From truth to discourse marker: The case of thâִt in Vietnamese
- Authors: Adachi M.1
-
Affiliations:
- Tokyo University of Foreign Studies
- Issue: Vol 28, No 4 (2024): Discourse-pragmatic markers of (inter)subjective stance in Asian languages: With special focus on Chinese etymons
- Pages: 966-990
- Section: Articles
- URL: https://journals.rudn.ru/linguistics/article/view/42182
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-40501
- EDN: https://elibrary.ru/LPAZGY
Cite item
Full Text
Abstract
Vietnamese thật (truth)-based expressions are prevalent in a 17th-century text and contemporary data, however there has been a lack of in-depth studies of such Sino-Vietnamese expressions in terms of their grammaticalization into discourse markers (DMs). The aim of this study is to identify whether linguistic elements from the same source develop into DMs in a similar manner. To achieve this, I compared diachronic data in the 17th century to contemporary Vietnamese. The historical data includes the first Romanized Vietnamese prose written in 1651, while the contemporary data consists of written and spoken materials collected from a language consultant, internet quotes, and naturally occurring conversations. The main findings of this research are as follows: (1) Thật -related expressions appear to follow the well-attested grammatical path from “true” to “intensive” and further into DMs. (2) The subjective and intersubjective uses of thật forms are distributed complementarily: subjective usage tends to occur in the utterance-final position, while intersubjective usage typically appears in the utterance-initial position. (3) Thật has also combined with other elements to form multiword-unit DMs, indicating that DMs do not always undergo formal reduction. (4) Regarding the borrowing of DMs through language contact, examples from Vietnamese and other languages suggest that lexical elements are initially borrowed as in their original forms and then grammaticalized as DMs in ways that are language-specific yet comparable. These findings provide theoretical contributions to our understanding of the emergence and development of DMs in Vietnamese.
Full Text
Introduction
This study is organized as follows. In Section 2, I present history of Vietnamese and give an overview of relevant research. In Section 3, I present an account of the data used in this study. In Section 4, I present results of the study which are discussed in Section 5 in terms of grammaticalization. Section 6 concludes the paper.
2.1. A short history of Vietnamese and its writing system
Vietnamese is classified as an Austro-Asiatic language. It is an isolating language with a verb-medial and head-initial structure, featuring six tonal distinctions. The dialects of Vietnamese are generally categorized into three main groups: the northern dialect, primarily spoken in Hanoi; the central dialect, spoken in Hue; and the southern dialect, spoken in Ho Chi Minh City (Tomita 2000: 17–20). In this study, I examine the northern dialect. Detailed information on the dialect will be provided in Section 3.
The history of writing in Vietnam is influenced by the country’s long cultural connection with China. Accordingly, Vietnamese leaders and scholars borrowed a large number of Chinese words from Chinese written forms (Alves 2007a: 357), which are now known as Sino-Vietnamese words. Regarding Sino-Vietnamese words, Nguyễn (1961) states that they account for 60–70% of modern written Vietnamese texts (see also Alves 2001, 2009, Murakami & Imai 2010), while Miyajima (2019: 809) argues that approximately 70% of Vietnamese words are Sino-Vietnamese (see Shibasaki & Higashiizumi (forthcoming), Note 6 for more details).
Edmondson (2006: 432) summarizes the history of writing in Vietnam as follows: Chinese scripts may have been adopted as a learned script in Vietnamese before the Common Era1. Subsequently, a demotic script, Chữ nôm, to write purely Vietnamese words, may have been in use as early as the 10th century. Ultimately, these two scripts were replaced by Quốc ngữ in the 20th century, a Romanized script developed by Jesuit missionaries in the 17th century. Chữ nôm characters are based on Chinese ideograms, while the modern Vietnamese writing system (Quốc ngữ) is a phonetic script written using Roman characters (Vũ 2005: 7).
In line with Maspero (1912)2, Nguyễn (1997: 5) categorizes Vietnamese in the 17th century as Middle Vietnamese, as “reflected in the Vietnamese-Portuguese-Latin dictionary by Alexandre de Rhodes,” a French missionary. Missionary literature such as dictionaries and catechisms have been examined as materials for missionary linguistics (Kishimoto & Sirai 2022), which are “modeled according to the traditional Greco-Latin framework” (Zwartjes 2018).
