and Norwegian patterns is broad, showing that there are a number of linguistic resources in the two languages that can be used to express attitudinal/evaluative stance. It is concluded that, while English and Norwegian are shown to have similar means of expressing attitudinal meanings with the frames, the two languages have their preferred ways of doing so both in terms of individual adjectives and attitudinal/evaluative class.

show abstract

Section: Previous Studies Of the Patternsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: 1mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Exploring cross-linguistic congruence: The case of two stance frames in English and Norwegian

Ebeling

2018

BeLLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Huck and Na 1990;Herriman 2000a;Netz and Kuzar 2007) and the interpersonal (evaluative, modal, etc.) meanings conveyed by the matrices and various classes of postverbal complements (cf.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extraposition constructions in the deontic domain: state-of-affairs (SoA)-related versus speaker-related uses

linden

2010

Text &Amp; Talk - An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse &Amp; Communication Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines how extraposition constructions with adjectives, such as it is important to honour those who have done honour to us (CB) function in the deontic and directive domain. It is found that in these two domains, which correlate with different sets of adjectives, the adjectival expressions can function on two distinct levels, either relating to the real world (State of Affairs (SoA)-related), or relating to the speaker's argumentative goals (speaker-related). These levels have also been noted for other linguistic categories, such as interclausal relations (e.g., Davies 1979;Sweetser 1990;Verstraete 2007). Within the set of speaker-related uses, a further distinction will be proposed between text-building uses and mental focus on a proposition uses. The first type serves to build arguments, or to specify or justify the organization of a text. The second type is used to make the hearer focus mentally on a propositional content. It will be argued that this latter type is a partially filled construction in the sense of Goldberg (1995). In this sense, this study proposes a constructionally motivated typology of extraposition constructions in the deonticdirective domain.

show abstract

“…One example relevant to the present study is reported by Herriman (2000), who reports her findings that "extraposition does vary in different types of Enghsh texts and this variation reflects the degree to which its functional properties satisfy the communicative purpose of the text" (p. 225). Herriman furthernotes that "extraposition provides writers with a means of avoiding subjective involvement when making an explicit statement of opinion [and] is used most frequently in expository and procedural types of texts" (p. 225).…”

Section: 1 Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 74%

The mental verbs "think" and "believe" in authorial evaluative "that" statements: a corpus study of four academic disciplines

Daisy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The functions of extraposition in English texts

Cited by 43 publications

References 0 publications

Exploring cross-linguistic congruence: The case of two stance frames in English and Norwegian

Exploring cross-linguistic congruence: The case of two stance frames in English and Norwegian

Extraposition constructions in the deontic domain: state-of-affairs (SoA)-related versus speaker-related uses

The mental verbs "think" and "believe" in authorial evaluative "that" statements: a corpus study of four academic disciplines

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About