SPEAKING

English—like other languages—has many verbs in the SPEACKING type, reflecting the important role that language activity has in our lives. There are four semantic roles associated with SPEACKING verbs—the Speaker, the Addressee(s), the Message, and the Medium (language or speech-style used). Speaker, Addressee and Medium are realized as NPs; the Message can be an NP or complement clause or direct speech.

 

Speaker role is in every case mapped onto subject (A or S) syntactic relation. There is considerable variation in how the other three roles are associated with semantic relations. Many verbs have the Message as O, e.g. She reported John’s illness (to the chairman), while many others have Addressee as O, e.g. She reminded the chairman of John’s illness. The verbs speak and talk may have the Medium in O slot, e.g. They speak French here.

 

If the Addressee is not in O slot it is generally introduced by the preposition to; if the Medium is not in O slot it is generally introduced by in. There are a variety of means for grammatical marking of the Message, which are discussed below.

 

Verbs in five of the eight SPEAKING subtypes may introduce direct speech, e.g. ‘It’s Christmas Day,’ he shouted/said/informed Mary/told the children/ instructed the alien. The other subtypes describe kinds of vocal activity (e.g. speak, discuss, slander) and generally do not occur in apposition to direct speech.

 

Thought is often considered internalized speech, and a verb like think may occur with an utterance in quotation marks (really referring to direct thought rather than direct speech), e.g. ‘Maybe I’ll win the lottery,’ John thought. People are sometimes represented as making decisions aloud, or thinking aloud in various ways, and a number of verbs from the DECIDING and THINKING types are sometimes used to introduce direct speech, as in (23) ‘I ought to spray the apple trees,’ he reflected/remembered/concluded/decided/resolved. (Note that the use of such verbs to introduce direct speech occurs much more often in written, literary English than in colloquial styles.)

 

The Message, if it is not shown by direct speech, may have two components, as in [the news] about [the murder], [an announcement] concerning [the picnic]. The first part, which we can call the Message-Label, is an NP whose head is a SPEECH ACT noun (e.g. announcement, question, proposal) or a noun referring to some language unit (e.g. news, message). The Message Label is linked by a preposition to the second component, which we can call the Message-Content. This may be an NP, or an ING, WH- or THAT complement clause; thus the news about the murder, the news about Mary’s shooting John, the news about who Mary shot, the news that Mary had shot John (as always, a preposition drops before that). (The Message-Content can alternatively be a full Message, consisting of Label, preposition and Content, e.g. the news about [[the announcement] concerning [the election]].)

 

A Message can consist of Label-preposition-Content or just Label or just Content. The possibilities are summarized in I–III. In each sentence the Message is in O slot. For Ia it consists just of a Label; in Ib–e it is Label followed by preposition plus Content, which is NP or ING, WH- or THAT clause. Constructions IIa–c show a Message that is just Content—NP, ING or WH- clause. Frame IIIa again shows just Content, here a THAT clause, while IIIb involves direct speech. (The possibilities are grouped in this way since some verbs show all I, some all II, some both of III, and some combinations of I, II and III.)

Ia. Fred reported the sad news

Ib. Fred reported the sad news about the murder

Ic. Fred reported the sad news about Mary(’s) shooting John

Id. Fred reported the sad news about who Mary shot

Ie. Fred reported the sad news that Mary had shot John

IIa. Fred reported the murder

IIb. Fred reported Mary(’s) shooting John

IIc. Fred reported who Mary shot

IIIa. Fred reported that Mary had shot John

IIIb. Fred reported: ‘Mary has shot John’

 

We can now discuss the individual subtypes within the SPEAKING type; their occurrence in the various syntactic frames.

(a) The TALK subtype simply refers to an activity of vocal communication, e.g. speak, talk, chat, gossip, converse, communicate, quarrel, one sense of argue (that corresponding to ‘have an argument’); joke involves intersection of the TALK and REPORT subtypes.

 

These verbs are basically intransitive and can occur with just the Speaker role filled. In may introduce a Medium NP and about or concerning a Message in frame I or II (that is, speak about, talk about, etc. can be substituted for report in I and II). Frame III is not possible—TALK verbs do not take a THAT complement or introduce direct speech.

 

Chat, gossip, converse, communicate, quarrel and argue generally refer to reciprocal activity; they should either have a plural Speaker NP or else an Addressee NP introduced by with (rather than to), e.g. John and Mary chatted or John chatted with Mary. Talk and speak may also be used reciprocally, taking with, but they may alternatively have an Addressee introduced by to; speak has, as a further alternative, at.

