LV A STUDY OF PROCLAIM MARKERS IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE

Aims The aim of this study is to investigate the structural, semantic, and pragmatic characteristics of proclaim markers in English and Vietnamese.. Objectives This study is intended t

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 RATIONALE

When people use language to communicate, both in everyday conversations and in writing such as novels, reports, letters, etc they not only desire to give the descriptive information but they also show their attitudes, evaluation to the content of their statement and to the hearers or readers In making their statements as claims of knowledge or feelings, the speakers/writers can adjust and negotiate the arguability of their utterances While doing so, the speakers may choose to shape their position in verbal interaction as to be likely accepted by the hearers or readers as far as the reliability of information is concerned And by doing so, their claim can be supported and the others’ claims denied Every language offers various ways

of performing these functions According to the speaker’s purpose toward the dimension of their attitude to their claim, these functions can be labelled proclaim or disclaim Under the Appraisal framework initiated by James Martin [26], Proclaim is first introduced as a fairly new name for communicative categories and is seen as a member of Engagement subsystems which carries all properties of a linguistic unit So what is it?

In every day speech or in written texts, the speakers may choose to modify their claim with a particular linguistic device so as to avoid the challenge from the hearers or readers By doing so, they are performing a proclaim Let me examine the following examples

(1) “He wants to buy me out?”

“Yes, But of course, I told him you wouldn’t sell.” [114]

(2) But I do contend that if Ellen deceived me in this matter, it was a piece

of unwarranted cruelty, and as man to man I ask you, if you can, to

relieve me of this horrible suspense [78]

(3) Quang với Hiền, hai đứa lưu ban thì tất nhiên không thể làm tổ trưởng

được rồi Cuối cùng tụi tôi đùn cho thằng Đại [41, p.30]

(4) Năm ấy nước sông Nhĩ Hà lên to Thảo nào mấy nghìn gốc nhãn trồng

trên mặt đê quanh vùng vụ đó sai quả lạ [43, p.91]

In (1) and (2) above, the claims can be received and interpreted as with more force and certainty These additional meanings apart from the core

meaning encoded in the proposition are signalled by of course and do contend

which are called Proclaim Markers (Hereafter PM)

In (3) the writer based on the assumption that student repeaters could neither be good at subjects nor behave well and that a group leader must be a

typical and model student Therefore, by using “tất nhiên” he wanted to draw

the reader’s support to his proposition - to vote for Đại As in (4) the writer would like the readers to agree with his proposition and not to be rejected by preceding the human’s experience - the knowledge of the world - rising river

water carries nutrient to nourish the longan trees well “thảo nào” in this

current location confirms his belief in his statement

So far much has been written on the related semantic areas such as modality, evidentiality, and hedges in English and Vietnamese Although Proclaim can be considered as one of the basic purposes of modulating the speaker’s or writer’s claim, little has been done on Proclaim concerning the linguistic realizations and its semantic functions

With the assumptions that such PMs as of course, I do contend, tất nhiên, thảo nào, and other members of PMs may cause some difficulties to

those who use English in everyday speech as well as in argumentative essays,

I therefore try to carry out a research on this in a hope that it may help Vietnamese learners of English to enhance their competence in spoken and written communication and achieve cooperation in interaction

1.2 JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY

The research of PMs on the aspects of syntax, semantics and pragmatics makes an attempt to contribute to the understanding of proclaim markers in different types of discourses in English and Vietnamese The similarities and differences between the two languages analysed in the study may be of great benefit for Vietnamese learners of English An insight of these markers along with appropriate practice can help them improve in practising language skills, especially in translation Vietnamese learners of English may base on the findings of this study in order that they can enhance their competence to naturally express the information as well as the attitudinal, dialogistic and intertextual positioning in both languages

1.3 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

1.3.1 Aims

The aim of this study is to investigate the structural, semantic, and pragmatic characteristics of proclaim markers in English and Vietnamese

1.3.2 Objectives

This study is intended to achieve these following objectives:

• Giving a description of English and Vietnamese proclaim markers with reference to structures, semantics and pragmatics

• Finding out the similarities and differences between proclaim markers

in English and their Vietnamese equivalents

• Giving suggestions for teaching and learning proclaim markers

1.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

This study will do research on 50 representative proclaim markers in lexical devices in form of adverbial disjuncts in English and Vietnamese discourse

• What are the differences and similarities of Proclaim markers in

English and Vietnamese in terms of syntax, semantics and pragmatics?

• What are the learners’ difficulties in comprehending and using PMs in English?

1.6 ORGANISATION OF THE STUDY

The study consists of five chapters as follows:

Chapter one, the introductory chapter, represents the rationale for the research, the general purpose of the study, the justification, scope and organisation of the study

Chapter two gives an overview of how proclaim markers are approached from different perspectives Furthermore, the chapter mentions a number of such relevant concepts as dialogistic position, epistemic modality, evidentiality, force dynamics, speech act and politeness principles

Chapter three brings out the methods of collecting and analysing data

Chapter four describes and contrasts the proclaim markers in English and Vietnamese in terms of structural features, semantic functions and pragmatic functions so as to draw out their similarities and differences

Chapter five is the summary of the development of the study This section also raises some implications for English teaching and learning, some limitations and gives some suggestions on further research

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 PREVIOUS RESEARCH

Proclaim, a subcategory of Engagement under the Appraisal framework proposed by Martin and his group of researchers [26], concerns with the diverse range of resources by which speakers/writers adjust and negotiate the arguability of their utterances, which has been analysed in the literature under headings such as modality, evidentiality, polarity, hearsay, concession, hedges, boosters and metadiscursives

The notions of modality, evidentiality and polarity have been discussed

in the literature by Palmer [20], Lyons [18], Coates [8], Chafe [6] and Hanns [10] However, Proclaim, a fairly new concept for some of us, is one key of engagement resources just mentioned under the Appraisal framework proposed by Martin [26]

