Documentation

Linglib.Core.Subjectivity

Subjectivity Cline #

@cite{traugott-dasher-2002} @cite{traugott-2010}

Traugott & Dasher's synchronic cline of (inter)subjectivity, formalized as an ordered type. Expressions range from nonsubjective (ideational, propositional) through subjective (speaker attitude/belief) to intersubjective (addressee face/self-image). The diachronic hypothesis is that coded (inter)subjective meanings arise later than non-subjective ones; subjectification precedes intersubjectification.

Bridges #

Synchronic subjectivity scale (@cite{traugott-dasher-2002} Table 1, @cite{traugott-2010} cline 2). Diachronic work shows that subjective polysemies arise later than ideational ones, and intersubjective polysemies arise later than subjective ones.

Instances For
    Equations
    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
    Instances For

      The cline is totally ordered.

      Intersubjectivity presupposes subjectivity (@cite{traugott-2010} section 2).

      Whether the utterance constitutes the act it describes or merely reports it.

      The performative/descriptive distinction originates with Austin (1962) and cross-cuts subjectivity: a speaker-oriented utterance can be performative ("You must go" — creates the obligation) or descriptive ("He must be home" — assesses without creating). @cite{narrog-2012} §2.4 argues that Traugott's subjectivity cline conflates speaker-orientation with performativity, collapsing distinctions that matter for face-threat, person restrictions, and diachronic change paths.

      This dimension connects to:

      • Modal semantics: deontic = performative; epistemic = descriptive
      • Politeness: performative + volitive = face-threatening (Brown & Levinson)
      • Speech acts: performatives (Austin) vs constatives
      Instances For
        Equations
        • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
        Instances For