From truth to reality to effect
The journey of sasilsang in Korean
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/eap.20897Keywords:
discourse marker, sasilsang, reality, (inter)subjectification, stance-markingAbstract
The Korean discourse marker sasilsang, literally ‘in fact’, developed from the Sino-Korean nouns sasil ‘truth, fact’ and sang ‘top’ as a compound. Unlike its original meaning making reference to religious truth, its later meanings are concerned with reference to reality, hidden reality, etc. The hidden reality meaning prompted the word’s development into a discourse marker as a signal to indicate the surprising nature of the information to be presented. Interestingly, hidden reality is often the speaker’s interpretive reality rather than objective reality. The strategic use of the discourse marker engendered such discursive functions as marking common-ground solicitation, pause-filling, hesitance, and politeness, among others. The development of the discourse marker can be characterised as an instance of subjectification and intersubjectification. The oft-cited peripheral asymmetry, however, cannot be confirmed by the development of the discourse marker sasilsang.
References
Adamson, S. (2000). A lovely little example: Word order options and category shift in the premodifying string. In O. Fischer, A. Rosenbach, & D. Stein (Eds.), Pathways of change: Grammaticalization in English (pp. 39–66). Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.53.04ada
Aijmer, K. (1997). ‘I think’ – An English modal particle. In T. Swan & O. Jansen Westvik (Eds.), Modality in Germanic languages: Historical and comparative perspectives (pp. 1–47). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110889932.1
Beeching, K., & Detges, U. (2014). Introduction. In K. Beeching & U. Detges (Eds.), Discourse functions at the left and right periphery: Crosslinguistic investigations of language use and language change (pp. 1–23). Leiden: Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004274822_002
Degand, L. (2014). ‘So very fast then’: Discourse markers at left and right periphery in spoken French. In K. Beeching & U. Detges (Eds.), Discourse functions at the left and right periphery: Crosslinguistic investigations of language use and language change (pp. 151–178). Leiden: Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004274822_008
Fischer, O. (2007). Morphosynactic change: Formal and functional perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fraser, B. (1990). An approach to discourse markers. Journal of Pragmatics, 14(3), 383–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(90)90096-V
Fraser, B. (2006). Toward a theory of discourse markers. In K. Fischer (Ed.), Approaches to discourse particles (pp. 189–204). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Ha, Y. (2014). Hanca ewen sacen (An etymological dictionary of Chinese characters). Seoul: Tosechwulphan 3.
Hansen, M.-B. M. (1998). The function of discourse particles: A study with special reference to spoken standard French. Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.53
He, X. (2021). Diachronic change and synchronic variation of the Chinese discourse marker shishishang. East Asian Pragmatics, 6(3), 283–301.
Heine, B., Kaltenböck, G., Kuteva, T., & Long, H. (2021). The rise of discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108982856
Hopper, P. J., & Traugott, E. C. (2003[1993]). Grammaticalization (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165525
Kim, H. (2005). Hyentaykwuke sayong pinto cosa 2 (A frequency analysis of Modern Korean 2). Seoul: National Institute of the Korean Language.
Lee, H. S. (2021). From reality to contrast to counterexpectation: The development of silsang in Korean. East Asian Pragmatics, 6(3), 403–421.
Lee, W.-Y. (2002). Phyocwun kwuke taysacen yenkwu pwunsek (A study on A complete standard Korean dictionary). Seoul: National Institute of the Korean Language.
Nam, P.-H. (2012). Old Korean. In N. Tranter (Ed.), The languages of Japan and Korea (pp. 41–72). Milton Park: Routledge.
Narrog, H., & Rhee, S. (2013). Grammaticalization of space in Korean and Japanese. In M. Robbeets & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), Shared grammaticalization with special focus on the Transeurasian languages (pp. 287–315). Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.132.21nar
Narrog, H., Rhee, S., & Whitman, J. (2018). Grammaticalization in Japanese and Korean. In H. Narrog & B. Heine (Eds.), Grammaticalization from a typological perspective (Oxford Studies in Diachronic and Historical Linguistics, pp. 166–188). Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198795841.003.0009
Norde, M. (2009). Degrammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199207923.001.0001
Onodera, N. O. (2007). Interplay of (inter)subjectivity and social norm. Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 8(2), 239–267. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.8.2.05ono
Östman, J.-O. (1982a). Pragmatic particles in an applied perspective. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, 83 (Special issue: Papers on English philology), 135–153.
