Interactional motivations for using hearsay and quotative markers in Spanish conversation

Interactional motivations for using hearsay and quotative markers in Spanish conversation Bert Cornillie (KU Leuven) Pedro Gras (Universiteit Atwerpen) TOPIC, AIMS AND METHODOLOGY. It is established knowledge that Spanish is a language without morphological encoding of evidentiality (cf. Aikhenvald 2004). Yet, colloquial Spanish has a series of lexico-grammatical expressions which allow speakers to express hearsay and quotative evidence: (i) evidential adverbials referring to indirect evidence (Martín Zorraquino & Portolés 1999; Fernández Sanmartín 2006, Author1 & Author2 submitted), (ii) insubordinate clauses introduced by que ‘that’ reproducing the discourse of the speaker, the co-participant or a third person (Etxepare 2010, Author2 2013), and (iii) semi-grammaticalized expressions that introduce direct speech (Benavent Payá 2001, 2003). The three expression types can be considered hearsay/quotative markers in a broad sense, but they do not form an evidential paradigm, i.e. they are no set of expressions referring to different and mutually exclusive sources of information. Rather, the differences between these expression types are correlated to the kind of interactional activities that speakers realize in spontaneous conversation. The aim of this paper is to account for the hearsay and quotative expressions in Spanish in terms of their function in talk-in-interaction. Our analysis not only aims at providing a distributional-interactional account of the different expression types but also focuses on the difference between hearsay and quotative markers in interaction (cf. Buchstaller & van Alphen 2012). From a semantic point of view, we will examine the evidential values that can be expressed by these markers (i.e. indirect evidence, hearsay, reported, literal quotes). From a functional point of view, we will analyze the evidential markers on the basis of discourse-interactional criteria such as illocutionary force, position in the turn, kind of turn and the negotiation between co-participants about “the authority to know” and the “right to make an assessment” (Sidnell 2012). DATA. The analysis is based on two corpus of spoken data: the Val.Es.Co. corpus (Briz & Val.Es.Co., 2002); and the Corec corpus of spoken Castilian (Marcos Marín). PRELIMINARY RESULTS. The three expression types that we have analyzed present different interactional profiles. First, the adverbials of indirect evidence are generally used in the middle of a turn and report on inferences or statements from someone else, which are eventually endorsed by the co-participants at a further stage of the sequence. Secondly, the insubordinate clauses with que appear in turn-initial position. They refer to a specific source and are used for interactional activities such as elaborating the turn or organizing the transition between turns. Finally, semi-grammaticalized expressions of direct discourse are used almost exclusively to keep the turn so as to elaborate it. They are used in different positions. With regard to the priority to make an assessment, the three expression types from a continuum from symmetry to asymmetry between speech participants in terms of access to indirect knowledge. REFERENCES Author1 & Author2 submitted Author2 2013 Aikhenvald, A. (2004). Evidentiality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Benavent Payá, E. 2001. ¿Decir = Decir que? Análisis gramatical. Análisis discursivo. In Alexandre Veiga, Víctor M. Longa y JoDee Anderson (eds.), El verbo: entre el léxico y la gramática. Lugo : Tris Tram, 2001 Benavent Payá, E. 2003. ¿Por qué contamos nuestras historias cotidianas en estilo directo? Foro Hispánico 23: 11-20. Briz, A. & Val.Es.Co. (2002): Corpus de conversacionales coloquiales, Madrid, Arco/Libros. Buchstaller, I. & van Alphen, I. (eds.) (2012). Quotatives. Cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary perspectives. Amsterdam – Philaldelphia: Benjamins. Etxepare, R. (2010). From hearsay evidentiality to samesaying relations. Lingua 120, 604-627. Fernández Sanmartín, A. (2006): La expresión de la modalidad epistémica en español conversacional, memoria de investigación inédita, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela. Ford, C. E.; Fox, B. A.; & Thompson, S. A. (eds.) (2002): The language of turn and sequence, Oxford, Oxford University Press. Martín Zorraquino, M. A. & Portolés, J (1999), “Los marcadores del discurso”, chapter 63 in Bosque, I. & Demonte, V. (dirs.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española, vol. III, pp. 4051-4214. Sidnell, J. (2012). “Who knows best?”: Evidentiality and epistemic asymmetry in conversation. Pragmatics and Society 3:2. 294-320.status: publishe