So far, little has been written about this linguistic phenomenon and thus this is a derelict field for exploration As for disclaim or disclaimers, I just mention here a very early work by Hewitt [11] This paper introduces, defines and discusses a new concept - Disclaimer as an interactional tactics employed

by actors faced with upcoming events or acts which threaten to disrupt emergent meanings or discredited situational identities Its function is to predefine such problematic events for others in a manner which reduces salience as interactional cues

Another study that relates to the issues of Disclaimers is “Formulaic Disclaimers” by Overstreet, Maryann and George Yule [25, pp.45-60] In this

paper, the author describes the form and functions of a formulaic construction used as a disclaimer in contemporary English These two studies can be viewed as primarily pragmatics oriented and treat Disclaimers as serving social functions

Among the cross linguistic studies that deal with issues of proclaims and proclaim markers, it can be noted by Bui Thi Huynh Tran’s graduation paper for B.A degree “Proclaim and Disclaim (English vs Vietnamese) [5] This study mainly looked into the semantic and pragmatic features of Disclaim and Proclaim in both spoken and written discourse (English and Vietnamese), especially speech acts which are structured with evaluative disjuncts and conjunctions This research paper was an attempt to find out the implicature, presupposition or assumption of Disclaim and Proclaim in English and Vietnamese, investigated and decided which are their equivalent features in pragmatics in Vietnamese However, at such a level of B.A degree, the work just gave general points of the proclaim

The latest study of the matters of Proclaim and Disclaim markers should be mentioned here is M.A Thesis by Ho Long Ngoc (2006) [12] with the title “A Study of Disclaim Markers in English and Vietnamese” This thesis examined described the disclaim markers in English and Vietnamese in terms of syntactic, semantic and pragmatic aspects The study investigated a wide range of linguistic devices to mark the speaker/writer’s disclaim with different structures of verbs, adverbs, adjectives and nouns in the two languages The findings were about the information status of the proposition mentioned in the disclaim as unexpected, new desirable or undesirable which anticipated the speaker/writer’s attitudes to this proposition against an assumption expected in both the speaker’s and hearer’s minds In this study,

the addresser’s reactions to the proposition in the disclaim also reflected themselves in the politeness strategies in communicative interaction

Hence, issues about Proclaim and proclaim markers are still unsolved questions The concept of proclaim and its characteristics in syntax, semantics and pragmatics are still inaccessible to many of us Therefore, I need to make clear the definition of Proclaim and its related concepts

2.2 PROCLAIM AND RELATED CONCEPTS

2.2.1 The notion of proclaim

Keys engagement resources include meanings which can be grouped together under the headings: Disclaim, Proclaim, Probabilise, and Attribute According to Martin [26], under “proclaim” (which includes Expect and Pronounce) we are concerned with formulations which can be interpreted as heading off contradiction or challenge from potential dialogistic respondents They are meanings which increase the interpersonal cost of any such contradiction by adding additional support or motivation for the current proposition/proposal

To facilitate my searching for those linguistic units that function as a proclaim I assume that Proclaim is a kind of speech act that functions to signal the speaker/ writer’s support to anticipate a prevention of any challenge

of doubt or undesirable assumption from the hearer/ reader

In this sense, any kind of linguistic devices that are used to signal the function as adding this supportive meaning to the proposition are called Proclaim markers (PM) and will be examined in this study

2.2.1.1 Expect

P.R.R White [29] claims that through values of Expects, the speaker/writer represents the current proposition/proposal as uncontentiouswithin the current speech community, as a “given”, as being in accord with what is generally known or expected Let’s consider the example below about

the use of “of course”

(5) Mrs Parry thought that this pastoral was in some ways, rather like the

Tempest Mr Stanhope, of course, was not as good as Shakespeare,

because Shakespeare was the greatest English poet, so that Stanhope

Here the writer represents himself/herself as simply agreeing with the reader, as recounting a view (Mr Stanhope was not as good as Shakespeare, because Shakespeare was the greatest English playwright) which is already held by the dialogistic partner and by people in general The location of the current proposition within a dialogistic exchange is thus employed to increase the cost of any subsequent challenging or rejecting of the proposition

2.1.1.2 Pronounce

Under “Pronounce”, according to P.R.R White [29], we are concerned with formulations by which speakers/writers interpolate themselves directly into the text as the explicitly responsible source of the utterance This

“pronouncement” may take the form of an explicit interpolation of the speaker into the text (‘I’d say this will lead to mistrust’), an intensifying comment adjunct (‘Really, this will lead to mistrust’), stress on the auxiliary

(‘This did lead to mistrust’), or through structures such as ‘It’s a fact that…’

Such formulations are dialogistically prospective The author thereby increases the interpersonal cost of any rejection/doubting of their utterance in

future communicative exchanges, rendering such direct challenge to the author’s dialogistic position Of course, through such a strategy, by confronting the possibility of rejection, the author integrates that possibility into the text and thereby acknowledges the dialogistic diversity of meaning making in socially diverse social contexts

2.2.2 The notion of “Dialogism”

The notion of “dialogism” is set out in the work of Bakhtin [4] and Voloshinov [24] The following quotation sums up this perspective:

The actual reality of language-speech is not the abstract system of

linguistic forms, not the isolated monologic utterance, and not the

psychological act of its implementation, but the social event of verbal

interaction implemented in an utterance or utterances

Thus, verbal interaction is the basic reality of language

Dialogue, in the narrow sense of the word, is of course only one of the forms –

a very important form, to be sure – of verbal interaction But dialogue can also

be understood in a broader sense, meaning not only direct, face-to-face,

vocalised verbal communication between persons, but also verbal

communication of any type whatsoever A book, i.e a verbal performance in print, is also an element of verbal communication … [it] inevitably orients itself with respect to previous performances in the same sphere… Thus the printed verbal performance engages, as it were, in ideological colloquy of a large scale: it responds to something, affirms something, anticipates possible responses and objections, seeks support, and so on [28] P.R.R White [29] also claimed that the resources included within Engagement are all “dialogistic” in this sense - they are all means by which speakers/writers represent themselves as engaging in a “dialogue” to the extent that they present themselves as taking up, acknowledging, responding

to, challenging or rejecting actual or imagined prior utterances from other speakers or as anticipating possible responses from other speakers/writers