Östman, J.-O. (1982b). The symbiotic relationship between pragmatic particles and impromptu speech. In N. E. Enkvist (Ed.), Impromptu speech: A symposium. Papers contributed to a Symposium on Problems in the Linguistic Study of Impromptu Speech, Åbo, Finland, November 20–22, 1981 (pp. 147–177). Åbo: Åbo Akademi.
Phyocwun kwuke taysacen. (A complete standard Korean dictionary). (1992). Seoul: The National Institute of the Korean Language.
Rhee, S. (1996). Semantics of verbs and grammaticalization: The development of Korean from a cross-linguistic perspective (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin). Seoul: Hankook Publisher.
Rhee, S. (2006). Grammaticalization of postpositional particles from spatial terms in Korean. Japanese Korean Linguistics, 14, 139–150.
Rhee, S. (2008). From rhetoric to grammar: Grammaticalization of rhetorical strategies in Korean. Japanese/Korean Linguistics, 13, 359–370.
Rhee, S. (2011). Divergent specialization in grammaticalization of native and Sino-Korean spatio-relational terms. Language and Linguistics, 50, 171–202.
Rhee, S. (2016). From quoting to reporting to stance-marking: Rhetorical strategies and intersubjectification of reportative. Language Sciences, 55, 36–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2016.02.003
Rhee, S. (2018). On the emergence of the stance-marking function of English adverbs: A case of intensifiers. Linguistic Research, 33(3), 395–436.
Rhee, S. (2020a). On determinants of discourse marker functions: Grammaticalization and discourse-analytic perspectives. Linguistic Research, 37(2), 289–325. doi: 10.17250/khisli.37.2.202006.005
Rhee, S. (2020b). From object to text to stance: The case of kyelkwa in Korean. Nippon Ninchigengomanabu 20 (Papers from the 20th National Conference of the Japanese Cognitive Linguistics Association vol. 20), 471–476.
Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611841
Shibasaki, R. (2021). Discourse markers in the making: Pragmatic differentiation of jijitsujoo from jijitsu in Modern through Present Day Japanese. East Asian Pragmatics, 6(3), xxx–xxx.
Sohn, H.-M. 1999. The Korean language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Suh, J.-B. (2003[2000]). Kwuke ewen sacen (An etymological dictionary of Korean). Seoul: Bogosa.
Swan, T. (1982). A note on the scope(s) of sadly. Studia Linguistica, 36(2), 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9582.1982.tb00717.x
Tabor, W., & Traugott, E. C. (1998). Structural scope expansion and grammaticalization. In A. Giacalone Ramat & P. J. Hopper (Eds.), The limits of grammaticalization (pp. 229–272). Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.37.11tab
Traugott, E. C. (1982). From propositional to textual and expressive meanings: Some semantic-pragmatic aspects of grammaticalization. In W. P. Lehmann & Y. Malkiel (Eds.), Perspectives in historical linguistics (pp. 245–271). Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.24.09clo
Traugott, E. C. (1995). Subjectification in grammaticalization. In D. Stein & S. Wright (Eds.), Subjectivity and subjectivisation: Linguistic perspectives (pp. 31–54). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511554469.003
Traugott, E. C. (2003). From subjectification to intersubjectification. In R. Hickey (Ed.), Motives for language change (pp. 124–140.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486937.009
Traugott, E. C. (2010). (Inter)subjectivity and (inter)subjectification: A reassessment. In K. Davidse, L. Vandelanotte, & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), Subjectification, intersubjectification and grammaticalization (pp. 29–71). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110226102.1.29
Traugott, E. C. (2014). Intersubjectification and clause periphery. In L. Brems, L. Ghesquière, & F. Van de Velde (Eds.), Intersubjectivity and intersubjectification in grammar and discourse: Theoretical and descriptive advances (pp. 7–27). Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.65.02trau
Traugott, E. C., & Dasher, R. B. (2002). Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486500
Traugott, E. C., & König, E. (1991). The semantics-pragmatics of grammaticalization revisited. In E. C. Traugott & B. Heine (Eds.), Approaches to grammaticalization (vol. 1, pp. 189–218). Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.19.1.10clo
Waltereit, R. (2011). Grammaticalization and discourse. In B. Heine & H. Narrog (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization (pp. 413–423). Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586783.013.0033
Watts, R. J. (1989). Taking the pitcher to the ‘well’: Native speakers’ perception of their use of discourse markers in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 13(2), 203–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(89)90092-1
Whitman, J. (2015). Old Korean. In L. Brown & J. H. Yeon (Eds.), The handbook of Korean linguistics (pp. 422–438). London: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118371008.ch24
