Comparison of "fei" and "aber"

Stefan Hinterwimmer,Cornelia Ebert

doi:10.21248/zaspil.60.2018.477

Abstract

This paper compares the modal particle fei (Schlieben-Lange, 1979; Thoma, 2009)with the modal particle/sentence adverb aber (not to be confused with the conjunction aber,‘but’). Intuitively, both items express some form of contrast and correction. We will show thatboth are special among discourse particles in the following sense: They make a contributionthat is interpreted at a level distinct from the level where at-issue content (Potts, 2005) isinterpreted, as is standard for modal particles (see Gutzmann, 2015 and the references therein).But more interestingly, they exclusively relate to propositions that have not entered theCommon Ground via being the at-issue content of an assertion made by the addressee.Keywords: discourse particles, assertions, at-issue content, presuppositions, conventionalimplicatures, conversational implicatures.

Highlights

In this paper we compare the Bavarian modal particle fei (Schlieben-Lange, 1979; Thoma, 2009), which does not have a direct counterpart in standard German, with the modal particle/sentence adverb aber, which exists in Bavarian as well as in standard German
We will show that both are special among discourse particles in the following sense, : They make a contribution that is interpreted at a level distinct from the level where at-issue content (Potts, 2005) is interpreted, as is standard for modal particles
They exclusively relate to propositions that have not entered the Common Ground via being the at-issue content of an assertion made by the addressee

Summary

Introduction

In this paper we compare the Bavarian modal particle fei (Schlieben-Lange, 1979; Thoma, 2009), which does not have a direct counterpart in standard German, with the modal particle/sentence adverb aber (not to be confused with the conjunction aber, ‘but’), which exists in Bavarian as well as in standard German. In the case of (18), Paula’s utterance indicates that she believes neither the proposition denoted by Tom’s reaction nor its negation, i.e. she considers it both possible that the book is interesting and that it is not interesting – otherwise there would be no point in making the utterance in the first place In such a situation, the addition of fei is perfectly felicitous, while oba is degraded ( far from being infelicitous). That is the case when the speaker’s assumption that the addressee at least considers a proposition contradicting the propositional content of the prejacent of fei to be a likely option is inferred on the basis of contextual information or general background knowledge It is the case if the presuppositions or conversational or conventional implicatures of a recent utterance by the addressee entail such a proposition. Asserting p would have been sufficient to make the conflict between the speaker’s and the addressee’s beliefs maximally prominent

The analysis of oba

Conclusion and outlook