2.2.3 Epistemic modality and evidentiality

Hanns [10] claimed that there is a distinction between marking the source of the information and the degree of commitment a speaker places in his/her utterance (epistemic) Epistemic modality evaluates evidence and on the basis of the evaluation assigns a confidence to measure to the speaker’s utterance An epistemic modal will be used to reflect the degree of confidence In his viewpoint, an evidential asserts that there is evidence for speaker’s utterance but does not interpret the evidence any way

Palmer [20], in his book on Mood and Modality (1986) viewed that

evidentiality is part of the epistemic modal system According to him, epistemic modality divides into two subcategories: judgement and evidence Opinions and conclusions involve judgement by the speaker but reports indicate the kind of evidence Both judgements and evidentials can be seen as devices for the speakers to indicate that he wishes to modify his commitment

to the truth of his speech utterance Let me take the following examples

(6) “I shall cause all my relatives and my acquaintances in Persia to know

of it, and I will take such an oath that they will certainly believe,” the

(7) For a long moment Romano stared into the fire “But one who had such

evidence - one who had, perhaps, assisted in the arrest of the guilty -

such a one would be forced to linger here?” “For a time And he would

undoubtedly be commanded to return for the trial.” [78] The semantic process of restriction (or focus) involves the same items which function as emphasizers, but now the adverbs draw attention to the

modal by actually focusing upon it Restriction is not readily distinguishable from emphasis for this reason In the above examples the adverb has its focus

on the modal which it thus clearly highlights

2.2.4 The semantic mechanism of the claim of truth with PMs

In the foregoing section I have presented the role and function of PMs

as epistemic markers as well as that of evidence as the semantic background for the speaker’s assertion of a proposition in his/ her claim The question here is how the notion of epistemic modality acts as a basis for a claim of truth about the state-of-affairs mentioned in the proclaim For the analysis of the semantic mechanism of the claim of truth with PMs I would like to start with a view of modality as Epistemic Deixis with the convergence and divergence of the expressed world and reference world As Chung and Timberlake [7, p.387] state, through modality, language can encode the comparison between an expressed world described by a particular speaker with a reference world as the world of present state of actualized events By this view, a modalized utterance is made about the possibility of a state-of-affairs mentioned in the proposition with reference to the present state of the actualized events and in this sense “the expressed world”, the state-of-affairs

in the asserted proposition, is the modal equivalent of the deictic located point The reference world, normally the actual world or speech, is the modal counterpart of the spatial and temporal reference point, “the here-and-now.”

As Frawley [9, p.388] states, with the parameters remoteness and direction, epistemic values can be established to mark the distance between the actual world (the present) and the non-actual world where the latter is away from or approaching to the former As an epistemic version of deixis, with the values for deictic points understood as the speaker’s belief, these

points can be interpreted as degrees of commitment and likelihood of the actualization of a state-of-affairs

Following Frawley, I assume that the coincidence or convergence of the expressed world and the reference world results in the notion of actual modality or realis, and the divergence of these two worlds yields the so-called non-actual world or irrealis Accordingly, the extent of the divergence of the two worlds with various epistemic stances can be translated into different degrees of epistemic values such as possibility, evidence, commitment, and so

on

From these assumptions about the convergence of the expressed world and the reference world along the two parameters remoteness and direction I can say that a modalized utterance as proclaim conveys that the speaker/ writer views the state-of-affairs in proposition as the expressed world in the complete convergence or full coincidence with the reference world Accordingly, what is presented in the proposition of the proclaim can be judged as true basing on the evidence as part of the reality in the reference world The semantic mechanism for the assertion of truth of proposition can

be represented in figures 2.1 and 2.2 below

State-of-affairs Present state of actualized event

Expressed world Reference world State-of-affairs Present state of actualized event

Yule’s [25, p.47] claimed that “Actions performed via utterances are generally called speech acts….” Normally, kinds of speech acts derive from speaker’s communicative intention, such as apology, complaint, compliment, invitation, promise, or request Furthermore, he introduced three related acts performed by producing an utterance:

a locutionary act: produces a meaningful linguistic expression

b illocutionary act: an utterance with some kind of function in speaker’s

mind

The illocutionary act is performed via the communicative force of an utterance

c perlocutionary act: the utterance on the assumption that the hearer will

recognise the effect that the speaker intended

However, briefly, the term “speech act” can be meant only the illocutionary force of an utterance

Yule [25, pp.53.54] classified speech acts according to general functions: declarations, representatives, expressives, directives, and commissives In the scope of this study I will deal with mainly proclaims in the form of representatives or assertive and expressives, and these functions

of speech act will be treated as the ones with performative force rather than constative utterances

Hurford [14] gives a definition of proposition that I explicitly mentioned declarative sentences, but propositions are clearly involved in the meanings of other types of sentences, such as interrogatives and imperatives Normally, when a speaker utters a simple declarative sentence, he commits himself to the truth of the corresponding proposition: i.e he asserts the proposition

2.2.5.2 Performatives

a Performatives and constatives

On making the overt distinction between performative and constative sentences, Ross in [22, pp 321-345] claimed that performative sentences are those which not only can serve as linguistic communicative (i.e convey information), but can also constitute actions that are in a sense independent of

their communicative function; constative sentences are those which can be viewed as simply communicating information, for example

(8) I admit I was hasty (Performative utterance) [13, p.236] (9) I think I was wrong (Constative utterance) [13, p.236]

A major difference between such sentences is that whereas constative sentences may be true or false, performative sentences “have, instead of truth values, various conditions pertaining to appropriateness of use” [22, p.322]

b Characteristics of performatives

According to Leech G.N [17, pp.183-184] syntactically, a regular illocutionary performative utterance has the following distinguished features: (i) The verb of the main clause is an illocutionary verb

(ii) This verb is in the simple present tense

(iii) The subject of this verb is in the first person

(iv) The indirect object of this verb, if one is present, is you

(v) Optionally, this verb is preceded by the adverb hereby

(vi) The verb is followed (except in elliptical cases) by a reported-speech clause

From what is presented in features (i) - (vi) it can be inferred that illocutionary verbs are performative verbs, as Hurford & Heasley [13, p.237] defined, “a Performative Verb is one which, when used in a simple positive present tense sentence, with a 1st person singular subject, can make the utterance of that sentence performative.”

