Primary Interjections Research Articles

Междометия и междометные комплексы в пьесах А.Н. Островского

An analysis of the use of interjections and interjection complexes in the plays of A.N. Ostrovsky was carried out, whose 200th birthday is celebrated all over the world this year. The playwright’s works significantly changed the Russian theater; ordinary people, representatives of the merchant class and the lower social classes appeared on the stage. They spoke the folk language, in which dialectisms, vernacular units, proverbs, sayings, and phraseological units were widely used. There important component of folk speech are interjections. They represent a complex part of speech with contradictory lexical-semantic and grammatical properties. Among them there are units with non-standard phonetic composition. Attempts to convey such interjections by means of the alphabet lead to the use of traditional notation, which very approximately reflects their real sound appearance (ugh), which becomes the cause of ethnospecific forms of transmission of such physical phonations in different languages, and this causes difficulties in their translation. At the same time, it is hardly worth talking about a special phonetic system of interjections, since the overwhelming majority of primary units (well, ah, ah, ba, wow, alas, and many others) consist of standard phonemes of the language, and their prosody generally corresponds to the prosodic characteristics vocatives and other lingual units. Interjections are widely represented in the texts of A.N. Ostrovsky’s plays. A significant place in the speech of the characters is occupied by primary interjections, with the help of which the author reflects the diversity of feelings and experiences of the characters. Among the most frequent words in plays by A.N. Ostrovsky includes interjections, well, ah. In almost all works there are also primary interjections oh, eh, hey, etc. Secondary interjections in the plays of A.N. Ostrovsky is mainly represented by the interjectivated words God, God, Lord, used both independently and as part of interjectional constructions (God bless, God be with you, etc.). In many cases, it is not easy to draw a line between interjection and religious use of these units in the speech of characters.

ENGLISH EMOTIVES IN TABASARAN TRANSLATION ALISAH AYLAMATNAN VILAYATDI

The article gives a general description of interjection as an emotive. Approaches and techniques of translating interjections from English into Tabasaran are considered on the example of L. Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland and its Tabasaran translation Alisah Aylamatnan Vilayatdi performed by G. Omarova. The relevance of the research lies in the increased attention to the languages of small nations and the issue of translation. The lack of a theoretical basis for the theory and practice of translation into Tabasaran is the main problem of the study. The purpose of the study is to identify the features of Tabasaran translation as well as the main methods of translation. The research methods are the analytical review, analysis of the scientific literature on the problem of interjection classification and the comparative method that allows to highlight the linguistic features of the original language and translation most vividly, being the basis to analyze the linguistic and cultural and cognitive plans.
 Results of the study. The most popular ways of translating primary interjections into the Tabasaran language are equivalent with elements of tripling, transcription, compensation and omission. The most popular ways of translating secondary interjections into the Tabasaran language are modulation, integral transformation, equivalent translation, addition and omission.

INTERJECTION IN ENGLISH COMIC ONLINE ENTITLED “LINKED SOUL”

This study aims to describe the interjection words used in the Linked soul online comic. This study used descriptive qualitative method. The data source is the Linked soul online comic in English. The results of the study are as follows. First, based on the type of interjection used in the comic, the researchers found 20 primary interjections and 10 secondary interjections. Second, based on its meaning, interjection can be divided into four (emotive, cognitive, conative, and phatic). Third, from the four interjection words, emotive occupies the top position (17), followed by cognitive (8), conative (4) and phatic (1). The total amount of interjection content in volume 1,3 and 5 found 36 interjections. 28 among them are the primary type and the eight interjections for secondary type.

УНИВЕРСАЛЬНОСТЬ И ЛИНГВОСПЕЦИФИЧНОСТЬ ПЕРВИЧНЫХ МЕЖДОМЕТИЙ В РУССКОМ, АНГЛИЙСКОМ И КАЗАХСКОМ ЯЗЫКАХ (на материале художественной прозы и драматургии)

