Diachronic and dialect variation of English intensifying adverbs in the film dialogue discourse: corpus-based study

Diachronic and dialect variation of English intensifying adverbs in the film dialogue discourse: corpus-based study

Автор: Kochetova Larisa A., Ilyinova Elena Yu.

Журнал: Вестник Волгоградского государственного университета. Серия 2: Языкознание @jvolsu-linguistics

Рубрика: Межкультурная коммуникация и сопоставительное изучение языков

Статья в выпуске: 5 т.21, 2022 года.

Бесплатный доступ

The article presents a corpus-based study of the diachronic and dialect variations of adverbial intensifiers used as the expression of emotionality that is a key defining feature of interpersonal conversation in the British and American film discourse. Based on the corpora of scripts of British and American feature films released in the 1930-1950s and 1990-2010s, data on the frequency of adverbial intensifiers in the sub-corpora of the English regional varieties of the two periods were obtained and their comparative analysis was carried out to establish the regional specifics and historical dynamics of their use; the collocation profiles of adverbial intensifiers that form syntagmatic units in the dialogic speech of British and American film discourse for each of the studied periods were described; semantic classes and stylistic characteristics of adjectives that form the most frequent collocations with the intensifiers were identified; the pragmalinguistic potential of the intensifiers and adjectives to indicate informality and emotionality in the dialogues of the English film discourse was determined. The diachronic analysis revealed a decline in the occurrences of the standard register intensifiers ( terribly , awfully , perfectly , extremely , etc.) with adjectives carrying the semantics of general evaluation, opinion, judgment, and emotionality in both corpora of modern English film discourse. In the 1990-2010s period, the process of renewal is observed in the UK and US film discourse when formerly frequent intensifiers are seen to be replaced by informal adverbs with a maximal degree of emotionality in speakers’ attitudes to situations, objects of the surrounding world and the interlocutor, which reflects a trend in preference towards the colloquial and substandard stylistic register. The growth of substandard vocabulary indicates that this trend is in line with the expectations of the English-speaking discursive communities that perceive film discourse as a reflection of authentic face-to-face discursive practices.

Еще

Corpus, corpus linguistics, film dialogue discourse, intensifier, english adverbs, syntagmatic unity

Короткий адрес: https://sciup.org/149141047

IDR: 149141047   |   DOI: 10.15688/jvolsu2.2022.5.9

Список литературы Diachronic and dialect variation of English intensifying adverbs in the film dialogue discourse: corpus-based study

