Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T15:39:23.791Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Control and dominion: Factivity and mood choice in Spanish

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2014

Rainer Vesterinen
Rainer Vesterinen*
Affiliation:
Stockholm University
*
Correspondence addresses: Rainer Vesterinen, Department of Spanish, Portuguese and Latin American Studies, Stockholm University, Universitetsvägen 10b, 10691 Stockholm, Sweden. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present paper analyses the meaning of Spanish mood in factive contexts from a Cognitive Grammar perspective. It is argued that terms like assertion and presupposition do not explain the semantics of the subjunctive. Rather, they constitute an initial classification for finding a conceptually grounded explanation of it. The hypothesis is put forward that mood choice in factive contexts can be explained by the elaboration of Maldonado's (1995) notions of dominion and control. On the one hand, the conceptualizer has a low degree of effective control over the described event in presupposed contexts where the subjunctive mood occurs. On the other hand, presupposed contexts with the verb in the indicative mood equates with epistemic control over the described event. Thus, it is argued that the meaning of the subjunctive mood is related to the conceptualizer's epistemic dominion, and to the dominion of effective control. An additional analysis of the subjunctive mood in volitional, causative and perceptual contexts corroborates the initial claim.

Keywords

assertionCognitive Grammarcontroldominionnon-assertionpresupposition
Type
Research Article
Information
Language and Cognition , Volume 4 , Issue 1 , March 2012 , pp. 43 - 64
Copyright
Copyright © UK Cognitive Linguistics Association 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Achard, M. 1993. Complementation in French and Spanish: A Cognitive Grammar approach. San Diego: University of California dissertation.Google Scholar
Achard, M. 1998. Representation of cognitive structures—Syntax and semantics of French sentential complements. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bolinger, D. 1974. One subjunctive or two? Hispania 57(3). 462–471.Google Scholar
Dirven, R. 2003. In search of conceptual structure: Five milestones in the work of Günter Radden. In Cuyckens, H., Berg, T., Dirven, R. & Panther, K-U. (eds.), Motivation in language: Studies in honor of Günter Radden, xii–xxv. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, D. 2006. Introduction. A rough guide to cognitive linguistics. In Geeraerts, D. (ed.), Cognitive Linguistics: Basic readings, 1–28. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Givón, T. 1985. Iconicity, isomorphism and non-arbitrary coding in syntax. In Haiman, J. (ed.), Iconicity in syntax, 187–219. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Gregory, A. 2001. A cognitive map of the indicative and subjunctive mood in Spanish. Pragmatics and cognition 9(1). 99–113.Google Scholar
Haiman, J. 1985. Natural syntax: Iconicity and erosion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kemmer, S. & Verhagen, A.. 1994. The grammar of causatives and the conceptual structure of events. Cognitive Linguistics 5(2). 115–156.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, P. & Kiparsky, C.. 1971. Fact. In Steinberg, D. & Jakobovits, L. A. (eds.), Semantics: An interdisciplinary reader in philosophy, linguistics and psychology, 345–369. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M.. 1999. Philosophy in the flesh. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. 1—Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. 1988. A usage-based model. In Rudzka-Ostyn, B. (ed.), Topics in Cognitive Linguistics, 127–161. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R. W. 1991. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. 2—Descriptive application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. 2004. Aspects of the grammar of finite clauses. In Achard, M. & Kemmer, S. (eds.), Language, culture and mind, 535–577. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. 2008. Cognitive Grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. 2009. Investigations in Cognitive Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de GruyterGoogle Scholar
Lavandera, B. 1983. El cambio de modo como estrategia de discurso [Mood choice as a discourse strategy]. In Bosque, I. (ed.), Indicativo y subjuntivo, 330–357. Madrid: Taurus.Google Scholar
Levinson, S. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lipski, J. M. 1978. Subjunctive as fact? Hispania 61(4). 931–934.Google Scholar
Lunn, P. V. 1989. Spanish mood and the prototype of assertability. Linguistics 27. 687–702.Google Scholar
Maldonado, R. 1995. Middle-subjunctive links. In Hamispour, P., Maldonado, R. & Naerssen, M. Van (eds.), Studies in language learning and Spanish linguistics in honor of Tracy D. Terrell, 399–418. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Mejias-Bikandi, E. 1993. Syntax, discourse and acts of mind: A study of the indicative/subjunctive in Spanish. San Diego: University of California dissertation.Google Scholar
Mejías-Bikandi, E. 1995. Presupposition inheritance and mood in Spanish. In Hamispour, P., Maldonado, R. & Naerssen, M. Van (eds.), Studies in language learning and Spanish Linguistics in honor of Tracy D. Terrell, 375–384. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Mejías-Bikandi, E. 1998. Presupposition and old information in the use of the subjunctive mood in Spanish. Hispania 81(4). 941–948.Google Scholar
Shibatani, M. 1976. The grammar of causative constructions: A conspectus. In Shibatani, M. (ed.), Syntax and semantics, Vol. 6, The grammar of causative constructions, 1–40. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Shibatani, M. 2002. Introduction. Some basic issues in the grammar of causation. In Shibatani, M. (ed.), The grammar of causation and interpersonal manipulation, 1–22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Shibatani, M. & Pardeshi, P.. 2002. The causative continuum. In Shibatani, M. (ed.), The grammar of causation and interpersonal manipulation, 85–125. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Silva, A. Soares da. 2004. Imagery in Portuguese causation/perception constructions. In Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B. & Kwiatowska, A. (eds.), Imagery in language. Festschrift in honour of Professor Ronald W. Langacker, 297–319. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Sperber, D. & Wilson, D.. 1995. Relevance. Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Terrell, T. 1995. Assertion and presupposition in Spanish complements. In Hamispour, P., Maldonado, R. & Naerssen, M. Van (eds.), Studies in language learning and Spanish linguistics in honor of Tracy D. Terrell, 342–360. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Terrell, T. & Hooper, J.. 1974. A semantically based analysis of mood in Spanish. Hispania 57(3). 484–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Travis, C. 2003. The semantics of the Spanish subjunctive: Its use in the natural semantic metalanguage. Cognitive Linguistics 14(1). 47–69.Google Scholar
Vesterinen, R. 2007. Complementos finitos e infinitivos dos verbos perceptivos ver, ouvir e sentir: Iconicidade linguística e subjectificação. [Finite and infinitive complements of the perception verbs see, hear and feel: linguistic iconicity and subjectification]. Revista Portuguesa de Humanidades. Estudos Linguísticos 11(1). 251–283.Google Scholar
Vesterinen, R. 2010. The relation between iconicity and subjectification in Portuguese complementation: Complements of perception and causation verbs. Cognitive Linguistics 23(1). 573–600.Google Scholar