Spatio-temporal systems in Chaucer’s language: A discourse-pragmatic analysis
Minako Nakayasu
Hamamatsu University School of Medicine , Japanhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-7578-213X
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to conduct a discourse-pragmatic analysis of the spatio-temporal systems in Chaucer’s language along the lines of historical pragmatics and discourse analysis. The text used for analysis is “The knight’s tale” adopted from the Riverside edition of The Canterbury tales. Language has built-in spatio-temporal systems by which speakers judge how distant the situations they wish to express are from their domain, i.e. proximal or distal. Spatio-temporal elements can be connected to each other to take either a proximal or a distal perspective in discourse. Based on this approach, the present paper performs a detailed examination of the spatio-temporal elements, and addresses the following questions: 1) How does the perspective change as the discourse progresses? and 2) What factors are relevant to this change in discourse? To provide answers to these questions, this paper will investigate: 1) elements which structure discourse, 2) elements which promote a proximal or a distal perspective, 3) elements which trigger alternations of these perspectives, and 4) factors which facilitate the alternation of elements in either the spatial, the temporal, or the integrated spatio-temporal domain.
Keywords:
spatio-temporal system, Chaucer, historical pragmatics and discourse analysis, proximal and distal perspectivesReferences
Benson, L. D. 1961. Chaucer’s historical present: Its meaning and uses. English Studies 42: 65–77. doi: 10.1080/00138386108597094
Benson, L. D. 1987. The Riverside Chaucer (3rd ed.). Boston: Houton Mifflin.
Boggel, S. 2009. Metadiscourse in Middle English and Early Modern English religious texts: A corpus-based study. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Brinton, L. J. 2017. The evolution of pragmatic markers in English: Pathways of change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brisard, F. (ed.) 2002. Grounding: The epistemic footing and deixis and reference. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Bühler, K. 1934. Sprachtheorie: Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. Jena: G. Fischer.
Diessel, H. 1999. Demonstratives: Form, function, and grammaticalization. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Fillmore, C. J. 1997. Lectures on deixis. Stanford: CSLI Publications. (Reprinted from Santa Cruz lectures on deixis, 1975, Indiana: Indiana University Linguistics Club).
Fries, U. 1994. Text deixis in Early Modern English. In D. Kastovsky (ed.), Studies in Early Modern English, 111–128. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Halliday, M. A. K., and R. Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in English. Harlow: Longman.
Halliday, M. A. K., and C. M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2014. Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th ed.). Milton Park: Routledge.
Nagucka, R. 2000. The spatial and temporal meanings of before in Middle English. In I. Taavitsainen, T. Nevalainen, P. Pahta, and M. Rissanen (eds.), Placing Middle English in context, 329–337. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Guryter.
Nakayasu, M. 2009. The pragmatics of modals in Shakespeare. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Nakayasu, M. 2013. Chaucer’s historical present: A discourse-pragmatic perspective. In L. Sikorska, and M. Krygier (eds.), Evurhappie and glorious, ffor I have at will grete riches, 41–60. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Nakayasu, M. 2015. Spatio-temporal systems in A treatise on the astrolabe. In J. C. Conde-Silvestre, and J. Calle-Martín (eds.), Approaches to Middle English: Variation, contact and change, 243–259. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Nakayasu, M. 2017a. Spatio-temporal systems in Margaret Paston’s letters. In J. Fisiak, M. Bator, and M. Sylwanowicz (eds.), Essays and studies in Middle English, 121–140. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Nakayasu, M. 2017b. Spatio-temporal systems in Paston letters. Studia Neophilologica 89(1), 75–89. doi: 10.1080/00393274.2017.1317020
Nakayasu, M. 2018. Spatio-temporal systems in Chaucer. In P. Petré, H. Cuyckens, and F. D’Hoedt (eds.), Sociocultural dimensions in lexis and text in the history of English, 125–150. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Novelli, C. 1957. The demonstrative adjective this: Chaucer’s use of a colloquial narrative device. Medieval Studies 19(1): 246–249. doi: 10.1484/J.MS.2.306775
Oakeshott-Taylor, J. 1984. Factuality, tense, intonation and perspective: Some thoughts on the semantics of ‘think’. Lingua 62: 289–317. doi: 10.1016/0024-3841(84)90056-1
Schiffrin, D. 1987. Discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Taavitsainen, I. 1999. Personality and styles of affect in the Canterbury tales. In G. Lester (ed.), Chaucer in perspective: Middle English essays in honour of Norman Blake, 218–234. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Taavitsainen, I., and T. Hiltunen. 2012. Now as a text deictic feature in Late Medieval and Early Modern English medical writing. In U. Busse, and A. Hübler (eds.), Investigations into the meta-communicative lexicon of English: A contribution to historical pragmatics, 179–205. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Taavitisainen, I., and A. H. Jucker. 2010. Trends and developments in historical pragmatics. In A. H. Jucker, and I. Taavitsainen (eds.), Historical Pragmatics, 3–30. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
Taavitisainen, I., and A. H. Jucker. 2015. Twenty years of historical pragmatics: Origins, developments and changing thought styles. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 16(1): 1–24. doi: 10.1075/jhp.16.1.01taa.
Traugott, E. C. 1974. Explorations in linguistic elaboration: Language change, language acquisition and the genesis of spatio-temporal terms. In J. M. Anderson, and C. Jones (eds.), Historical linguistics, Vol. 1. Syntax, morphology, internal and comparative reconstruction: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Edinburgh, 2-7 September 1973, 263–314. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Traugott, E. C. 1978. On the expression of spatio-temporal relations in language. In J. H. Greenberg (ed.), Universals of human language, Vol.3. Word structure, 369–400. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