The meaning of speak focuses on the fact that the speaker is using a language (one asks How many languages does he speak? in preference to How many languages does he talk?) whereas talk refers to how the language is used, in what circumstances and on what topics (e.g. Don’t talk in church! and What shall I talk about with your father?). Speak tends to be used for one-way communication and may be employed where there is a difference of rank (The King spoke to/with me!) whereas talk carries an expectation of reciprocity and equality (The King talked with the Queen). We can say, focusing on the speaker’s activity: He spoke the truth, She spoke her mind, but not *He talked the truth, *She talked her mind. (Write can be used in the same contexts as speak, referring just to a different medium, e.g. She wrote the truth in that letter, but it also has a wider range, e.g. She wrote (to say) that she’d been ill.)

 

Both speak and talk (but not other verbs from this subtype) may omit preposition in before the Medium NP, which then appears to be in O syntactic relation since it freely passivizes, e.g. They are talking Swahili, Spanish is spoken here. Again, there is a difference between talk and speak—Ken talked Navaho to Clyde implies that Clyde can understand him; one could say speak Navaho with a similar interpretation but there is also Ken spoke Navaho at Sally, where the preposition at indicates that she probably didn’t comprehend it.

 

There are examples of Message-Content (when it is a single noun) dropping its preposition and filling O slot, e.g. The old men are talking politics and the young mothers are talking babies, A lot of linguistics was talked at that party last night (which made it extremely boring for the spouses). This is possible with talk, which deals with what the language is used for, but not for speak, which centres more on what the speaker is doing. Some of the other verbs may also, in specially marked circumstances, drop the preposition before a Message-Content NP, e.g. They are arguing (about) politics. (One also hears He is speaking/talking rubbish/double Dutch, where the NP refers to the lack of comprehensibility of the Message; note that one could add specification of the Medium, e.g. in Spanish.)

 

(Talk also occurs in an idiomatic causative, e.g. We talked Mary into going, meaning ‘We talked to Mary until we persuaded her to go’.)

(b) The DISCUSS subtype refers to vocal activity that focuses on a specific message, e.g. discuss, refer to, describe.

 

These are strictly transitive verbs, with O slot filled by the Message role. Discuss and refer to may occur in frames I and II while describe is restricted to II, where the O NP is Message-Content, e.g. John described the battle (but scarcely frame I *John described the news (about the battle)). None of these verbs may be used in III, with a THAT clause or to introduce direct speech.

 

DISCUSS verbs could be regarded as transitive correspondents of TALK—in fact talk about may substitute for most occurrences of discuss, refer to and describe. Discuss has a reciprocal meaning; there should be either a plural Speaker NP or else an Addressee introduced by with (not to). Describe takes the normal to before the Addressee while refer would not generally include any mention of Addressee (at least partly because the appropriate preposition to is already present, as an inherent component of this transitive verb).

 

(c) The SHOUT subtype refers to manner of vocal production, e.g. shout, call, cry, roar, swear, pray, preach, narrate, recite, intone, read, sing. Related to this subtype are whistle and warble. (Shout, call, cry and read often take the adverb out.)

 

These verbs may be used intransitively, or else transitively with the Message in O relation. They occur in frame III, with a THAT complement or with direct speech, e.g. John called out that the pirates were approaching or ‘The pirates are approaching,’ John called; or in frame I, where the Message NP begins with a Label, e.g. Fred read the message (about the murder). The Label can be omitted from the Message constituent, but the following preposition must be retained, so that we get a variant of frame I:

I’a. Fred read about the murder

I’b. Fred read about Mary(’s) shooting John

Note that this is distinct from frame II, which is not possible with SHOUT verbs, i.e. *Fred read the murder.

 

All SHOUT verbs introduce the Addressee by to except swear, which takes at (swear at the dog), and shout, roar, cry, which can take to (when raising one’s voice the better to communicate, e.g. shout to the children that dinner is ready) or at (when raising the voice in annoyance, e.g. shout at the children (to go away) ).

 

A number of other verbs are marginal members of this subtype. Translate shares all syntactic properties except that it does not take a THAT complement. Pronounce, mispronounce and utter take an O NP that begins with an appropriate label and may be followed by quotation of the sound or word or sentence which this label refers to, e.g. pronounce the letter ‘s’, utter the name ‘Jehovah’.

