On the Syntactic Intensification (Based on Spontaneous Pseudo-Dialogue Speech)
Liberal Arts in Russia. 2013. Vol. 2. No. 4. Pp. 390-398.Get the full text (Bulgarian)Email: email@example.com
Author's aim is to characterize pseudo-dialog in terms of intensifying means in a speech of speaking person. The theory of oral communicative acts was developed in accordance with a triangle “speaker – adressee – con-situation” which reveals one of the most important peculiarities of oral speech, its pragmatic basis. In a process of quasi-communication with pseudo-addressee (object, animal and similar) pragmatics of spontaneous speech realizes specifically: speaker phrases addressed to fictitious addressee, hence the term “speaker” is not adequate to the situation there is no real realization of communication. The author supposes that the term “speaking subject” introduced by O. Ducrot is more suitable for the analysis of the quasi-communication conditions. The author focuses on the analysis of verbal means of expression of speaking subject's intentional feelings within pseudo-dialog. Thus pseudo-dialog with elements of communication involves the usage of intensifying address, that is often come in connection with interjections, particles and imperative forms. Expressive connotation can be actualized in a metaphor or through components with intensifying or evaluating semantics. Sometimes diminutive forms with morphologically enhanced intensification are used, in such cases short possessive pronoun “ми” is used as a lexical intensifier with endearment meaning. Addresses with negative evaluative meaning based on zoosemantic metaphor are large in number and diversity. Addresses accompanied by subjective modal particles and interjections and located at the very beginning of a phrase before the address are the most frequent. The author supposes that functional semantic specificity of construction “interjection + particle + address with evaluative meaning” forms syntactic intensifier. Invectives can also be found in its structure, in a situation of pseudo-dialog they serve as forms of verbal aggression. The author also examines the forms of imperative and structures with intensifying semantics. Imperatives pronounced with appropriate intonation within pseudo-dialogs function as intensifiers. As a result it is concluded that any lexeme within the structure of the syntactic unit serve as an intensifier: address as a syncretic unit, with the help of it subject's emotional reaction directly verbalizes; interjection and subjectively-modal particle; demonstrative pronoun “такъв” with the explicit meaning of the intensity, preposition with quality-definitional grammatical meaning of comparison.
- • quasi-communication
- • pseudo-dialog
- • speaking person
- • intensifier
- • oral speech
- • address
- • imperative
- • interjection
- • particle
- Aleksova Kr. Admirativat v savremenniya balgarski ezik [Admirative in Contemporary Bulgarian]. Sofia, 2003. Pp. 181–201.
- Dimitrova St. Lingvistichna pragmatika [Linguistic Pragmatics]. Sofia: Veles, 2009. 239 pp.
- Ilieva M. Balgarinat v svoite mestoimeniya [Bulgarians in Their Pronouns]. V. Tarnovo: Sv. sv. Kiril i Metodii, 2004. 159 pp.
- Meng'ono D. Klyuchovi termini v diskurs analiza [Key Terms in Discourse Analysis]. Sofia, 2000. 168 pp.
- Nitsolova R. Pragmatichen aspekt na izrechenieto v balgarskiya knizhoven ezik [Pragmatic Aspect of Sentence in Bulgarian Literary Language]. Sofia, 1984. 190 pp.
- Radeva P. Dinamika na sintaksisa v savremenniya balgarski ezik [Dynamics of Syntax in Contemporary Bulgarian]. V. Tarnovo: Sv. sv. Kiril i Metodii, 2012. 270 pp.
- Rechnik na balgarskiya ezik [Dictionary of Bulgarian Language]. T. 4. Sofia, 1984.
- Rechnik po psikhologiya [Dictionary of Psychology]. Sofia, 1989.
- Rodionova S. E. Problemy funktsional'noi grammatiki: Polevye struktury. Saint Petersburg: Nauka, 2005.
- Pp. 150–168.
- Staneva Kh. Stilistika na balgarskiya knizhoven ezik [Stylistics of Bulgarian Literary Language]. V. Tarnovo: Ab-agar, 2001. 519 pp.
- Stoichkova L. Problemi na balgarskata razgovorna rech. V. Tarnovo: Sv. sv. Kiril i Metodii, 2004. Pp. 203–211.