[Corpora-List] Studies of YET and STILL -- summary

From: R.M.Salkie@bton.ac.uk
Date: Fri Jan 16 2004 - 10:45:58 MET

  • Next message: Argyrios Vassilakopoulos: "[Corpora-List] TIMEBANK corpus"

    As well as the items listed below, two recent unpublished studies came to
    light:

    Charlene Dee Crupi. But Still a Yet: The Quest For a Constant Semantic
    Value For English YET. Ed Doc dissertation, Graduate School of Education,
    Rutgers University. January 2004.

    This study demonstrates that yet contributes a single semantic value,
    SIGNIFICANT CONTRAST, wherever it appears, regardless of syntactic function.
    In a linking capacity, yet indicates that both conjuncts contribute to a
    contrast that is relevant to an author's communicative purposes-a strikingly
    different cue than those provided by but and still, despite their common
    designation as adversative conjunctions. Conjunctive still [CONTINUATION,
    NO CHANGE] indicates that subsequent information has been mentioned earlier
    in the text or is part of the reader's general knowledge. But instructs the
    reader to abandon previous assumptions in favor of subsequent information of
    higher thematic relevance. For more information, contact the author at
    ccrupi@att.net.

    María Oset García. English in the books vs. English in Use: The Case of Yet.
    MPhil essay, University of Birmingham.

    The essay examines what dictionaries, grammars and ESL textbooks say about
    YET, and compares this with corpus examples from the Bank of English. For
    more information, contact the author at < osetmaria@yahoo.com>.

    ABRAHAM, W. (1980), The synchronic and diachronic semantics of German
    temporal 'noch' and 'schon', with aspects of English 'still', 'yet' and
    'already', Studies in language 4, 3-24. [I have not yet been able to find a
    copy of this paper].

    CLOSS TRAUGOTT, E., WATERHOUSE, J. (1969), Already and yet : a suppletive
    set of aspect-markers ?, Journal of linguistics, 5, pp.287-304. [Deals
    entirely with the temporal use of YET]

    GREENBAUM, S. (1969). Studies in English Adverbial Usage. London:
    Longman. pp. 59-69. [Brief discussions on YET and STILL as discourse
    markers, but useful because he compares them with NEVERTHELESS, ANYHOW, etc,
    using authentic examples].

    HIRTLE, W. H. (1977), Already, still and yet, Archivum Linguisticum, VII,
    Glasgow, N.S., n°1, pp.28-45. [Almost entirely on the temporal uses, but has
    a page near the end on the discourse marker uses. Uses the Guillaume
    theoretical framework, which has its own terminology, but fairly easy to
    read]

    KÖNIG, E. (1991), The meaning of focus particles. A comparative perspective,
    London, New York, Routledge. (Chapter 7, in particular pp. 153-7) [A few
    words on STILL and YET, mostly as a companion to the main discussion of
    German NOCH and SCHON].

    LENK, U. (1998). Marking discourse coherence: Functions of discourse markers
    in spoken English (Language in performance, Vol. 15). Tübingen: Gunter Narr
    Verlag. [I have not yet been able to find a copy of this book].

    MICHAELIS, L. (1993), 'Continuity' across three scalar domains : the
    polysemy of adverbial 'still', Journal of semantics 10, 193-237. [Almost
    entirely about the temporal use, but some discussion near the end of the
    discourse marker use. Heavy use of logical formalism].

    TRAUGOTT,E.C. AND KÖNIG, E. (1982), Divergence and apparent convergence in
    the development of 'yet' and 'still', In M. Macaulay et al (eds.),
    Proceedings of the eighth annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics
    Society, 170-179. [Historical development of these words, mostly the
    temporal uses: they argue that "the original meanings of YET and STILL
    account for all the temporal and even the concessive uses of these
    particles"].

    VAN DER AUWERA, J. (1993), Already and still : Beyond Duality, Linguistics
    and Philosophy, 16, pp. 613 - 653. [Almost entirely on the temporal uses.
    In the tradition of Traugott & Waterhouse above].

    VAN BAAR, T. (1997) Continuation and change in FG. In C. Butler, J.
    Connolly, R. Gatward and R. Vismans (eds.) A Fund of ideas: Recent
    Developments in Functional Grammar. (Studies in Language and Language use
    31), Amsterdam: IFOTT, 42-59. (IFOTT is (or rather, was) the Institute for
    Functional Research into Language and Language Use at the Unviersity of
    Amsterdam). [Examines the temporal uses of ALREADY, STILL, YET and NO
    LONGER and their equivalents in a wide range of languages. In the tradition
    of Traugott & Waterhouse above].

    Thanks to the following people for their help:

    Joel Walters
    Lisa Ferro
    Chris Butler
    Tim van Baar
    Jlsperanza@aol.com
    Larry Horn
    Alan Huffman
    Galina Bolden
    Mike Matloff
    Wolfgang Teubert
    Bruce Fraser
    Charlene Crupi
    Sandrine Deloor
    María Oset



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 16 2004 - 10:46:40 MET