 

Name, and one sense of call, have rather different syntax (and could perhaps be regarded as a separate small subtype). They have in O slot an NP referring to a person or thing or place, and this is followed by the name (which may be in direct or indirect speech), e.g. She called him ‘my little doll’, She called him her little doll, and They named the baby ‘Imogene’.

(d) The REPORT subtype refers to the manner of presenting a message. We can distinguish a number of sets of verbs within this subtype, with sample members:

(i) say, declare, assert, one sense of observe, one sense of joke; put NP about, give NP out, let NP out, put NP across, let on about NP.

(ii) state, affirm, rumour (mostly used in the passive);

(iii) announce, proclaim, mention, note, report; regret (also in LIKING);

(iv) remark (on), comment (on); explain;

(v) boast (about/of ), brag (about/of ), complain (about/of ), grumble (about);

(vi) suggest, claim; acknowledge, admit, confess (to); (repute, which is confined to the passive, may also belong here);   

(vii) undertake, offer, propose; one sense of agree (with);   

(viii) promise, threaten.

 

Sets (i)–(vii) are basically transitive, with the Message in O slot. Promise and threaten are ditransitive with Addressee as O (although this can freely be omitted), followed by the Message. For all REPORT verbs the Message may be a THAT clause or direct speech (frame III), e.g. ‘New York is the finest city in the world,’ she announced/remarked/boasted/suggested/proposed and She announced/remarked/boasted/suggested/proposed that New York is the finest city in the world.

 

All sets except (i) and (ii) may have the Message-Content as O (frame II), e.g. He mentioned/complained about/suggested/offered/promised a dinner party. Sets (ii)–(v) occur in frame I, with Message-Label (optionally followed by preposition plus Content) as O, e.g. They stated/announced/complained about/regretted the message (concerning our having to work on Sundays in future). Say has somewhat unusual properties—if there is no direct speech or THAT complement it can take a Message whose first element is some qualification, e.g. He said a lot/something/nothing (about the picnic); there is also a very limited set of nouns that can occur in the label slot, e.g. say a prayer ( for/about . . . ), say grace.

 

A Judgement TO complement may occur with most verbs from sets (ii) and (iii), as well as declare, admit and claim (and say only in the passive). Thus:

IV. The Judge declared/reported/admitted him to be insane

Sets (vii) and (viii) may take a Modal (FOR) TO complement, e.g.

Va. I offered/undertook/promised/threatened for my charlady to clean your house

The subject of the complement clause will often be coreferential with main clause subject and then omitted (together with for):

Vb. I offered/undertook/promised/threatened to clean your house

Speakers tend to accept the full FOR TO construction (in Va) with only some of these verbs; for the remainder they require coreferential subjects, as in Vb.

 

As already mentioned, threaten and promise have Addressee in O relation. This can be followed by Message-Content (introduced by with in the case of threaten) or by a THAT clause or by direct speech. Imagine a scenario in which I have the authority to transfer Mary and in which John has strong feelings about her; to taunt him I may either promise a transfer (if I want to please him) or threaten it (if I wish to annoy him):

(1) I promised John a transfer for Mary/I threatened John with a transfer for Mary

(2) I promised/threatened (John) (that) I/Bill would transfer Mary

(3) I promised/threatened (John): ‘I/Bill will transfer Mary’

 

When the Addressee is omitted these verbs may take a Modal (FOR) TO complement (with complement clause subject coreferential to main clause subject and thus omitted):

(4) I promised/threatened to transfer Mary

 

In many dialects of English promise (but never threaten) may take a Modal (FOR) TO clause—with subject coreferential with main clause subject and thus omitted, together with for—even when the Addressee is retained:

(5) I promised John to transfer Mary

 

However, speakers of other dialects (e.g. contemporary Australian English) do not accept (5) as grammatical, and must instead say (2), i.e. I promised John that I would transfer Mary. When confronted by (5) these speakers can only interpret it with the complement clause subject coreferential with main clause object (i.e. John arranges the transfer, the whole sentence then meaning perhaps that I let him transfer her); that is, they interpret (5) as having the syntax of a verb from the ORDER subtype.