  • Arutyunova N.D., 1988. Tipyyazykovykh znacheniy. Otsenka. Sobytie. Fakt [Types of Language Values. Evaluation. Event. Fact]. Moscow, Nauka Publ. 341 p.
  • Bednarek M., 2010. The Language of Fictional Television: Drama and Identity. London, New York, Continuum. 285 p.
  • Bednarek M., 2011. The Stability of the Televisual Character: A Corpus Stylistic Case Study. Piazza R., Rossi F., Bednarek M., eds. Telecinematic Discourse: Approaches to the Language of Films and Television Series. Amsterdam-Philadelphia, John Benjamins, pp. 185-204.
  • Bednarek M., 2012. "Get Us the Hell Out of Here": Key Words and Trigrams in Fictional Television Series. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, no. 17 (1), pp. 35-63.
  • Bezrukova V.V., 2003. Rol' intensifikatorov vneshney formy pri sozdanii yazykovoy igry [Functions of Intensifiers of Extra Form in Designing Language Play]. Izvestiya Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta. Aktualnye problemy professionalnoy podgotovki uchitelya inostrannogo yazyka [Izvestia Voronezh State Pedagogical University], vol. 253, pp. 10-13.
  • Biber D., 2009. Foreword. Quaglio P. Television Dialogue: The Sitcom Friends vs. Natural Conversation. Amsterdam, Philadelphia, Benjamins, p. xiii.
  • Blommaert J., 2005. Discourse: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 299 p.
  • Bolinger D., 2013. Degree Words. The Hague, Pari, De Gruyter. 324 р.
  • Brezina V., 2018. Statistical Choices in Corpus-Based Discourse Analysis. Taylor Ch., Marchi A., eds. Corpus Approaches to Discourse. London, New York, Routledge, pp. 259-280.
  • Cacchiani S., 2009. Translating Intensifiers: (Non-) Equivalences Across English and Italian'. Chantler A., Dente C., eds. Translation Practices. Through Language to Culture. Amsterdam, New York, Rodop. 279 p.
  • Downing A.A., 2015. University Course in English Grammar. New York, Prentice Hall. 652 p.
  • Egbert J., Schnur E., 2018. The Role of the Text in Corpus and Discourse Analysis: Missing the Trees for the Forest. Taylor Ch., Marchi A., eds. Corpus Approaches to Discourse. London, New York, Routledge, pp. 159-173.
  • Ermakova O.P., 2005. Perekhod kolichestva v kachestvo (o prirode intensifikatorov) [The Transition from Quantity to Quality (On the Origin of Intensifiers)]. Arutyunova N.D., ed. Logicheskiy analiz yazyka. Kvantitativnyy aspekt yazyka [Logical Analysis of Language. Quantitative Aspect of Language]. Moscow, Indrik Publ., pp. 272-279.
  • Forchini P., 2012. Movie Language Revisited. Evidence from Multi-Dimensional Analysis and Corpora. Bern, Peter Lang. 142 p.
  • Fox K., 2005. Watching the English. The Hidden Rules of English Behaviour. London, Hodder. 424 p.
  • Freddie M.A., 2011. A Phraseological Approach to Film Dialogue: Film Stylistics Revisited. Yearbook of Phraseology, no. 2, pp. 137-163.
  • Furs L.A., Nazarova I.V., 2008. Kognitivnye aspekty formirovaniya kategorii gradualnosti [Cognitive Aspect of Forming Grading Category]. Voprosy kognitivnoy lingvistiki [On Cognitive Linguistics], no. 4, pp. 33-37.
  • Ivanova I.P., Burlakova V.V., Pocheptzov G.G., 1981. Teoreticheskaya grammatika sovremennogo angliyskogo yazyka [Theory of Modern English Grammar]. Moscow, Vyssh. shk. Publ. 285 p.
  • Jucker A.H., Taavisainen I., 2014. Diachronic Corpus Pragmatics: Intersections and Interactions. Taavitsainen I., Jucker A.Y., Toumien J., eds. Diachronic Corpus Pragmatics. Amsterdam, John Bendjamins, pp. 3-28.
  • Kolesnikova S.M., 2016. Funktsionalnaya grammatika: predikativnost, gradualnost, otsenochnost [Functional Grammar: Predicativity, Graduality, Evaluativeness]. Moscow, MPGU. 288 p.
  • Kosova M.V., 2013. Informativnost dokumentnogo teksta: lingvisticheskie kriterii mery [Informativity of Document Text: Linguistic Criteria of Measure]. Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya 2. Yazykoznanie [Science Journal of Volgograd State University. Linguistics], no. 3 (19), pp. 85-89.
  • Koryakovtseva E.I., Ratsiburskaya L.V., Sandakova M.V., 2021. Dinamika otsenochnykh intensifikatorov v russkom yazyke 21 v.: slovoobrazovatelnyy i semanticheskiy aspekty [Intensifiers in the Language of the 21st Century: Word-Building, Semantics, Syntagmatics and Dynamics of Evaluation] Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya 2. Yazykoznanie [Science Journal of Volgograd State University. Linguistics], vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 6-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15688/jvolsu2.2021.5.1
  • Kraeva I.A., 2017. Nekotorye yazykovye sredstva vyrazheniya sravneniya i gradatsii kachestva v angliyskom yazyke [Several Language Means to Represent Comparatives and Quality Grading in English]. Vestnik moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo lingvisticheskogo universiteta. Gumanitarnye nauki [Vestnik of Moscow State Linguistic University. Humanities], no. 6 (777), pp. 13-20.
