<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"CMU Serif Roman";
panose-1:2 0 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;
mso-ligatures:none;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:567809233;
mso-list-template-ids:-1660673396;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0B7 ;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0A7 ;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0A7 ;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0A7 ;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0A7 ;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0A7 ;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0A7 ;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0A7 ;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></style>
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"CMU Serif Roman"">Dear Christian – Thanks! A few quick responses:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE" style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div id="mail-editor-reference-message-container">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">From: </span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf of Christian Lehmann <christian.lehmann@uni-erfurt.de><br>
<b>Date: </b>Monday, October 16, 2023 at 11:48<br>
<b>To: </b>lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org <lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [Lingtyp] Pragmatic cue support: a soft onset of grammaticalization<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Dear Jürgen,<br>
<br>
I find it difficult to assist you in your search for more than one reason:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1">
<![if !supportLists]><span style="font-family:Symbol"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">·<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><span style="font-size:11.0pt">You assume a division of grammaticalization into two kinds but do not make explicit the criteria which produce such a division. Consequently, you also recognize cases like the grammaticalization
of third person pronouns which do not neatly fit into either of your categories. This could be avoided only if there was a binary criterion, with two logically contradictory values, producing the division. E.g.: 'grammaticalization of a lexical relator vs
grammaticalization of anything that is not a lexical relator'; or alternatively 'grammaticalization of a syntagma consisting of a pragmatic cue and its host vs. grammaticalization of anything else'.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"CMU Serif Roman"">Agreed. Unfortunately, I’m not yet in a position to propose an exhaustive classification of grammaticalization scenarios,
otherwise I would have done so. Sorry!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1">
<![if !supportLists]><span style="font-family:Symbol"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">·<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Also, the grammaticalization of lexical relators specifically concerns the initial phase of an ideally complete grammaticalization process, while pragmatic cue support may concern any of its phases
or possibly not be related to grammaticalization at all; which also renders this pair an impure contrast.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"CMU Serif Roman"">Agreed. PCS does not seem to be inherently a grammaticalization phenomenon (though that might depend on the definition
of ‘grammaticalization’). Nevertheless, I’m convinced that it plays a powerful role in grammaticalization. It provides a motivation for adding ancillary expressive machinery to another expression in order to facilitate that expression’s processing and boost
the probability of the hearer getting the intended meaning.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1">
<![if !supportLists]><span style="font-family:Symbol"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">·<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><span style="font-size:11.0pt">You do not define pragmatics (just as almost nobody defines it). In my understanding, pragmatics contrasts with system linguistics, the former dealing with discourse, the latter with the language
system, i.e. exclusively with aspects of language which are coded by language signs.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"CMU Serif Roman"">Pragmatics is the study of utterance meaning, whereas semantics in the narrow sense is the study of lexical and compositional
meaning. Terminology aside, I think we have the same basic idea.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in">
<span style="font-size:11.0pt">Presupposing this, it does not seem that all of your examples of pragmatic cue support are actually related to pragmatics. This concerns, in particular, the grammaticalization of a noun into a noun class or gender formative. The
semantic side of such a process can be described by semantic changes that abide within the language system. The same goes for optional grammatical markers: If they are present, they add their bit to the (system) meaning of the construction; and otherwise,
the meaning of the construction is construed without this bit, which may or may not lead to the same (message) sense as the combination with the formative in question.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"CMU Serif Roman"">Agreed. In fact, as I was composing my query, I was considering dropping the ‘pragmatic’ bit from ‘pragmatic cue support’
or putting it in parenthesis. The reason being that the cues in question aren’t always implicatures, but may in fact be of a semantic nature in the narrow sense, as you say. An alternative would be ‘redundant cue support’, but that would require one to defend
the view that the cues in question are always redundant, which is not yet (entirely) clear to me. OTOH just ‘cue support’ by itself seems a bit … spare? What I’m trying to get across is that the cues in question are expressed, not because they are part of
the speaker’s intended message, but because they help clarifying that message (or so the speaker hopes).
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">If I am right with the above, then maybe your topical area is not a subdivision of processes of grammaticalization, but instead the theoretical foundation of the notion of pragmatic
cue support and its empirical outfit.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"CMU Serif Roman"">I have to confess I’m not quite sure where you’re going with that. My overall goal is to capture (as in, properly theorize) the role, or rather roles, of communicative efficiency
in grammaticalization. *<b>One</b>* of these ways in which communicative efficiency influences (drives?) grammaticalization is by (P)CS providing an efficiency incentive for speakers to enhance their expressions so as optimize the odds of being understood.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"CMU Serif Roman""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"CMU Serif Roman"">The only reason I distinguished scenarios involving (P)CS from other grammaticalization scenarios is simply that it seems clear that not all grammaticalization phenomena involve
(P)CS.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"CMU Serif Roman""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"CMU Serif Roman"">Hope this clarifies things (no pun intended)! – Best – Juergen<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>