2007/04/11

Kirsner, R. S., & van Heuven, V. J. (1996). Boundary tones and the semantics of the Dutch final paricles hè, hoor, zeg and joh. Linguistics in Netherland, 133–146.

Presentation: Sarah
Summary: Chris

This paper illustrated the use of a particular intonational contrast as a device in analyzing the semantics of the Dutch utterance final particles: hè, hoor, zeg, and joh. The use of particle hè represents asking for listener’s confirmation or acknowledgement while that of particle hoor implies no confirmation is needed. Zeg expresses the speaker’s pure surprise without regard for the hearer. Joh does not suggest an ongoing relationship between the speaker and the hearer. The study showed that the corresponding coherence of the above particles in utterances with different boundary tones reflected crucial differences in their underlying semantics. There was an interaction of sentence type, intonation, and pragmatic particles in the interpretation of Dutch sentences. Since hè is judged as least acceptable with L, it supports the claim that it makes most claims upon the hearer. The result that zeg is the least usual with H% supports the view that it makes the least claim from the hearer. The results showed the effect of boundary tones and particles: The usualness with H% is ordered as no particle < zeg < joh < hoor < hè, which is consistent with the prediction from the ranking scale provided in the paper. The authors concluded that the more a particle is compatible with the meaning APPEAL, the greater should the difference between H% and L scores be.