Particles, Modality and Coherence

This paper considers some aspects of the meaning of sentence-final particles. Such particles have a use on which they serve to emphasize what is said, and a use on which they have a modal semantics. The present paper is an attempt to unify these two uses from the perspective of discourse coherence. The conclusion is that sentence-final particles are used to maintain coherence. This paper is about sentence-final particles, such as man in English and yo in Japanese. (1) It’s raining, man. (2) ame-ga rain-Nom futteiru falling yo YO ‘It’s raining, man.’ (Japanese) These particles have a number of interesting properties. The paper begins with an exploration of some of the things SF particles can do. We will see that they can be used to emphasize the content in their scope, and also have a modal interpretation in certain contexts. We then turn to an examination of previous analyses of these properties. I then present a new (meta)theory of sentence-final particles that unifies their emphatic and modal qualities under the rubric of discourse coherence. The paper closes with a discussion of the relation between particles and modality from the perspective of coherence. Before going on, let me note that the English particles also have a sentence-initial use. When used sentence-initially, man has a kind of emotive meaning, and also can function as a degree modifier. (3) Man, it’s hot. On this use, the particles exhibit interesting locality constraints and interactions with definiteness. However, the Japanese particles can only be used sentence-finally. I want ∗I would like to thank the audience at Sinn und Bedeutung 12, especially Adrian Brasoveanu, Stefan Himmerwinter, and Magdalena Schwager for helpful comments and advice. Grønn, Atle (ed.): Proceedings of SuB12 , Oslo: ILOS 2008 (ISBN 978-82-92800-00-3), 430–441. Eric McCready Particles, Modality and Coherence to exclude the sentence-initial use in this talk; they need a very different kind of semantic analysis. 1 Data on Sentence-Final Particles What is the basic function of the sentence-final particles? Intuitively, it is to provide emphasis. In (4), adding yo seems to provides emphasis, or adds a sense of urgency to the utterance. (4) Taroo-ga Taro-NOM kita came (yo) (YO) ‘Taro came (, man).’ The basic semantics of SF particles seems to be the same cross-linguistically, though there are differences. I will draw on English and Japanese for the basic examples, showing differences when needed. The particle produces a sense of insistence in imperatives as well. The particle-less version below is simply a request for the hearer to go to Disneyland. The version with the particle, however, gives the impression that the speaker is trying to convince the hearer that the going is something that should happen. (5) Dizuniirando Disneyland ni to it-te go-Imp (yo) (YO) ‘(Come on,) Go to Disneyland.’ (6) Go to Disneyland, man. The basic function of the particle is to strengthen what is said—-‘I insist you accept what I have said’. It’s easy to see this in dialogues where dubiety about φ in the particle’s scope has been expressed. It is rather more natural to use particles than not in situations like these, if the speaker is actually trying to convince the hearer of the truth of φ. If the speaker doesn’t really care, of course, the particle isn’t necessary. Such cases will generally be associated with a characteristic, ‘flat’ intonational pattern. Consider this dialogue. Here yo is natural in A’s second utterance in the following dialogue, where A is explicitly denying B’s denial of A’s first utterance. (7) a. A: saki just.now Jon-ga John-NOM kaetta went.home ‘John just went home.’