8.583, Disc: Hedging expressions

[linguist at linguistlist.org]

LINGUIST List:  Vol-8-583. Thu Apr 24 1997. ISSN: 1068-4875.

Subject: 8.583, Disc: Hedging expressions

Moderators: Anthony Rodrigues Aristar: Texas A&M U. <aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at linguistlist.org>
            T. Daniel Seely: Eastern Michigan U. <seely at linguistlist.org>

Review Editor:     Andrew Carnie <carnie at linguistlist.org>

Associate Editors: Ljuba Veselinova <ljuba at linguistlist.org>
                   Ann Dizdar <ann at linguistlist.org>
Assistant Editor:  Sue Robinson <sue at linguistlist.org>

Software development: John H. Remmers <remmers at emunix.emich.edu>
                      Zhiping Zheng <zzheng at online.emich.edu>

Home Page:  http://linguistlist.org/

               ************************************************
  During the month of April, you may make credit card donations to
  LINGUIST via the Cascadilla Press web site:
                  http://www.cascadilla.com/linglist.html
  If you believe LINGUIST is a valuable service, please contribute to
  the LINGUIST Editorial Support Fund, which pays our student editors.
                ***********************************************


Editor for this issue: T. Daniel Seely <seely at linguistlist.org>

=================================Directory=================================

1)
Date:  Mon, 21 Apr 1997 08:42:16 -0500
From:  "F. K. L. Chit Hlaing" <f-lehman at uiuc.edu>
Subject:  Re: 8.553, Sum: hedging expressions

-------------------------------- Message 1 -------------------------------

Date:  Mon, 21 Apr 1997 08:42:16 -0500
From:  "F. K. L. Chit Hlaing" <f-lehman at uiuc.edu>
Subject:  Re: 8.553, Sum: hedging expressions

I think something is missing in your summary of people's account of
these expressions. It seems to me, from a certain amount of research
as well as intuition, that hedges like these are commonly, if not
indeed invariably, meant to express that the speaker recognises and
acknowledges the violation of a norm, but wishes none the less to say
what he/she has to say in spite of that. The principle seems to be
that violation of a norm of politness or etiquette is at least
mitigated this way; more recisely still, that the worst violation is
the violation that remains unacknowledged -- acknowledgement
mitigating the violation on the grounds that it constitutes something
of an apology, at least showing that you are sufficiently decent to
know the difference and may, then, have some over riding excuse for
the violation.

F. K. L. Chit Hlaing

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-8-583