2.2. A brief overview of the relevant studies
Hopper & Traugott (1993: xv) define grammaticalization as “the process whereby lexical items and constructions come in certain linguistic contexts to serve grammatical functions, and, once grammaticalized, continue to develop new grammatical functions.” According to Kuteva et al. (2019: 443), there is a typological tendency for words meaning ‘true’ to be grammaticalized as intensive markers. With regard to this point, Rhee et al. (2021) highlighted the Chinese etymon 實-based expressions that denoted ‘real(ity), true, full, rich, fruit’ and examined how they have been grammaticalized into DMs in languages in the Chinese cultural sphere, including Chinese, Japanese, and Korean. Rhee et al. (2021) point out that the developmental paths of DMs containing the Chinese etymon 實/实/実 in Chinese, Japanese, and Korean such as事實上/事实上/事実上 and 其實/其実, shows similarities semantic, syntactic, and discursive changes. Additionally, several articles in this special issue explore words including 真 ‘true’ in different languages, including Khammee (2024)’s work on cing in Thai, Higashiizumi et al. (2024)’s discussion of 真に (shinni) in Japanese, and Rhee & Zhang (2024)’s analysis of cincca in Korean and 真是 (zhenshi) and 真的 (zhende) in Chinese.[3]
Bui (2012, 2015) lists examples of DMs in Vietnamese that have text connective functions as in (1).
(1) | Vietnamese DMs | |
a. | tuy nhiên (雖 ‘though’ + 然 ‘so’) 4 / tuy thế (雖 ‘though’ + ‘so’) / tuy vậy (雖 ‘though’ + ‘so’) ‘however’ |
(Bui 2012: 4, Bui 2015: 23–90) |
b. | vả lại (‘moreover’ + ‘again’) / vả chăng (‘moreover’ + ‘surely’) ‘moreover’ |
(Bui 2012: 4, Bui 2015: 246–302) |
c. | dù sao (‘however’ + ‘how’) ‘anyway’ | (Bui 2012: 91–176) |
d. | thế (‘so’) / vậy (‘so’) ‘so’ | (Bui 2012: 3) |
According to the language consultant, in addition to Bui’s (2012, 2015) list, other DMs that consist of ‘truth’-related elements, as in (2) exist. Note that thực is a variant[5] of thật.6
(2) | Some other Vietnamese DMs | ||
a. | thật ra (實 ‘real’+ ‘out’) ‘in fact, actually’ | ||
b. | thực ra (寔 ‘real’ + out) ‘in fact, actually’ | ||
c. | thật sự (實 ‘real’ + 事 ‘matter’) ‘in fact, actually’ | ||
d. | thực sự (寔 ‘real’ + 事 ‘matter’) ‘in fact, actually’ | ||
e. | trên thực tế (on + 實 ‘real’ + 際 ‘occasion’) ‘in fact, actually’ | ||
f. | thật tình (實 ‘real’ + 情 ‘situation’) ‘in fact, actually’ | ||
g. | thực tình (寔 ‘real’ + 情 ‘situation’) ‘in fact, actually’ | ||
h. | quả tình (果 ‘fruit’ + 情 ‘situation’) ‘in fact, actually’ | ||
i. | quả thế (果 ‘fruit’ + ‘so’) ‘in fact, actually’ | ||
j. | quả thực (果 ‘fruit’ + 寔 ‘real’) ‘in fact, actually’ | ||
k. | quả thật (果 ‘fruit’ + 實 ‘reality’) ‘in fact, actually’ | ||
l. | quả nhiên (果 ‘fruit’ + 然 ‘so’) ‘in fact, actually’ | ||
m. | quả vậy (果 ‘fruit’ + ‘so’) ‘in fact, actually’ | ||
n. | kỳ thật (其 ‘its/that’ + 實 ‘real’) ‘in fact, actually’ | ||
o. | kỳ thực (其 ‘its/that’ + 寔 ‘real’) ‘in fact, actually’ |
|
Contrarily, the counterpart expressions in Vietnamese to such cognate-like forms in Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Thai, that is, thật, have not yet come under close scrutiny, especially from the perspective of grammaticalization. Broadly speaking, ‘truth’-related expressions with 眞/真 ‘truth’ in Chinese, Korean, and Thai have developed in a convergent way to DMs, although the Japanese counterpart shinni ‘truly, genuinely’ has not (yet) reached the DM stage. Therefore, this study uncovers pathways of change from ‘truth’ to a DM in Vietnamese and contributes to a better understanding of the ways DMs develop in this particular cultural region.