 

Of this subtype only set (v)—boast, brag, complain and grumble—may be used intransitively; the meanings of these verbs indicate the Speaker’s attitude towards some Message, which need not be specified, e.g. She’s complaining again. Confess may omit the Message only when this could be inferred from the context, e.g. ‘Did you steal the Saab?’ ‘Okay, I confess’ (sc. that I did steal it). All other verbs in sets (i)–(vii) must include a Message, which can be a THAT clause, or else introduce direct speech. Of set (viii), threaten should have either Message or Addressee stated, e.g. He’s threatening John, She’s threatening to blow up the plane; but promise is like confess in that it may omit both Addressee and Message when they could be inferred, e.g. ‘Will you really mend the window?’ ‘Yes, I promise’ (sc. you that I will mend it).

 

Offer and promise are both very frequently used to convey a Message of giving (where the subject of give is coreferential with main clause subject); the verb give can then be omitted, with the Donor, Recipient and Gift roles being coded as surface constituents of the SPEAKING verb. Thus She offered/ promised me an apple/an apple to me are paraphrases of She offered/promised to give me an apple/an apple to me.

 

Note also that offer (especially in relation to giving) and threaten—and perhaps other REPORT verbs—need not necessarily involve language activity but could just refer to some gesture or mode of behavior. The verbs can still be used in their full syntactic range to describe these gestures (except for the direct speech option), e.g. The dumb giant threatened to hit her (but then she handed over the keys, and so he didn’t).

 

(e) The INFORM subtype refers to the way in which a Message (which is not an order or instruction) is conveyed to the Addressee, e.g. inform, lecture, agree (with); remind has cross-membership of the INFORM and ORDER subtypes.

 

These verbs are transitive and have the Addressee role in O syntactic relation. This is followed by the Message introduced by a preposition—of (for inform and remind), on (for lecture and agree) or about (for all four verbs). The varieties of Message illustrated in frames I and II (with a preposition inserted) and III are all applicable, e.g. I I informed John of the announcement (about the picnic); II I informed John of the picnic; IIIa I informed John that there will be a picnic tomorrow; IIIb ‘There will be a picnic tomorrow,’ I informed John.

 

The Addressee NP is obligatory with inform and remind but can be omitted after lecture and agree when inferrable from the cotext, e.g. Mary’s father thought that she should resign and her mother agreed (sc. with her father that she should resign). Statement of the Message may be omitted after any of the verbs when inferrable, e.g. ‘Does Mary know about the picnic?’ ‘She should, I did inform her’ (sc. about the picnic).

 

(f) The TELL subtype contains verbs which relate both to Message (particularly its Label component) and to Addressee; they may have either of these roles in O relation. The subtype includes tell, ask, request and beg (note that all these verbs also have cross-membership of the ORDER subtype).

 

Tell combines something of the syntactic properties of the last two subtypes. Compare:

 

There are, however, important differences. The Message, as O of report, can be Label, Label-preposition-Content or just Content, e.g. I reported the news/ the news about the accident/the accident (to John). For tell the Message, if in O slot, must include a Label—thus I told the news (about the accident) to John but not *I told the accident to John. In addition, a THAT complement or direct speech cannot be included with tell if the Addressee is marked by to.

 

The basic syntactic frame for tell appears to be with Addressee as O. The Message—which can be Label, Label-preposition-Content or Content—is then introduced by a preposition, e.g. I told John about the news/about the news concerning the accident/about the accident. The initial preposition may be dropped only if the Message begins with a Label, e.g. I told John the news (concerning the accident), but not *I told John the accident. (There is, of course, a semantic difference between tell John the news and tell John about the news. And there can, in the Addressee-as-O frame, be a THAT clause or direct speech, e.g. I told John that the bus had crashed, and ‘The bus has crashed,’ I told John.)

 

Ask, request and beg have similar syntactic properties, with some differences of detail. With Message as O the Addressee is introduced by of with ask and by from with request and beg, e.g. She asked a question (about the accident) (of John), He requested information (about the accident) (from John). When Addressee is O, ask does not include a preposition before a Message Label, e.g. She asked John (a question) (about the accident), whereas request and beg require for, e.g. They begged John for information (about the accident). Enquire, and one sense of demand, are semantically similar to request but may only have a Message (beginning with a Label) in O slot, e.g. She enquired directions (about how to get to the station) (from John).