  • Kraeva I.A., 2021. Ispolzovanye angliyskikh otnositelnykh prilagatelnykh dlya vyrazheniya gradualnosti [Using English Relative Adjectives to Express Graduality]. Vestnik moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo lingvisticheskogo universiteta. Gumanitarnye nauki [Vestnik of Moscow State Linguistic University. Humanities], no. 13 (855), pp. 98-112. DOI: 10.52070/2542-2197_2021_13_855_98
  • Kustova G.I., 2005. Kolichestvennye znacheniya kachestvennykh slov [Quantitative Meanings of Qualitative Words]. Arutyunova N.D., ed. Logicheskiy analiz yazyka. Kvantitativnyjy aspekt yazyka [Logical Analysis of Language. Quantitative Aspect of Language]. Moscow, Indrik Publ., pp. 295-305.
  • Lakoff G., 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. Chicago, University of Chicago Press. 614 p.
  • Larina T.V., Leontovich O.A., 2015. Too Many Walls and not Enough Bridges: The Importance of Intercultural Communication Studies. Russian Journal of Linguistics, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 9-16. DOI: 10.22363/2687-0088-9253
  • Lebedeva I.S., Pavlova E.B., 2017. Intensifitsiruyushchie narechiya v angliyskom yazyke: diahronnyy aspect [Intensifying Adverbs in the English Langauge Viewed Diachronically]. Vestnik moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo lingvisticheskogo uni-versiteta. Gumanitarnye nauki [Vestnik of Moscow State Linguistic University. Humanities], no. 11 (784), pp. 151-152.
  • McIntyre D., 2012. Prototypical Characteristics of Blockbuster Movie Dialogue: A Corpus Stylistic Analysis. Texas Studies in Literature and Language, no. 54 (3), pp. 402-425.
  • Quaglio P., 2008. Television Dialogue and Natural Conversation: Linguistic Similarities and Functional Differences. Adel A., Reppen R., eds. Corpora and Discourse. The Challenges of Different Settings. Amsterdam, Philadelphia, John Benjamins, pp. 189-210.
  • Quaglio P., 2009. Television Dialogue: The Sitcom Friends vs. Natural Conversation. Amsterdam, Philadelphia, John Benjamins. 165 p.
  • Quirk R., Greenbaum S., Leech G., Svartvik J., 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London, Longman. 1779 p.
  • Raytseva N.A., 2012. Slovoobrazovatelnye sredstva vyrazheniya intensivnosti v sovremennom russkom yazyke [Word-Formative Methods of Expressing Intensity in Modern Russian]. Vestnik Severo-Osetinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta im. K.L. Khetagurova. Obshchestvennye nauki [Bulletin of the North Ossetian State University named after K.L. Khetagurov. Social Sciences], no. 1, pp. 308-312.
  • Rey J.M., 2001. Changing Gender Roles in Popular Culture: Dialogue in Star Trek Episodes from 1966 to 1993. Biber D., Conrad S., eds. Variation in English: Multi-Dimensional Studies. London, Longman, pp. 138-156.
  • Richardson K., 2010. Television Dramatic Dialogue. A Sociolinguistic Study. Oxford, Oxford University Press. 272 p.
  • Rodionova S.E., 2004. Intensivnost i eyo mesto v ryadu drugikh semanticheskikh kategoriy [Intensification and its Place in the Line of Other Semantic Categories]. Slavyanskiy vestnik [Vestnik of Slavonic Languages], iss. 2, pp. 303-308.
  • Rodionova S.E., 2005. Semantika intensivnosti i eyo vyrazhenie v sovremennom russkom yazyke [Semantics of Intensity and Its Expression in Modern Russian]. Bondarko A.V., Shubik S.A., eds. Problemy funktsionalnoy grammatiki. Polevye struktury [Problems of Functional Grammar. Field Structures]. Saint Petersburg, Nauka Publ., pp. 150-168.
  • Sheptukhina E.M., Meshkova T.A., 2011. Zakonomernosti realizatsii otnosheniy slovoobrazovatelnoy sinonimii prefiksalnykh glagolov v tekste (na materiale raznozhanrovykh proizvedeniy F. Prokopovicha) [Conformities to Implementation of Synonymy Relation of Word-Formative Prefixal Verb in Text (Based on Eulogistic Works of Pheophan Prokopovich)]. Vestnik Volgogadskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya 2. Yazykoznanie [Science Journal of Volgograd State University. Linguistics], no. 2 (14), pp. 55-60.
  • Sternberg C., 1997. Written for the Screen: The American Motion-Picture Screenplay as Text. Tübingen, Stauffenburg. 260 p.
  • Turanskiy I.I., 1990. Semanticheskaya kategoriya intensivnosti v angliyskom yazyke [Semantic Category of Intensification in English]. Moscow, Nauka Publ. 172 p.
  • Tagliamonte, S.A., 2008. So Different and Pretty Cool! Recycling Intensifiers in Toronto, Canada. English Language and Linguistics, vol. 12, iss. 2, pp. 361-394. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/ S1360674308002669
  • Tagliamonte S., Roberts C., 2005. So Weird; So Cool; So Innovative: The Use of Intensifiers in the Television Series Friends. American Speech, no. 80 (3), pp. 280-300. DOI: 10.1215/0003128380-3-280
  • Toolan M., 2011. I Don't Know What They're Saying Half the Time, but I'm Hooked on the Series: Incomprehensible Dialogue and Multimodal Characterisation in the Wire. Piazza R., Bednarek M., Rossi F., eds. Telecinematic Discourse: Approaches to Language of Films and Television Series. Amsterdam, Philadephia, John Benjamins, pp. 161-183.
  • Volf E.M., 2002. Funktsionalnaya semantika ocenki [Functional Semantics of Evaluation]. Moscow, Editorial URSS Publ. 280 p.
Еще
Статья научная
SciUp 2024 © 2024 ©