Before proceeding, let us examine one of common views of DMs. Brinton (2010: 285–286) clarifies the following formal features of DMs:
(3) DMs
They are phonologically “short” items that preferentially occur in sentence-initial position. They are syntactically independent elements that are loosely attached to (parenthetical to) their host clause and often constitute a separate intonation unit and as such have scope over global units of discourse (beyond the level of the clause). They occur with high frequency, especially in oral discourse, and may be stylistically stigmatized. (Brinton 2010: 285–286)7
Notably, DMs also have text-connective and interpersonal functions, including subjective and intersubjective functions. The concept of speaker stance encompasses both subjectivity and intersubjectivity. Subjectivity refers to the speaker’s expression of their own attitudes and beliefs (Lyons 1982: 102), whereas intersubjectivity pertains to the speaker’s awareness of the addressee’s attitudes and beliefs (Traugott 2003: 126, 2010: 33).
Data and methodology
The data used for this study are twofold. For diachronic data, I use Phép giảng tám ngày (PGTN; Cathechismvs in octo dies diuisus; Catechisms in eight days), which is the first Romanized Vietnamese prose written in 1651 by Alexandre de Rhodes. According to Kishimoto (2018: 58), PGTN is a Latin/Vietnamese bilingual translation. In addition, Schreiter (2015: 8) evaluates PGTN as follows: “The Cathechismus he wrote to evangelize the Vietnamese people was the first Vietnamese-language book to be published in the West. And the Roman alphabet with a diacritical marking system he devised became the basis for the alphabet used to this day in the Vietnamese language.”8 Maspero (1912: 9, Note 1) reports that PGTN relates to the Tonkinese dialect, that is the northern dialect. In the Từ điển Việt–Bồ–La (TĐVBL; Dictionarium Annamiticum Lusitanum et Latinum; The dictionary of Annamese, Lusitanian and Latin) compiled by Rhodes in 1651 (See 2.1 for its significance in the history of the language) along with PGTN, thật is spelled as thặt, and it is defined as verdade (truth) and certo (right) in Lusitanian, that is, Portuguese, as well as veritas (truth), atis (truly), and verus (true) in Latin.9 The data of PGTN and TĐVBL is sourced from Wikisource, a free-content digital library maintained by the Wikimedia Foundation. For contemporary Vietnamese, I use data from the northern dialect, which comprise written and spoken data obtained from a language consultant,10 quotes from the Internet, and family conversations.11
For the methodology, I will compare examples from the 17th century with contemporary ones to see how thật-based DMs develop over time, with a particular focus on their pragmatic functions. This approach will help to reveal part of the grammatical pathways that lead from ‘truth’ to a DM in Vietnamese, along with the characteristics of this change.
As Vietnamese lacks inflectional morphology, it is necessary to differentiate word classes based on their functions and distribution for diachronic and typological comparison. The following are brief definitions of terms related to word class in Vietnamese grammar. Nominals can be used as the subject, object of a verb, or object of a preposition. Classifiers are sometimes used before or instead of nominals to indicate specificity and definiteness. Adjectivals can modify noun phrases and act as a predicate. Adverbials modify adjectivals and clauses. Notably, utterance-final particles (UFPs) are used to convey pragmatic information, such as the speaker’s emotions and epistemic state, and to indicate the connection and relationship between preceding discourse. Some UFPs can be compounds.
4 .Results
In this section, I present the following five types of usages of thật, namely, (A) nominal, (B) adjectival, (C) adverbial, (D) utterance-final, and (E) DM, with examples from the 17th century and contemporary Vietnamese. Results indicate that thật was not used as (D) utterance-final particles or (E) DM in the historical context. Instead, it primarily appeared in prose as (B) adjectival meaning ‘true’ and (C) adverbial meaning ‘truly’ or ‘really,’ particularly in the context of conveying “religious truth” to the Vietnamese at that time. In contrast, today thật exhibits a range of uses, including (B) adjectival meaning ‘real’; (C) adverbial (sometimes followed by a linker là) ‘really’; (D) as an utterance-final particle meaning ‘indeed’; and (E) DM in utterance-initial position, such as thật ra (thật + out) meaning ‘in fact’.