2.2.6 Force dynamics

In Speech Act theory, the notion of force is regarded as a way of indicating that different utterances have different properties Meanwhile, in linguistic theory, a richer notion of force, suggested by Leonard Talmy [27, p.50] still exists, namely Force Dynamics Talmy used Force to explain the operators of possibility (modals: CAN, MAY, MUST, WOULD, COULD, etc.) in natural language In other words, semantically, he viewed root modality which denotes real-world obligation, permission, or ability in terms

of force dynamics; that is, in terms of linguistic treatment of force and barriers

in general [23]

Sweetser E [23, p.69] also considered the epistemic world as having a force-dynamic structure parallel to that of the real world Thus, the speech act’s own internal force-dynamic structure is reflected in the use of modal verbs

2.2.7 Politeness principles

In the scope of the research associated with cooperative interaction, it is crucial to touch upon cooperative and politeness principles which have received much attention lately

Leech [17] stated his principle of politeness as the following: once other things being equal, minimise the expression of beliefs which are unfavourable to the hearer and at the same time (but less important) maximise the expression of belief or beliefs, which are favourable to the hearer He also proposed six Interpersonal Maxims, adapted as follows:

a Tact Maxim:

Minimise hearers’ costs; maximise hearers’ benefit

Minimise disagreement between yourself and others;

maximise agreement between yourself and others

f Sympathy Maxim:

Minimise antipathy between yourself and others;

maximise sympathy between yourself and others

2.3 SUMMARY

This section has presented a literature review of Proclaim Its working definition has been built under the Appraisal framework by P.R.R White The related aspects considered as the preliminary information for the analysis of proclaim in the next chapters are also discussed, including Hanns and Palmer’s views of epistemic modality and evidentiality, Yule’s theory of speech acts, Talmy’s notion of force dynamics and Leech’s politeness principles On the preliminary information about Proclaim, I will present my method of study and result of study in the next chapters

CHAPTER 3 METHODS AND PROCEDURES

2) Setting up smaller corpora for PMs according to the style

This is done with the identification of the style of PMs not only in spoken but also in written English and Vietnamese For some PMs I will

decide whether they are more formally used in argumentative essays or informally used in dialogues of every speech

3) Classifying proclaim markers

This is done in terms of syntactic, semantic and pragmatic features In reference to the linguistic structures of PMs, the semantic category they belong to and the pragmatic functions they perform, I put them into distinctive groups

4) Describing and comparing proclaim markers in English with their counterparts in Vietnamese

This is executed with an interpretive contrastive analysis where I try to identify the similarities and differences of PMs in the two languages A comparison is made after a description of PMs in each of the three linguistic aspects

5) Discussing the findings

6) Suggesting some implications for English teaching and learning

3.2 DATA COLLECTION

A corpus of 500 samples of English proclaim markers and 500 samples

of Vietnamese proclaim markers were set up for each language The data were mainly collected from conversations, interviews or essays reproduced in novels, short stories, newspapers by native speakers/writers of English and Vietnamese

3.3 DESCRIPTION OF POPULATION AND SAMPLES

Samples of the study were lexical expressions including words, phrases and clauses realised as proclaim markers grouped under the broad class of adverbial disjuncts They were collected from different types of discourse in

both English and Vietnamese, e.g novels, short stories, articles, and transcription of interviews, ; not only from paper books and newspapers but also on the internet Here are my initial word lists of adverbial disjuncts for investigation

Table 3.1 The PMs in English

VERBS NOUNS ADJECTIVES ADVERBS

Acknowledge As a matter of fact Certain Actually

Admit Claim Clear Admittedly Affirm In fact Sure Certainly Agree No doubt True Clearly Assert No wonder Naturally Claim Of course Really

Contend

As for the Vietnamese list of lexical devices I include here a class of lexical units functioning as adverbs in English Ngu Thien Hung [3] proposed that these are structures which exist as a perfect whole and can hardly be divided apart into lexical and grammatical constituents This kind of structure

is called epistemic markers Generally, it is hard to recognise the head word in this structure He suggests that this structure functions like an adverb and can

be called quasi-adverbials Hoàng Tuệ [2] called it adverbials or adverbial equivalents (phó từ or trạng ngữ and ngữ tương đương với phó từ, trạng từ) Another Vietnamese linguist, Diệp Quang Ban [1] put this lexical device into

“phụ ngữ câu” For the facilitation of terminological terms, I would like to use

the technical term “adverb” here for the Vietnamese set phrases which share nearly all the linguistic features of adverbs in English

Table 3.2.: The PMs in Vietnamese

VERBS NOUNS ADJECTIVES ADVERBS

Chắc chắn Chắc chắn Hiển nhiên Dĩ nhiên

The analysis also looks into the contribution of each component into the shaping of the semantics of a proclaim marker: which element is the core

of the meaning of a proclaim marker and which is the specifier or modifier?

