Gender and Age Aspects within the Pragmatic Potential of the Epistemic Modality Markers

Rezeda D. Shakirova, Adelina R. Safina

Özet


It is well known that the representatives of a certain gender and age groups are distinguished by various perceptions of the world, evaluation of the objective reality events as well as by operating facts as reliable. The purpose of the research is to reveal the speaker’s gender and age characteristics affecting the confidence level in reliability of facts provided and as such the epistemic modal markers (modal words and modal verbs) chosen by him or her. To achieve the objective of the research there were used some linguistic methods such as a communicative-pragmatic and the descriptive ones. The illustrative basis consists of the situations expressing the meanings of epistemic possibility and epistemic necessity. Two types of literary characters from two fiction resources (J. Banville «The Sea» and M. Zusak «The Book Thief») were chosen to analyse: a middle-aged man and a teenage girl. The research identifies that the man mostly deals with markers of epistemic possibility if his statement is based on retrospection, intuition, or faith / conjecture (unlike a girl), an assumption (similar to a girl). In case of having a convincing evidence base, the man uses epistemic necessity markers. The girl demonstrates the usage of modal markers of epistemic necessity if her statements are based on faith, desire to benefit or “female logic”. The desire to attract attention of the opposite sex interlocutor is marked by the usage of modal markers of epistemic possibility. It is also worth noting that strong emotions, which are common to a teenage girl rather than a mature man, can distort the reliability of the statements. The content of the article is of practical value for the further epistemic modality researches in the field of linguistic pragmatics and sociolinguistics.

Anahtar Kelimeler


Epistemic modality, Epistemic possibility, Epistemic necessity, Modal verbs, Modal words, Gender-age aspect, Pragmatics, Anthropocentric approach.

Tam Metin:

PDF (English)

Referanslar


Banville, J. (2013). The Sea. London: Picador.

Brown, P. & Fraser, C. (1979). Speech as a Marker of Situation. In K.R. Scherer, H. Giles (Eds.), Social Markers in Speech (pp.34-35). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gritsenko, E. S. (2005). Language as a means of constructing gender. Dissertation of doctor philological sciences. Nizhny Novgorod.

Karasik, V. I. (2002). Social status language. Moscow: Gnosis.

Karaulov, Yu. N. (2010). Russian language and language personality (7th ed.). Moscow: Publisher LKI.

Kirilina, A. V. (1999). Gender: linguistic aspects. Moscow: Institute of Sociology, Russian Academy of Sciences.

Kurakina, N. A. (2015). Lingo-stylistic means of expressing age identity in complimentary expressions (on the material of works of modern English, American and Russian fiction). Bulletin of the Baltic Federal University, 1(2), 152-157.

Maltz, D. & Borker, R. (1982). A Cultural Approach to Male-Female Miscommunication. In J.J. Gumperz (Ed.), Language and Social Identity (pp.195-216). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Miklyaeva, A. V. & Rumyantseva, P. V. (2008). Social identity: content, structure, mechanisms of formation: monograph. St. Petersburg: Publishing House of the Russian State Pedagogical University.

Oleshkov, M. Yu. (2006). Basics of functional linguistics: the discursive aspect: textbook for students of the faculty of Russian language and literature. Nizhny Tagil: Nizhny Tagil State Socio-Pedagogical Academy.

Palmer, F. R. (2001). Mood and Modality (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Pavilionis, R. I. (1983). The problem of meaning. Modern logical-philosophical analysis of language. Moscow: Mind.

Plusnina, A. V. (2012). Characteristics of Man and Female Written Speech in Gender Consciousness of Communicators. Yaroslavl Pedagogical Bulletin, 1(1), 184-188.

Shakirova, R. D.; Sadrieva, G. A.; Safina A. R.; Almikaeva, I. G. & Galimullina A. F. (2016). Evidentiality, Epistemic Modality, and Epistemic Status. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, Australia: Australian International Academic Centre, 5(5), 32-38.

Susov, I. P. (2006). Linguistic pragmatics: textbook for students, undergraduates and graduate students (doctoral students). Moscow: East-West.

Tannen, D. (1990). You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. New York: Ballantine Books.

Van der Auwera, J. & Plungian, V. A. (1998). Modality's Semantic Map. Linguistic Typology, 2(1), 79-124.

Zusak, M. (2006). The Book Thief. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7596/taksad.v8i1.2053

Refback'ler

  • Şu halde refbacks yoktur.




Telif Hakkı (c) 2019 Journal of History Culture and Art Research

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.