4.1. Vietnamese in the 17th century[12]
4.1.1. Nominal usage
In the texts from the 17th century, the word thật does not exist as a noun. It is preceded by the classifier ſự, which originated from the Sino-Vietnamese word 事 (meaning ‘matter’), to form the noun ſự thạt (sự thật with contemporary spelling), rendered in English as ‘truth,’ as shown in (4). Note that in traditional Vietnamese linguistics, classifiers are functionally treated as nouns.
(4) | e thì13 | phải | giữ | ba | ſự | một | là14 | ſự | thạt, |
| LNK | have.to | keep | three | CLF | one | LNK | CLF | THẬT |
| hai | là | ſự | cou᷄ bàng, | ba | là | ſự | cần: | |
| two | LNK | CLF | fair |
| three | LNK | CLF | need |
| ‘(The second commandment prescribes us not to offend God with our tongue by swearing by God’s name in vain. For an oath in the name of God or of divine things not to be a sin), there are three conditions: truth, justice, and necessity. (Lit. then, (we) have to keep three matters, one is real one, two is fair one, three is necessary one.)’ |
4.1.2. Adjectival usage
As an attributive adjective meaning ‘true’, thật follows a noun as shown in (5).
(5) | m huấng lọ | người | ở | thể | nầy | thì | phải | tìm | |
| much less | people | in | world | this | LNK | have.to | find | |
| biét | đươc | ai, | làm | Chúa | thật | đã | sinh |
|
| know | POSSIB | who | do | lord | THẬT | PFT | give.birth | |
| cho | nên | blời, | đất, | muôn vật, | mà | thờ | đấy. |
|
| let | should | sky | earth | all.things | LNK | worship | DEM.MED | |
| ‘How much more should all in this world find who the true lord is and the creator of heaven and the earth and all things in order to adore him.’ |
In addition, the following is an example of thật as a predicative adjective. In (6), thật follows an intensifier rứt meaning ‘very sincere’.
(6) | ſ Mà | đức | Chúa | Ieſu | rứt | khiem nhưầng, |
| LNK | saint | lord | Jesus | INT | modest |
| và | rứt | thạt | thưa | ràng : |
|
| and | INT | THẬT | answer | COMP |
|
| ‘(But the exceedingly good Lord, bearing this injury with great gentleness, did not want to keep silent lest he appeared to have lacked respect for the high priest.) He answered with greatest humility (Lit. And the Lord answered very modestly and very sincerely that…): (“If I have spoken wrongly, show me what I have said wrongly; but if I have spoken rightly, why do you strike me?”’ |
4.1.3. Adverbial usage
As an adverb, thật can express that the following proposition is true (‘without doubt’), modify the proceeding verb (‘really die’), and intensify the following adjective (‘very foolish’), as shown in (7), (8) and (9), respectively.
(7) | y thật | là | ma quỉ | ở | tlao᷄ | địa ngŏục | là | nhà | nó. |
| THẬT | LNK | devil | be | inside | hell | LNK | home | they |
| ‘Without doubt the demon is in hell which is his home.’ |
|
(8) | h ſau hết | đần bà | có | tội | lám, | vì | mlời | thật |
| finally | woman | have | sin | INT | because | sky | THẬT |
| đức | Chúa | blời | răn, | mà | chảng | giữ | thì |
| saint | lord | sky | admonish | LNK | NEG | keep | LNK |
| đe | chết | thạt, |
|
|
|
|
|
| threaten | die | THẬT |
|
|
|
|
|
| ‘Moreover, the woman sinned most grievously by doubting the order and the death threat that God had formally announced (Lit. Finally, the woman had much sin, because the true lord in the sky had admonished that (if she would) not follow (the order) then (she would be) threatened to really die)).’ |
(9) | e ví bàng | có | ai | giã | nhà, | má | chảng | |
| if |
| have | someone | farewell | house | LNK | NEG |
| giã | Chúa | nhà, | thạt | là15 | dại | mà | chớ. |
| farewell | master | house | THẬT | LNK | foolish | LNK | UFP |
| ‘(Suppose you enter a house and see that things to eat and drink have been prepared and laid out. After you have eaten and drunk and rested, to whom do you give thanks, to the house or to the master of the house, even though you do not see him?) Would it not be foolish (Lit. very foolish) to give thanks to the house and not to its master?’ |
4.2. Contemporary usages
4.2.1. Nominal usage
Similar to the Vietnamese language of the17th-century, sự thật (classifier + true) is used to mean denote ‘truth, fact’ as shown in (10).