The occurrence of instances of style and content disjuncts of different kinds are counted to set up their frequency in discourse With this result, the difference in distribution of style and content disjuncts are established in comparison between English style and content disjuncts and their Vietnamese counterparts

The results of the analysis are then presented in mainly qualitative manner (in words and nominal scales) Frequency of style and content disjuncts in discourse are tabulated

3.5 RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY

As presented above, the data collection is mainly based on written and spoken discourses by native speakers of English and Vietnamese, and the data ensures to include variants in each language which align to objective findings However, due to the manual counting process and rather small corpus, the reliability of the research is, to some extent, not as expected

CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

This chapter presents and discusses the findings of the data analysis The result of the analysis is accounted on the syntactic, semantic and pragmatic basis The presentation of the linguistic features of PMs is made both in English and Vietnamese

4.1 SYNTACTIC CHARACTERISTICS OF PMS IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE

This section shows how PMs are formed and how they behave syntactically in the clausal structure First PMs are analysed in reference to the compositional structure of themselves and how their actual positions in the structure of clause reflect their syntactic roles in the utterance The syntactic analysis is closely associated to the identification of the location of PMs in the structure of functional layers of an utterance

PMs are distinguished in three positions for the declarative form of the clause of a simple sentence as follows:

Initial position: before the subject

Medial position: immediately before auxiliary or after auxiliary verbFinal position: after an intransitive verb, an object or a complement

4.1.1 Adverbial structures of PMs in English and Vietnamese

Adverbials in English and Vietnamese were found to be realised in a wide range of syntactic forms: single adverbs, adverbial phrases, and prepositional phrases which will be dealt with respectively

PMs of this kind in English are actually, admittedly, certainly, clearly, factually, naturally, predictably, really, surely, undeniably, undoubtedly, quite certainly, quite naturally, etc

Typically, their common positions are in the initial position of the

clausal structure, for example

(10) Certainly tears are given us to use Like all good gifts, they should be

(11) Surely man was not created to be an idle fellow; he was not set in this

universal orchard to stand still as a tree [84]

In Vietnamese: đúng là, đúng rồi, đúng thế, đúng vậy, hèn chi, hèn gì, quả nhiên, tất nhiên là, quả thực là, rõ ràng, thảo nào, thật tình, thật vậy, can

be considered markers functioning as adverbials in English

(13) Sinh, đúng là Sinh đang đứng bên cối nước, cái mũ nồi đen đen trên

đầu, đèn pin cắp trên nắp, lộ ra một khe sáng bé xíu [37, p.136] (14) Vừa đặt chân đến làng Giữa hôm qua, nhưng cô bắt đầu cảm nhận

được nỗi vất vả của cuộc sống nơi đây Thảo nào Khanh cứ bảo: “Em

về rồi khắc biết Anh chẳng muốn giới thiệu trước đâu.” [42, p.55]

(15) Rõ ràng tình yêu ấy không phải hướng về ông, mà hướng về chính gã

đệ tử “truyền nhân y bát” của ông [40, p.51]

4.1.2 Adjective structures of PMs in English and Vietnamese

In this study, proclaim markers are examined in the structure “verb + adjective + complement” The structure is usually used to convey the level of

personal certainty With a first person pronoun subject it shows the

speaker/writer’s strong belief about the information In English, they are I am certain, I’m sure, it’s clear, or it’s natural

(16) So I leave club, very happy The affair has now pretty well unveiled

itself I have not yet discovered motives, but I am certain it was Major

Durand who objected to murderously to the finding of his lost wife

[77]

(17) It’s inevitable your environment will influence what you do [126]

(18) Mới hơn mười năm mà các anh nhìn khu công nghiệp Bình Hòa…

không nổi, lẽ ra phải biết chỗ ấy không thể là khu công nghiệp Tầm

nhìn như thế làm sao quản lý, dân kêu là đúng rồi!” - Ông Khải nói

[87] (19) Đối tượng thi của HS là tác phẩm văn học, sự hiểu và tiếp nhận tác

4.1.3 Noun structures of PMs in English and Vietnamese

English has at its disposal the adverbial disjuncts in form of Noun

phrases such as in fact, as a matter of fact, of course, and without a doubt

This structure is composed of a noun as the head and is preceded by a preposition Traditionally, it is labelled a prepositional phrase In this study Iuse the term noun structure due to the fact that the head noun is lexical word that carries the lexical essential meaning This kind of noun phrase can function as one kind of adverbials takes either initial position or medial positions Some of them may take the initial position Let me consider the following examples

(20) In fact, the confidence of the people is worth more than money [114]

(21) Neither the Meades nor the Elsings would have spoken to him on the

street, but in a friend’s home they would, of course, have to be polite

(22) Now and then she put her hand up to her cheek where he had kissed

her and felt again the thrill of his lips and smiled at him He had not

Another kind of noun phrase can be used as proclaim markers: no doubt, the fact, a fact, the truth For example

(23) “Oh, no doubt it’s a great place to rest,” Eden agreed [76]

In Vietnamese: sự thật, lẽ tất nhiên, điều chắc chắn, có một thực tế, e.g

(24) Nói điều này với bạn, chúng tôi không hề muốn vuốt ve hay trấn an

(25) Lẽ tất nhiên, khi xác định xong mọi khía cạnh, cổ vật có thể rửa sạch

để trưng bày hay bán đi cũng không chậm gì [122]

4.1.4 Verb structures of PMs in English and Vietnamese

Such English verbs as acknowledge, admit, affirm, agree, and contend

can be employed in the structure These are performative or speech act verbs which can be found characteristically at the initial position in the structure of the clause or utterance For example

(26) I agree that women need to be part of the work force, of course They

have enormous stuff to contribute, but don’t neglect the raising of

In Vietnamese, instances of speech act verbs were also found in my corpus These are verbs which can also be found at the initial position in the

clausal structure of an utterance such as chắc chắn, công nhận For example

(27) Tôi chắc chắn Serena sẽ rất mạnh trong lần trở lại này [119]

(28) Tôi công nhận rằng sử dụng đèn compact rất tiết kiệm điện [69]

I also found instances of speech act verbs in the proclaim as the collocation with degree words that act as the specifier or modifier to strengthen the force of the performative verbs For example

(29) I had a good time with Burt Reynolds I must admit that Burt was

very generous He’s like a brother to me He really is amazing [85]