 

Ask can omit specification of Message and/or Addressee if these could be inferred from the context, e.g. ‘I’ll ask Mary where the key is’. ‘No, don’t, I’ve already asked’ (sc. her where it is). Tell can omit the Message in similar circumstances, e.g. ‘Does Mary know where it is?’ ‘She should, I’ve told her’ (sc. where it is), and it may omit the Addressee when the Message is being particularly focused on, e.g. I don’t want to tell that story again, I’ve already told it a hundred times. But Message and Addressee may generally not both be omitted at once with tell (except perhaps in a style of children’s English, where one child may sometimes be heard accusing another with: Oh, you told!).

 

Answer is an unusual verb in that there are effectively two Messages—the question which was asked, and the answer that may be given (reply to is similar, except that it can be used for the response to a question or as a comment on some statement). The question may be coded as an NP in O slot (sometimes with the Addressee as ‘possessor’ to the Label), e.g. He answered the/Mary’s question (about the accident). Or the Addressee may be in O relation, e.g. He answered Mary. Or the answer may be shown by a THAT complement or by direct speech, e.g. He answered that the accident was in Pall Mall; ‘The accident was in Pall Mall,’ he answered. Note, though, that question and answer may not both be coded in the same clause (e.g. one cannot say *He answered Mary’s question that the accident was in Pall Mall) simply because the conventions for interpreting apposition in English syntax would then imply that Mary’s question and that the accident was in Pall Mall are coreferential, which they aren’t. Instead, one might say To Mary’s question he answered that the accident was in Pall Mall or He answered Mary’s question by saying that the accident was in Pall Mall. Answer and reply to may, like ask, be used without any Addressee or Message where the relevant information is supplied by context, e.g. ‘Have you asked him about the accident?’ ‘Yes, but he won’t answer’ (sc. my question about the accident).

 

(g) The ORDER subtype refers to a Message (generally an order or instruction) directed at an Addressee, e.g. (i) order, command, urge, instruct, encourage; warn, caution, persuade, invite, recommend (to); senses of tell, remind, ask, request, beg; (ii) forbid, discourage, dissuade, prohibit.

 

All these verbs are transitive, with the Addressee in O slot. It is followed by the Message, which can only be direct speech (often, an imperative) or—for set (i)—a THAT complement (generally including a modal should or would) or a Modal (FOR) TO complement. The subject of the complement clause (or of the direct speech) may be different from the main clause subject:

IIIb. I instructed the lieutenant: ‘Your platoon should be ready at dawn!’

IIIa. I instructed the lieutenant that his platoon should be ready at dawn

VIa. I instructed the lieutenant for his platoon to be ready at dawn

 

Or the subject of the complement clause can be coreferential with the main clause object, and then omitted from a direct speech imperative or from a Modal (FOR) to complementizer:

IIIb’. I instructed the lieutenant: ‘Be ready at dawn!’

IIIa’. I instructed the lieutenant that he should be ready at dawn

VIb. I instructed the lieutenant to be ready at dawn

(Speakers vary as to which verbs from this subtype may be used in frame VIa. For those that may not, we simply have to say that the subject of a Modal (FOR) TO clause must be coreferential with main clause object.)

 

The only verbs that may not omit the Addressee (in the presence of a THAT complement or direct speech) are tell and remind. As with their other senses—remind in subtype (e) and tell in (f)—these two verbs focus on the Addressee role, which must be stated. Persuade does not involve an order or instruction but refers to an attempt to get the Addressee to do something voluntarily; it is not used with direct speech (except perhaps if try is also included, e.g. ‘You go there, and you’ll really enjoy it,’ we tried to persuade him). Warn and caution may occur in IIIa/b and VIb (often, with the complement clause or direct speech including not), or with the negative preposition against plus an ING complement that lacks the negative particle (the ING clause will generally have its subject identical to the Addressee, and then omitted), e.g. I warned him not to go, I warned him against going.

 

We have already mentioned that, for all verbs in set (i), the subject of a reduced TO complement, in frame VIb, is understood to be identical to the O NP of the main verb (the Addressee role). All verbs except ask, beg and request must include an O NP in VIb; these three verbs can omit the Addressee and the subject of the Modal (FOR) TO clause is then understood to be identical to main clause subject, i.e.

VIa. John asked Bill to watch Mary (i.e. Bill will watch Mary)

Va. John asked to watch Mary (i.e. John will watch Mary)

 

(The second sentence could perhaps be regarded as an abbreviation of John asked to be allowed to watch Mary.) Ask, request and beg appear to be the only verbs in English whose complement clause subject is taken to be coreferential with the main clause object if there is one, and with main clause subject otherwise.