(10) Đó là sự thật đấy16.
DEM.MED LNK CLF true UFP [sharing information]
(That’s true, for your information [(Lit.) ‘That’s a type of truth’].) (Elicitation17)
4.2.2. Adjectival usage
As an attributive adjective meaning ‘true’, thật follows a noun as shown in (11).
(11)18 Có nên sử dụng tên thật trên Facebook của mình hay không?
Q should use name real on PN of I or NEG
‘Should I use my real name on Facebook or not?’ (A quote from the Internet)
Especially in a spoken context, thật is used as a type of backchanneling19 with some UFPs such as thật không? ‘really?’ as in (12) or thật à? ‘really?’ as in (13). In both instances, the speakers express surprise at new information or information that contradicts their prior expectations, and demonstrate interest through these thật-based backchannelings. In (12), the daughter is astonished because the mother reveals unexpected information about desserts that the daughter was unaware of. In (13), the mother is surprised when the father informs her that the price of the candles they are discussing is cheaper than she had assumed.
(12) M: có lẽ tráng miệng là những xoài đấy
perhaps dessert LNK PL mango UFP [sharing information]
‘Perhaps the dessert was mangos, for your information. ’
D: thật không?
true UFP [question]
‘Really?’ (Family conversation)
(13) F: hôm nay mình xem cái cây nến kia
today I [self]20 see CLF [thing] CLF [tree-like object] candle DEM.DIST
‘I saw that candle (in the store) today.’
một cây kia là hai trăm nghìn
one CLF DEM.DIST LNK two hundred thousand
‘That candle cost 200,000 Vietnamese dollars (= about 10 US dollars).’
M: bao nhiêu?
how much
‘How much?’
F: hai trăm nghìn
two hundred thousand
‘200,000 Vietnamese dollars.’
M: thật à?
real UFP [question with mild surprise]
‘Really?’ (Family conversation)
4.2.3. Adverbial usage
(14) is an example of thật as an intensifier modifying an attributive adjective ngon ‘delicious’.
(14) 21 Làm món nướng thật ngon
make food grill THẬT delicious
‘Make really delicious grilled dishes.’ (A quote from the Internet)
In sentences (15), (16), and (17), thật intensifies the negation of stative verbs of emotion that follow it such as nỡ ‘bear’, chịu ‘bear’, and hiểu ‘understand’, meaning ‘really unbearable’ or ‘really incomprehensive’.
(15)22 Giờ phải chia xa, tôi thật không nỡ chút nào.
time have.to separate far I [servant] THẬT NEG bear little any
‘When I have to be far away (from my wife), I cannot bear (it) at all.’
(A quote from the Internet)
(16)23 Thật không chịu nổi!
THẬT NEG bear able
‘Really unbearable!’ (A quote from the Internet)
(17)24 “Tôi thật không hiểu nổi”
I [servant] THẬT NEG understand able
‘Really incomprehensive (for me)!’ (A quote from the Internet)
The adverbial thật can also modify a predicate adjective such as lãng mạn ‘romantic’ as shown in (18).
(18) Phim này thật là25 lãng mạn.
Movie DEM.PROX THẬT LNK romantic
‘This movie is really romantic.’ (Elicitation)
In addition, the adverbial thật can modify proceeding verbs tưởng ‘think’ in (19), nói ‘say’ in (20) and (21) , and sống ‘live’ in (21), meaning ‘truly’, ‘candidly’ or ‘honestly’, respectively. Note that, as shown in (19)–(21), thật is not formally treated as an object noun like its English translation, ‘truth,’ but rather as an adverbial modifying the predicate.
(19)26 nói đùa mà cứ tưởng thật
say lie but continue think THẬT
‘(I) lied, but (you) believed it to be true.’ (A quote from the Internet)
(20)27 Không phải lúc nào cũng nên nói thật
NEG right whenever should say THẬT
‘Talking candidly isn’t always the best choice.’ (A quote from the Internet)
(21)28 A quote from the Internet
Nhà văn phải là người nói thật, sống thật
writer have.to LNK person say THẬT live THẬT
‘A writer must be someone who tells the truth and lives honestly.’
