ابعاد معنایی نقش‌نمای گفتمانی«آخه» در بیان روابط علّی از منظر (بین)ذهنی‌شدگی

این مطالعه به بررسی ابعاد معنایی نقش‌نمای گفتمانی «آخه» در بیان روابط علّی از منظر (بین) ذهنی‌شدگی می‌پردازد. پژوهش حاضر مطالعه‌ای توصیفیتحلیلی است و داده‌های آن پیکره‌ای همزمانی متشکل از زبان روزمرۀ به‌کاررفته در وبلاگ‌ها، مصاحبه‌های تلویزیونی و گفتگوهای روزمره است. بررسی داده‌ها نشان می‌دهد واژۀ «آخه» تحت فرایند دستوری‌شدگی در سطح جمله و گفتمان قرار گرفته و به پیشرفته‌ترین مراحل (بین) ذهنی‌شدگی رسیده است. در واقع، مطابق پیش‌بینی سویتسر (1990) و دِگاند و فاگارد (2012) در موارد مشابه، این عبارت علاوه‌بر بیان روابط علّی عینی، به‌عنوان یک نقش‌نمای گفتمانی، برای بیان انواع روابط علّی ذهنی یا روابط توجیهی نیز به کار می‌رود. به عبارت دیگر، گویشوران زبان فارسی از این عبارت برای بیان انواع روابط توجیهی معرفتی، کارگفتی و متنی استفاده می‌کنند. کاربردهای فوق، بیانگر وابستگی بیشتر «آخه» به موقعیت گفتمان و نشان دهندۀ درجات پیشرفتۀ دستوری‌شدگی گفتمانی واژۀ مذکور است.

The Discourse Marker of “âxe” (‘because’/‘but’) in Persian: An Intersubjectification Account

AbstractThis study investigates the functional complexity of the discourse marker “âxe” (‘because’/‘but’) in Persian to express causal relations from the perspective of (inter) subjectification. To this end, we have adopted a descriptiveanalytic approach to conduct the research. The data of our investigation come from certain synchronic corpora of every day conversations found in the Persian weblogs, talk shows interviews, as well as notes taken from every day talks. The findings indicate that “âxe” has undergone grammaticalization at both sentence and discourse levels, and it has reached the advanced stages of (inter) subjectification. In fact, in line with Sweetser (1990) and Degand and Fagard’s (2012) models, “âxe” expresses both objective and subjective causal relations. In fact, Persian speakers make use of this expression to express epistemic, speech act, and textual justification. These functions are indicative of increased dependency of “âxe” on discourse situation, showing the increased grammaticalization and (inter) subjectification it requires to materialize such discourse functions. Keywords: âxe, causal relations, grammaticalization, (inter) subjectification IntroductionAn extensive body of research in linguistics deals with discourse/pragmatic markers, the expressions that mainly contain procedural rather than propositional meanings. The development of discourse markers often involves a process of ‘(inter)subjectification’ (Traugott Dasher, 2002). This means a shift from meanings pertaining to the characterization of the objective world will be projected/mapped initially to other aspects of meanings involving the expression of personal attitudes of the speaker (subjectification) and then to meanings linked to speakerhearer interactions (i.e., intersubjectification). In line with this body of researches, Discourse Grammar treats two separate but interrelated domains for discourse processing: Sentence Grammar (SG) and Thetical Grammar (TG). The former deals with the structure and meaning of the sentences, while the latter deals with the organization of discourse at the level beyond the sentence as well as the relationship between linguistic materials and the contextual situation of discourse. As such, Discourse Grammar considers discourse markers as theticals resulting from grammaticalization at discourse level. Components of discourse situation identified in Discourse Grammar can well explain the expressions used to describe the semantic changes involved in the grammaticalization/pragmaticalization of discourse markers. Thus, it is not surprising that the meaning of theticals, including discourse markers, has been described by scholars such as Traugott Dasher (2002) with reference to concepts such as subjectivity (component of speaker attitude) and intersubjectification (component of speakerlistener interaction). Also, Der (2010) as well as Degand and Vandenbergen (2011) have predicted that these elements take on several major functions, which are textual, attitudinal (subjective) and interactive (intersubjective) functions.The present study, considering the perspective of Discourse Grammar and the above researchers, investigates the functional complexity of the discourse marker “âxe” (‘because’/‘but’) in Persian to express causal relations from the perspective of (inter) subjectification. By introducing the categories of CONTENT, EPISTEMIC, and SPEECH ACT use of causal conjunctions, Sweetser (1990) argues that in English, some differences can be observed in the use of backward as well as forward causal connectives with respect to the above domains. In recent years, however, there have been proposals to replace her threedomain distinctions with a subjectivity scale of speaker involvement (Traugott Dasher, 2002). Degand and Fagard (2012), for instance, add TEXTUAL relations to the Sweetser’s domains and describes them as noncontent causal relations, namely EPISTEMIC, SPEECH ACT, and TEXTUAL; each one is more subjective relative to the following one forming JUSTIFICATION relations. Materials and MethodsThis research is a descriptiveanalytical study to examine the pragmatic meanings of “âxe” by looking at a bulk of authentic data. It is part of a larger project investigating the grammaticalization of discourse markers in the colloquial Persian. Its data come from a variety of sources building a synchronic corpus of every day conversations found in Persian weblogs (blogs) and every day conversations observed by the researchers. In fact, all examples consist of attested data in contemporary Persian. Such data mainly maintain the nature of the conversational or colloquial Persian which can form a useful corpus for discoursepragmatic studies. Discussion and ConclusionThis paper argues that “âxe” (‘because’/‘but’) in Persian serves a number of pragmatic and discourse functions. The main line of argument focuses on the process of (inter) subjectification involved in the development of “âxe” as a discourse marker. The findings indicate that “âxe” has undergone the process of grammaticalization at both sentence and discourse levels, and it has reached the advanced stages of (inter) subjectification. In fact, in accordance with Sweetser (1990) and Degand and Fagard’s (2012) claims, “âxe” expresses both objective and subjective causal relations. The main point concerning different functions of the “âxe” delineates the fact that Persian speakers make use of this word to express epistemic, speech act, and textual justification. It is worth mentioning that such functions are indicative of increased dependency of “âxe” on discourse situation, and as a result we observe a kind of increased grammaticalization and (inter)subjectification in its development.