(30) Tôi xin khẳng định dù kinh phí có cấp đủ hay không thì ngành y tế

vẫn cùng các cơ quan ban ngành tìm biện pháp tháo gỡ để đảm bảo phục vụ tốt sức khỏe các cháu và phát triển bệnh viện [109]

4.2 THE SEMANTIC AND PRAGMATIC FEATURES OF PMS IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE

This section presents the semantic and pragmatic features of PMs in the reference with the notions of epistemic modality as the foundation for the analysis of the semantic ingredients encoded in the PMs Accordingly the speaker/writer’s attitude towards the proposition of the utterance will be judged as one of the basic motivations of the use of PMs in the proclaim Also, the nature of the information presented in the proposition of the proclaim should be taken into consideration as to identify another motivation

of PMs in the utterance As for a performative analysis of PMs in my study Iwould like to start with the presentation of the semantics of the verb structures

in English and Vietnamese which is the most characteristic type of PMs The analysis will be conducted basing on the assumptions of epistemic modality Accordingly, semantic notions such as factivity and evidentiality should be presented here as for the starting points

4.2.1 PMs in English and Vietnamese in view of Factivity

The analysis of instances of PMs in this study reveals that in most cases these markers were used mainly as epistemic markers that function as to

signal the speaker/writer’s attitude towards the truth of the proposition of the proclaim As a proclaim functions as to convey the addresser’s engagement to the proposition and to the addressee, PMs in statements as proclaims are specialised in manifesting the proposition as a fact or something like that On this semantic basis, the addresser wishes to invest his/her commitment and confidence into the presentation of a statement and wishes to show that he/she has evidence to present the state-of-affair mentioned in the proposition as a fact For example

(31) As a matter of fact, Gerry and I grew up in the same neighbourhood;

he was in school the same year with my sister [111]

(32) It is certain that concentration camps had a bad reputation with us

(33) We do acknowledge that coins lose their shine fast, meaning its

(34) “I invited you on a whim I don’t know why,” said the man, smiling

“We really didn’t think you would sit with us.” [112]

As can be seen from (31) - (34), the utterances in question are all structured with PMs of various forms from adverbs, adjectives, verbs and

nouns Such PMs as really, certain, acknowledge, as a matter of fact each of

which contains a lexical head conveying the meaning about the truth or

factuality or actuality As for really in (34), it serves to signal the epistemic

truth encoded in the semantics of the epistemic markers It serves a function

of epistemic grounding in that it specifies an expression relative to the speakers and the addressees and their spheres of knowledge [16, p.489] By uttering (46) the speaker was showing his epistemic commitment to the truth

of the proposition mentioned in the utterance It can be said that these markers

presuppose the existence of reality and imply the truth as far as the speaker and hearer’s knowledge is concerned In the same vein of analysis, Paradis [21, p.4] also puts that such markers as really can express epistemic modality

in the sense that it expresses the speaker’s judgement of the truth of the proposition based on what is known to be part of the reality The thing that should be taken into consideration is on what basis is the truth of proposition

is implied in these utterances? Here I can relate my analysis of the truth of proposition to the evidence that functions as background for the assertion of a proposition And the question here is whether the evidence in the context of the utterance in question is available in form of implicit evidence or explicit evidence

Take the following examples into consideration

(35) There is no winter sport at Montreaux

I beg your pardon, I come from Montreaux There is very certainly

winter sport on the Montreaux Oberland Bernois railway It would be false for you to deny that [49, p.271]

(36) Quả thật buổi học hôm sau dù có tới sáu vị đại biểu dự giờ mà cả lớp

(37) Nguyệt nhắm mắt, không dám nhìn trời hay nhìn nước, trông ngực đập thình thình Lát sau thấy Khanh bật cười bảo: “Đến nơi rồi, em mở

mắt ra đi” Nguyệt mới thôi nhắm tịt mắt Đúng là sang bên làng Giữa

rồi, lũ trẻ đang chơi thấy khách lạ bèn bu lại xem [42, p.42] (38) Cảnh trí, trang phục rực rỡ, hoành tráng, ca khúc vui tươi cũng vốn là

sở trường của IDECAF, thảo nào chinh phục khán giả từ đầu tới cuối

[97]

In (35) in English and (36-38) in Vietnamese, the PMs were used with

an evidential background for the manifestation of the speaker’s certainty In

(35), the proclaim with certainly reveals that the speaker had evidence available for the justification of the truth of the proposition: There is very winter sport on the Montreaux Oberland Bernois railway The evidence in

this context is explicit for the grounding of the truth of the proposition of the

utterance and this semantic entity is linguistically actualized as I come from Montreaux In the interpretation of the context of utterance, there is a topos to

be understood and accepted here that a local person in a certain place should know well many things related to this place This can be judged as an antecedent for a logical conclusion to be drawn by a normal person: If I come from a certain place X I should know well things about X In (37) and (38)

đúng là and thảo nào signal that the speaker/ writer drawn the conclusion

from the evidence available which allows him/ her to make his/ her confirmation of the proposition mentioned in the proclaim As in (37), the evidence can be interpreted as the sensory one revealing that the source of

evidence is visual: Nguyệt mới thôi nhắm tịt mắt The proposition sang bên làng Giữa was represented as something visual which acts as the evidential background for the proclaim Also, in (38) the explicit proposition: Cảnh trí, trang phục rực rỡ, hoành tráng, ca khúc vui tươi cũng vốn là sở trường của IDECAF works as the evidential antecedence for an asserted conclusion: chinh phục khán giả từ đầu tới cuối whose plausible logics is marked by thảo nào In some cases, the presentation of evidence can be postponed to meet the

expectation of the hearer/ reader as in (39) below

(39) Tôi đã sử dụng ADSL qua vài nhà cung cấp và đương nhiên cũng

chẳng thoát qui luật trên Trong giai đoạn “khốn khổ” hiện tại: để mở

một trang báo Tuổi Trẻ tôi phải mất một phút, trang “Kiểm tra tốc độ

download “của Trung tâm Tin học Hà nội mất gần bảy phút! Với các Website nước ngoài còn bi đát hơn thế nữa [118]