(A quote from the Internet)
4.2.4. Utterance-final particle usage
Sometimes, thật appears as an UFP with other UFPs, which as a whole plays an intensifier role. For example, thật đấy and ấy thật are used utterance-finally in (22)–(26) respectively. In other words, thật is not fixed but formulaic (or loosely conventionalized). While thật as an advervial to intensify the objective criterion, such as ‘better/worse/more/less than normal’, it serves as a UFP to express the speaker’s subjective evaluation based on direct experience, such as the speaker’s fatigue in (22).
(22) M: mệt thật đấy tired THẬT UFP [sharing information]
‘(I’m) tired, indeed, (for your information).’ (Family conversation)
In (23) and (24), the speaker (M) discusses the plot of the theatrical play she attended the day before. She evaluates the playwright’s and actor’s styles based on her actual experience.
(23) M: kiểu kịch Lưu Quang Vũ ấy29 thật
style play PN UFP [shared information] THẬT
‘(That was) exactly the playwright Luu Quang Vu’s dramatic style, indeed.
(Family conversation)
(24) M: thằng Xuân Bắc, nó đóng buồn cười thật đấy
CLF [young man] PN he play humorous THẬT UFP [sharing information]
‘Mr. Xuan Bac played a very humorous role (in the drama yesterday, indeed).
(Family conversation)
(25) is an interjectional use of thật. When the speaker says chết30 thật (Lit. ‘really dying’) to express his or her annoyance or disappointment, however, he or she is not dying in reality (cf. (4)).
(25) Chết thật!
die THẬT
‘Oh no!’ (Elicitation)
4.2.5. Discourse marker usage
Notably, DM usage shows a more subjective view of the situation in an utterance-initial position as shown below. This discourse characteristic is in contrast to the UFP usage used in the utterance-final position, as in Section 4.2.4. (see Section 5.2 for relevant discussions). Furthermore, thật has developed in diverse ways as DMs, some of which are shown below (see also Section 2.2). In examples (26)–(29), thật không may ‘unfortunately’ and thật là may ‘fortunately’ indicate the speaker’s subjective attitude toward the situation described, rather than presenting objective facts. These terms help to draw the addressee’s attention to the speaker’s perspective.
(26)31
Thật không may, dịch vụ Google Play đã ngừng
THẬT NEG fortunate service PN PFT stop
‘Unfortunately, Google Play services has stopped’. (A quote from the Internet)
(27)32 Thật không may, tựa phần mềm này không còn
THẬT NEG fortunate title part soft DEM.PROX NEG remain
trong kho.
within store
‘Unfortunately, this title is permanently out of inventory.’ (A quote from the Internet)
(28)33 Thật không may lại có vấn đề.
THẬT NEG fortunate again have problem
‘Unfortunately, there is a problem again.’ (A quote from the Internet)
(29)34 Thật là may, một người bạn đã cho cậu
THẬT LNK fortunate one person friend PFT let him [uncle, young man]
mượn một chiếc máy bay, …[snip]
borrow one CLF [vehicle] airplane
‘Fortunately, a friend lent him an airplane, …[snip]’ (A quote from the Internet)
In examples (30)–(33), the phrase (phải nói) thật là, which translates to ‘I had to choose, to be honest’ (literally ‘I have to tell the truth that’), indicates that the speaker feels the situation being described is challenging to communicate to the addressee. This concern arises from the speaker’s worries about how the addressee might react. It is worth noting that the words phải ‘have to’ and nói ‘say, tell’) can be omitted without losing the meaning.
(30)35 Phải nói thật là chất lượng xây dựng các tòa nhà tại
have.to say THẬT LNK quality construction PL building in
Việt Nam quá kém.
Vietnam too low.‘To be honest, the quality of the building construction in Vietnam is too low.’
(A quote from the Internet)
(31)36 “Nói thật là rất khó”
say THẬT LNK INT difficult
‘To be honest, (it’s) very difficult.’ (A quote from the Internet)
(32)37 A quote from the Internet
Nói thật là không dám ra khỏi nhà luôn, [snip]
say THẬT LNK NEG dare go.out escape house immediately
‘To be honest, (I) dared to leave (my) house right away.’
(A quote from the Internet)
(33) Thật là anh38 nhớ em nhưng anh
THẬT LNK I [brother] miss you [sister] but I [brother]
không dám nói ra.