Primary interjections consist of a group of prototypical units, which are associated with reflex cries by their origin, have an oral form called a vocal gesture, and written, conventional ones, with national characteristics. Analysis of similar features in pronunciation, spelling and semantics of prototypical units and linguistic differences of other units reveals universal characteristics of a limited number of prototypical interjections and linguistic specifity of the majority of primary interjections. Examples drawn from English, Russian and Kazakh languages demonstrate the ability of primary interjections to express the ambivalence of feelings and emotions. The article focuses on distinguishing instinctive and discursive categories of primary interjections concentrating on the mode of their production and purpose of use. The first category includes addressless exclamations that express a reaction to what is happening, as well as relevant feelings and emotions. The second group includes units that are explicitly or implicitly intended for the addressee of speech, which are used for communicative purposes. In contrast to instinctive interjections expressing spontaneous feelings and reactions, discursive units may reflect unreal emotions that the interlocutor expects to be demonstrated. In a pragmatic aspect, the use of primary interjections is considered to convey an ironic attitude to the subject of speech. The article provides an overview of language units that formally resemble primary interjections and make their identification difficult.

The (crucial yet neglected) category of interjections in Xhosa

Abstract The present paper analyzes the category of interjections in Xhosa within a prototype approach. The evidence demonstrates the robustness and internal complexity of the interjectional category. Interjections ranges from canonical and asystematic to non-canonical and (relatively) systematic, with emotive primary interjections entertaining the highest extent of interjectionality and asystematicity.

Interjections in Biblical Aramaic: A Radial Model

Abstract This article examines the lexical class of interjections in Biblical Aramaic through the framework of an interjectional prototype and its functional (semantic and pragmatic) and formal (phonetic, morphological, and syntactic) characteristics. The authors analyse eight interjectional lexemes or constructional patterns, attested in twenty-four uses, for their compliance to the canonical prototype. The evidence reveals significant variation in the interjections’ canonicity: high canonicity in primary interjections, semi-canonicity in nearly primary interjections, and low canonicity in secondary interjections.

Comment: Evidence for Basicness from Noise-like Interjections of Emotions

Goddard (2014) proposes a three-partite division of emotive interjections, which is helpful in delineating this heterogeneous set of phenomena. The distinction also explains inconsistencies between Goddard’s and previous findings: While his study demonstrates variability across languages in word-like primary interjections, previous work investigating noise-like interjections has found evidence for universality. Such cross-culturally consistent, categorical perception of emotional signals can be explained as emerging from bottom–up information without the need for top–down learning via language or interjections.

Interjections in the Performance of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice

Three data sets of primary and secondary interjections were compared: (1) the original interjections written into the text of Jane Austen's (1813/1994) novel Pride and prejudice; (2) the interjections read aloud in commercial recordings by six professional readers of the entire text of the novel; (3) the interjections spoken by actresses and actors in the film production (Birtwistle and Langton in Pride and prejudice [TV Mini-series]. London: BBC TV, 1995) whose script, despite modest selectiveness, adheres most closely of all film versions to Austen's original text. Overall, the respective frequencies of occurrence of interjections were 136 < 141 < 398. Of the 136 interjections in Austen's printed text, 96% were attributable to women's roles, particularly Elizabeth Bennet and her mother. The second of these figures (141) is an average across all six readers. Hence, readers added a very modest number of interjections. But the actresses and actors added a large number of interjections. The dramatic oral expressiveness of the film performance is largely carried by and reflected in the actresses' and to a lesser extent in the actors' use of these primary interjections. These findings can well be related to Nübling's (Zeitschrift für Semiotik 26:11-45, 2004, Duden: Die Grammatik (pp 573-640). Mannheim: Dudenverlag, 2005) hypothesis of a spectrum of interjectional expressivity. But Ameka's (J Pragmat 18:101-118, 1992) linguistic hypothesis that pauses will both precede and follow interjections was once again found to be empirically groundless. A large percentage (96%) of the interjections in the film performance served the function of initializing various units of discourse, either after a pause before articulatory phrases, or before a sentence and/or turn. Both the emotional and initiating functions of interjections are characteristic of conceptual and medial orality rather than of conceptual and medial literacy. Accordingly, their usage throws further light on a theory of spontaneous spoken discourse.