In other cases, the evidence is implicit and encoded in the semantics of PMs as one kind of built-in or self-evidence This semantic entity is understood as the underlying semantic ingredient functioning as the background for the truth attesting function of PMs in proclaims The utterances as proclaims structured with PMs of this type have an implicature that if challenged, the speaker/ writer can provide the evidence at his/her

disposal as in (39) illustrated above In this context, the marker đương nhiên signals that the proposition Tôi cũng chẳng thoát qui luật trên should be

accepted as a matter of fact or something taken for granted The justification

of the validity of the proposition with evidence is not needed if the speaker is not requested to do so And if the speaker/ writer has an internal compelling

to make clear or illustrate this proposition he/she will provide the evidence

later in the following parts in the same stretch of talk as in (39): Trong giai đoạn “khốn khổ” hiện tại: để mở một trang báo Tuổi Trẻ tôi phải mất một phút, trang “Kiểm tra tốc độ download”của Trung tâm Tin học Hà nội mất gần bảy phút! Với các Website nước ngoài còn bi đát hơn thế nữa

This kind of self-evidence can also be seen in the use of PMs in

proclaim with clear, obvious, rõ ràng, hiển nhiên in English and Vietnamese

in the following examples

(40) It is clear you leaped upon this Jennison with vigorous and

(41) It was obvious to Warren and Proudhon that, as soon as

individualists should no longer be protected by their fellows in

anything but personal occupancy and cultivation of land, ground-rent would disappear, and so usury have one less leg to stand on [136]

(42) Nhưng, quy định phải đăng ký danh sách trước ngày 1/10 rõ ràng

cũng là 1 quyết định bất chấp thực tế [32] (43) Ông thường ngồi một mình trong căn phòng chất đầy sách vở cổ xưa,

tự mình đứng nhìn mình như nhìn một bộ xương khô Và phủ Tường

Vi hiển nhiên đã thành nấm mồ của ông! [40, p.44] From the assumptions about the semantic ingredients of PMs such as factivity and evidence, (34) - (38) can respectively have the analogue as follows

(34) In accordance with the evidence of reality We really didn't think you would sit with us

(35) In accordance with the evidence of reality I come from Montreaux (36) In accordance with the evidence of reality the following day, though there were six guests, all the students in class were really well-behaved (37) In accordance with the evidence of reality she arrived at Giua Village (38) In accordance with the evidence of reality IDECAF attracted the

audience from beginning to end

From this analysis I can say that the interpretation of PMs in a particular proclaim is highly context dependent The evidence in the context can be linguistically actualized or suppressed, i.e this kind of evidence is implied as assumptions from the topos or encyclopaedic knowledge or in some cases simply the speaker/writer’s subjective belief Thus at this stage,

the semantics of such PMs as as a matter of fact, really, certainly, actually, it

is true that, I/ we know, we/ I acknowledge in English and đúng là, thực tế là,

sự thật là, quả thật, thảo nào, etc in Vietnamese can be formulated as

I say PM [P]

I know that P is true to the best of my knowledge

In reference to the evidence as part of the reality I say that P is true

Also, from what has been mentioned in section 2.2.4 about the convergence and divergence of the two described world and reference world, the semantics of (31) and (36) can be analyzed as follows

By saying “As a matter of fact, Gerry and I grew up in the same

neighbourhood; he was in school the same year with my sister”,

I assume that the state-of-affairs Gerry and I grew up in the same neighbourhood; he was in school the same year with my sister is believed to

coincide with the reference world or part of the reality

By saying “Quả thật buổi học hôm sau dù có tới sáu vị đại biểu dự giờ

mà cả lớp vẫn ngồi rất ngoan”, I assume that the state-of-affairs (the

following day, although there were six guests, all the students in class were

really well-behaved) buổi học hôm sau cả lớp vẫn ngồi rất ngoan với sáu vị đại biểu dự giờ is viewed as the factual state of actualized event in the

4.2.2 The semantics of PMs in English and Vietnamese in view of speech act verbs

In most of the cases, a typical proclaim can be characterized with the occurrence of a speech act verb which signals the performative force of an assertive statement My corpus yields a great number of instances of PMs in

the form of speech act verbs such as state, claim, contend, acknowledge, affirm, confirm in English and thừa nhận, công nhận, nhìn nhận in

Vietnamese Though issues related to this group of PMs are by nature pragmatics oriented, I would like to present some of their preliminary semantic characteristics here for the fact that the discussion of their semantics

is much closely associated to those semantic aspects of the proposition asserted by the speech act encoded by the speech act verb Among these are the information status of the proposition, the speaker/writer’s attitude towards this proposition, his/her illocutionary purpose of using the speech act verb in his/her proclaim

4.2.3 The information status of the proposition asserted in a proclaim

As mentioned in section 4.2.1 about the factivity and evidence as the two main semantic ingredients of PMs, the speaker/writer’s attitude can be manifested in the use of PMs to judge the truth along with the evidence available for the proclaim Along with these two semantic ingredients, force and dynamics can be further discussed here as the main components in shaping the semantics of the speech act verbs, to be mentioned here as the assertive force and motivation of the marker

4.2.3.1 Truth, plausibility and morality

In the reality of communication, not all proclaims with epistemic markers are used concerning only the factivity or the truth of the proposition

Apart from instances of proclaims with PMs where the speaker/ writer’s main purpose is to assert the truth of the proposition I also found instances of PMs used in proclaim to signal the speaker’s confidence and commitment about what he considered as morally right or wrong, plausible or non-plausible as far as domains of morality or plausibility is concerned

Take the following examples into consideration

(44) I am a believer, but I affirm that in public buildings the law of the

Republic overrides religious rules [124]

(45) It is, I claim, nonsense to say that it does not matter which individual

man acted as the nucleus for the change It is precisely this that makes history unpredictable into the future [72]

