About: Interjection is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 209 publications have been published within this topic receiving 2182 citations. The topic is also known as: int. & exclamation.
TL;DR: Evidence and arguments are presented for two distinct claims: that Huh?
Abstract: A word like Huh?–used as a repair initiator when, for example, one has not clearly heard what someone just said– is found in roughly the same form and function in spoken languages across the globe. We investigate it in naturally occurring conversations in ten languages and present evidence and arguments for two distinct claims: that Huh? is universal, and that it is a word. In support of the first, we show that the similarities in form and function of this interjection across languages are much greater than expected by chance. In support of the second claim we show that it is a lexical, conventionalised form that has to be learnt, unlike grunts or emotional cries. We discuss possible reasons for the cross-linguistic similarity and propose an account in terms of convergent evolution. Huh? is a universal word not because it is innate but because it is shaped by selective pressures in an interactional environment that all languages share: that of other-initiated repair. Our proposal enhances evolutionary models of language change by suggesting that conversational infrastructure can drive the convergent cultural evolution of linguistic items.
TL;DR: The authors assess the relative strengths and weaknesses of two contemporary approaches that reflect the historical dichotomy, and suggest a new analysis which preserves the insights of both approaches, and characterise the two notions in theoretical terms, and some implications of the proposed approach are considered.
Abstract: Historically, interjections have been treated in two different ways: as part of language, or as non-words signifying feelings or states of mind. In this paper, I assess the relative strengths and weaknesses of two contemporary approaches that reflect the historical dichotomy, and suggest a new analysis which preserves the insights of both. Interjections have a natural and a coded element, and are better analysed as falling at various points along a continuum between ?showing? and ?saying?. These two notions are characterised in theoretical terms, and some implications of the proposed approach are considered.
TL;DR: The authors argue that 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.
TL;DR: In this article, a number of interjections from English, Polish, Russian, and Yiddish are discussed, and rigorous semantic formulae are proposed which can explain both the similarities and the differences in their range of use.