 

Recommend has a meaning difference from the other verbs in set (i) in that it involves offering advice, not issuing an order, instruction or request.

 

It has the regular syntactic possibilities of the subtype (except that to introduces the Addressee, but is dropped before a TO complement), e.g. ‘Use brushbox for the steps,’ he recommended (to me); He recommended to me that I should use brushbox for the steps, He recommended me to use brushbox for the steps. Recommend may also code the Message-Content through an ING complement clause, e.g. He recommended (to me) (my) using brushbox for the steps. And there is an abbreviated construction in which a concrete NP may fill the O slot, e.g. He recommended brushbox (to me); a sentence like this could only be used where further necessary details could be inferred by the listeners (e.g. they know that I have been looking for a suitable timber to repair my steps).

 

The verbs in set (ii) involve negative instruction or advice (i.e. telling the Addressee not to do something that they may have intended to do). They can take direct speech, or a FROM ING complement, e.g.

VII. I discouraged John from going

 

Discourage and dissuade only take a FROM ING, not a TO, clause. Forbid occurs in both frames with no difference in meaning (John forbade Mary to go/from going); speakers differ as to which frame they prefer.

 

(h) The FORGIVE subtype refers to the Speaker saying something to the Addressee which reveals the Speaker’s attitude, such as their approval or disapproval of the Addressee or of something the Addressee has done (or which the Addressee or some other person thinks reveals such an attitude), or saying something which satisfies a social convention (such as greeting), e.g. (i) insult, slander, curse, abuse, scold, blame, rebuke, forgive, pardon, praise, thank, congratulate, compliment; tell NP off, pick on NP; (ii) accuse, excuse; (iii) greet, welcome, introduce; (iv) cheer, applaud, apologize.

 

All the verbs in sets (i)–(iii) are strictly transitive, with Addressee as O. Cheer and applaud are also transitive, but may omit the O; apologize is intransitive, but to-plus-Addressee may optionally be included.

 

Accuse and excuse must have a Message following the Addressee (unless it could be inferred from the context); this will be an NP or ING clause, introduced by of after accuse, and by for or from (with very different meanings) after excuse, e.g. He accused Mary of fiddling the books; She excused John for overlooking the mail/from dealing with the mail.

 

Verbs from sets (i)–(ii) and (iv) may add specification of the way in which the attitude was revealed or the greeting effected, using by plus an NP or ING clause, e.g. He insulted me by mispronouncing my name; She thanked me by making a very sweet speech. Set (i) may also specify the reason for the Speaker’s adopting this attitude, using for or on plus an NP or ING clause, e.g. He thanked me for saving his life. It follows from the meanings of these verbs that the subject of a clause introduced with by is taken to be coreferential with Speaker (main clause subject) while the subject of a clause introduced by for is taken to be coreferential with Addressee (main clause object), e.g. on hearing John congratulated Tom by shaking his hand on/for winning the race, a listener will infer that John did the shaking and Tom the winning.

 

Actually using one of these verbs may constitute an instance of the activity it refers to—that is, the verb is being used as a ‘performative’—e.g. ‘I greet you, stranger’, ‘I forgive you, darling’; this may be referred to in a by constituent, e.g. He congratulated me just by saying ‘I congratulate you, my boy’ in that posh voice and didn’t even shake my hand. These verbs generally do not introduce direct speech in the ways that the SHOUT, REPORT, INFORM, TELL and ORDER subtypes do. But—like some THINKING and DECIDING verbs—they may be used with direct speech, especially in a popular literary style (and may then omit the Addressee), e.g. ‘Oh, you are so wonderful,’ she praised.

 

Some FORGIVE verbs may of course refer to an activity that involves no speech at all, e.g. The dumb giant greeted me by clutching my shoulders. Or the subject may not even be human, e.g. My cat greets me when I get home. Syntactic possibilities remain unchanged.

 

SPEACKING is probably the most varied subtype, both semantically and syntactically. There are many more marginal properties, and differences of detail between verbs, than have been mentioned. But this abbreviated account has dealt with the major parameters.

مواضيع ذات صلة

Semantic change

Semantic change.

Dangerous New York, tranquil Norwich?

Urban surveys: New York and Norwich

The speech community

Urban sociolinguistics: methodology and problems

Positive and negative face

Safety first: pre- (and pre-pre-) requests

Politeness theory

Affective and social meaning

Other types of meaning

Semantic features