(46) I confirm that I will be honest and not abuse a patient's trust in me

For example, I will not establish improper personal relationships with patients or their close relatives [55] (47) I believe the troops are wasting their time in Iraq Politicians like Blair and Bush keep saying that Saddam was a threat because he had WMD, but the other day Bush admitted the intelligence was wrong Yes, we do admit that Saddam killed many civilians but that is not

In (44) and (45) where the speaker’s purpose of asserting the truth of the proposition clearly manifests itself in the use of PMs and the content of the proposition asserted, the same thing cannot be said to (46), and (47) In the former case, the factual status of the state-of-affairs can be judged against the present state of actualized event or epistemic knowledge As in (47), we can say readily that the P [Saddam killed many civilians] can be judged to be true or false according to the actual circumstance in the reference

world In the latter case, the thing to be asserted can be judged only in terms the speaker’s subjective view about the good or the bad side of the issue in

question As in (46), the thing to be emphasized for the assertion is the moral proposition of a doctor’s honesty and how he/she makes use of patient’s trust properly By making a proclaim on these propositions, the speaker/writer just

emphasize on what is right and what is moral to a doctor and the justification

of the rightness and truth of the claim is in the future rather than in the past or

at the present as far as the state of the actualized events of the reference world

is concerned

As compared, instances of PMs such as affirm could be found in

proclaims where the speaker usually provides with evidence to support his/her claim, as in (48) below

(48) I am not a Christian revivalist-I have no religion to recommend and

none to believe in I merely affirm, on the evidence of the history of

civilizations, that a religion is a necessary element in any organic

by making a proclaim should be taken into account

As has been mentioned, P can be something concerning a truth or something concerning the morality or something concerning the goodness or the badness Accordingly, these characteristics may have influence on the speaker’s choice or decision to speak out the proposition in a particular situation The motivation of making a proclaim can be a compelling reason to speak out the truth or to state a view or just to let someone know something that the addressee cannot hide Let me consider the following example

(49) I confess that I have difficulty praying much of the time [108]

As seen from (49), the state-of-affairs mentioned in the proposition of the proclaim was something related to the undesirable aspects of the situation

in which the speaker/writer was involved accidentally or deliberately In (49) the state-of-affairs [I am compelled to laugh at inappropriate times] can be viewed as a bad behavior under the principle of morality

This semantic ingredient can also be found in the instances of PMs

such as I admit, I concede though with lesser negative factor as far as the

speaker/writer’s undesirable aspects are concerned, as in the examples below

(50) I concede that I overestimated the intelligence of the American

people I concede that I put too much faith in America's youth [60] (51) Well I do admit that I use net from my office, but this has not ever

raised a smallest of dissent on the part of my boss This is because it is

a kind of de-stresser to me and I am more efficient if I get this kind of

As in (50), the actual situations mentioned in the proposition was not necessarily the speaker/writer’s errors or faults Rather, they are something unpleasant to talk about in the speaker’s viewpoint and accordingly, they suggest to some extent the addresser’s reluctance to claim the proposition

Though this reluctance is not so strong as suggested by the proposition

claimed in the utterance marked by I confess, it is viewed as some kind of

barrier that contribute to the speaker’s hesitation to utter his/her thought However, the distinction can be made here is about the speaker’s direct involvement in the incident or current state of actual event expressed in the

proposition As with PMs I confess P, P is something that suggests the badness or shame about the addresser Utterances with PMs like I admit, I

concede do not necessarily convey a cry for shame about the speaker/ writer

As in (50), the proposition [I overestimated the intelligence of the American people] was represented as a speaker’s critical judgement The state-of-affairs mentioned in (51) actually verifies this point though the incident really involved the speaker in the situation

In Vietnamese, I also found instances of proclaims with PMs functioning to signal the speaker’s reluctance to utter the proposition about the state-of-affairs where the speaker/writer were directly or indirectly involved in something undesirable or unpleasant In some cases, the badness

of the state-of-affairs (as viewed by the speaker) was manifested clearly as in proclaims marked with PMs like thú thực, quả thực, nói thực as in (52), (53)

and (54) below

(52) Nhưng …thú thật, cả nhà chỉ có độc mỗi cái giường [36, p.91] (53) Đẻ ra nó nhưng quả thật là tôi chưa hiểu hết được nó [36, p.219] (54) Chuyện Điện Biên ấy mà, nói thực là mình không biết nhiều lắm

In the above mentioned examples, the speaker viewed the situation mentioned in the proposition of utterance as something undesirable and even shameful that he found that he himself was responsible for these unpleasant

things As in (52), the actual event that there was only a bed was really

something difficult for the speaker to utter this to the hearer who wanted to spend the night in that house As in (53), the truth that the father’s failure to understand his son’s character was counted as a shame and this proposition was so painful to speak out In (54), it was really unpleasant thing for a poet

to uncover his confidence about his ignorance or insufficient experience of the reality which was actually needed for his composing Accordingly, the reluctance to assert these things verbally can be said to be a strong barrier for the speaker to realize them in the utterance

This semantic ingredient can be found with instances of proclaims with

the presence of the PM tôi thừa nhận, chúng tôi thừa nhận which signal a

presumption that the thing to be presented can be interpreted with a negative view The examples (55) – (56) below reveal that the propositions to be asserted were something directly or indirectly involving the speaker/writer’s responsibility

(55) "Chúng tôi thừa nhận có sai sót trong việc bảo mật thông tin về chi

tiết cuộc gọi gốc của khách hàng” [71]

(56) Tôi thừa nhận bằng cấp là quan trọng nhưng quan trọng hơn nữa là

kinh nghiệm của các bạn khi va chạm thực tế [105] Although the PMs tôi thừa nhận, quả thật là can be characteristically

recognized with the emphasis of truth or truth attesting as its dominating semantic ingredient, “badness or unpleasantness involving the addresser in the state-of-affairs can be established as one of its semantic component concerning the information status of P