Interjections as pragmatic markers

Interjections in everyday talk routinely function as pragmatic markers, initiating utterances and relating them to the foregoing interaction. In turn-initial position, one finds both primary interjections like oh and mhm and secondary interjections like wow and boy. Much of the interactional significance of primary interjections derives from their characteristic position as turn initiators, and much of their meaning in any particular case depends on their intonation contour. Particularly secondary interjections display a range of functions, first acting as parallel pragmatic markers, but also in functions beyond parallel markers, namely with typical discourse marker functions of signaling contrast, elaboration and transition. On the basis of several large corpora of English conversation, this paper seeks to demonstrate the open-ended nature of the class of interjections, which apparently accepts an unlimited number of new items. Despite their variability, the pragmatic functions of ever new interjections seem always to be clear to participants in the concrete context. Interjections represent a large, potentially infinitely extendable class of items, unlike the relatively circumscribed, closed classes of other pragmatic markers, and their pragmatic marker functions follow from their general status as expressions of shifts in cognitive states of various kinds. Thus, I argue in favor of considering interjections a sui generis class with recurrent pragmatic functions, and seek to explain their pragmatic characteristics as far as possible in universal terms.

From proper name to primary interjection

This paper is concerned with interjections that have evolved from nouns. Looking at a subclass of interjections, so-called expletives like gee!, jeeze!, gosh!, crikey!, it will be shown how primary interjections regularly evolve from religious names (here Jesus, God, Christ) via secondary interjections (Jesus!, God!, Christ!). Four stages can be distinguished: I proper name Jesus II secondary interjection Jesus! III phonological modification of Jesus! IV primary interjection gee! The “standard” model for subjectification in grammaticalization, Traugott and Dasher’s Invited Inferencing Theory of Semantic Change (2002), which focuses on the speaker as initiator of change, suffices to explain the gradual process through which the secondary interjection Jesus! has evolved through the repeated use of Jesus in invocations, oaths and prayers. Moreover it is claimed that the syntactic position of Jesus in these uses — sentence-initial and separated from the rest of the sentence — played a crucial role in the emergence of the interjection. Invited inferencing, however, fails to explain the emergence of gee!. It will be shown with corpus data that gee! emerged rather abruptly. The meaning of gee! is different from the meaning of Jesus! from its very beginning, and — in contrast to the process through which the secondary interjection Jesus! emerged — there are no transitional stages attested where both the meaning of Jesus! and the meaning of gee! can be inferred. It will be argued that this change was hearer-based and that semantic stability and relationships between words are determined by aspects of phonological transparency. As a result of the clipping of Jesus! (speakers did not want to “take the name of the Lord in vain”), which yielded gee!, the semantic base of gee! became phonologically obscured. Accordingly the hearer had to infer the meaning of gee! from the context of its occurrence alone — consequently gee! differed in meaning from Jesus! straightaway. The OED will be used as a corpus for the diachronic study (cf. Fischer 1992 and Hoffmann 2004 for a discussion of how the OED can be used as a historical corpus). The synchronic use of the forms discussed will be illustrated with examples from the British National Corpus and from the GoogleGroups newsgroups (cf. Bergh 2005 for a discussion of whether and how the Internet can be used as corpus).

Where Do Interjections Come From? A Psycholinguistic Analysis of Shaw’s Pygmalion

Starting from our recent findings regarding emotional and initializing functions of interjections in TV and radio interviews (Kowal & O'Connell, 2004b; O'Connell & Kowal, in press; O'Connell, Kowal, & Ageneau, 2005), we used the book and script of Shaw (1916/1969) and the audiotape of the motion picture (Pascal, Asquith, & Howard, 1938) Pygmalion to investigate how actors use interjections to express emotions. The following hypotheses were tested: (1) The actors use the written cues selectively in their oral performance by substituting, adding, and deleting interjections; (2) primary interjections added by the actors are less conventional than those in the written text; (3) durations and number of syllables of Eliza Doolittle's spoken renditions of her signature interjection ah-ah-ah-ow-ow-ow-oo do not correlate with the length in letters and syllables of the written versions; and (4) there is no evidence for Ameka's (1992b, 1994) characterization of interjections as temporally isolated, i.e., preceded and followed by silent pauses, in consequence of their syntactic isolation. Our findings confirmed all the hypotheses except for one unexpectedly significant correlation between number of syllables in Eliza Doolittle's signature interjection in the written version and duration in seconds of the spoken version thereof. The common thread throughout these data is the actor's need to personalize emotions in a dramatic performance--by means of interjections other than those provided in the written text. In this process of personalization, the emotional and initializing functions of interjections are confirmed.