NEG dare say outwards
‘To be honest, I miss you but I cannot tell you.’ (Elicitation)
In (34) and (35), thật ra (thật + ra) means ‘actually’ and indicates that the speaker presents a situation as a fact that contradicts the addressee’s expectations.
(34)39 Thật ra, không phải lúc nào cố gắng cũng là tốt
THẬT RA NEG right whenever exert.effort also LNK good
‘Actually, it’s not always good to exert effort.’ (A quote from the Internet)
(35)40 Thật ra rất đơn giản
THẬT RA INT simple
‘Actually, it’s really simple.’ (A quote from the Internet)
In (36), quả thật (fruit + thật) meaning ‘in fact’ appears in the utterance-initial position, indicating that the speaker perceives the situation as a fact, similar to thật ra ‘actually’ in (34) and (35).
(36)41 Quả thật, tôi không biết nên giải quyết
QUẢ THẬT I [servant] NEG know should solve
vấn đề này như thế nào và bắt đầu từ đâu?
problem DEM.PROX like how and begin from where
‘In fact, I don’t know how (I) should solve this problem and where (should I) start?’
(A quote from the Internet)
What I have shown above can be summarized as in Table 1. First, the nominal usage of thật was obsolete, if not possible, in the 17th century. Second, while adjectival and adverbial usages are attested in the 17th century, the DM usage is found only in contemporary Vietnamese. Lastly, the newly derived DM usage is realized in a variety of ways, which I indicates that thật has been well grammaticalized in the language.
Table 1. Thật-based expressions in the 17th and 20th centuries
| 17th century | 20th century |
(A) Nominal usage | obsolete | obsolete |
(B) Adjectival usage | Chúa thật ‘the true lord’ Ex. (5) rứt thạt ‘very sincerely’ Ex. (6) | tên thật ‘real name’ Ex. (11) thật không? ‘really’ Ex. (12) |
(C) Adverbial usage | thật là ‘without doubt’ Ex. (7) chết thạt ‘really die’ Ex. (8) thạt là dại ‘very foolish’ Ex. (9) | món nướng thật ngon ‘really delicious grilled dishes’ Ex. (14) thật là lãng mạn ‘really romantic’ Ex . (18) nói thật ‘tell the truth’ Ex. (20), (21) |
(D) UFP usage | n.a. | mệt thật ‘tired indeed’ Ex. (23) |
(E) DM usage | n.a. | thật không may ‘unfortunately’ Ex. (26), (27), (28) nói thật là ‘to be honest’ Ex. (31), (32) thật là ‘to be honest’ Ex. (33) thật ra ‘actually’ Ex. (34) (35) quả thật ‘in fact’ Ex. (36) |
Discussion
5.1 From “true” to “intensive” in Sino-Vietnamese
The above observations suggest the following. First, the historical pathway of Sino-Vietnamese 實 thật seems to be in line with the well-attested grammaticalization path from “true” to “intensive” (Kuteva et al. 2019: 443); from the adjectival usage ‘real’ to the adverbial usage ‘really, indeed’, subsequently giving rise to DMs in contemporary Vietnamese. In a broad sense, Hansen’s (2018a, b) cyclicity hypothesis holds true for Sino-Vietnamese cases. Interestingly, adjectival and adverbial usages can be attested in the 17th-century text PGTN. When the Chinese character 實 for thật was borrowed into Vietnamese (presumably as a noun), its adjectival usage appeared first, followed by its adverbial usage, because the reverse is not plausible from the standpoint of language change. However, of course, this is mostly a matter of speculation owing to the lack of any reliable number of historical resources in the language,42 although it is based on some cross-linguistic evidence (Kuteva et al. 2019: 443).
5.2. Toward (inter)subjectification
Second, the newly attested DMs of thật origin in contemporary Vietnamese are likely to convey the speaker’s view of the content of the immediate proposition, that is, subjectification. Moreover, and some of them seem to play an interpersonal role of prompting a reaction from the interlocutors, that is, intersubjectification. Consider the following examples. Note that ấy implies shared knowledge.
(23)’
M: kiểu kịch Lưu Quang Vũ ấy thật
style play PN UFP THẬT
‘(That was) exactly the playwright Luu Quang Vu’s dramatic style, indeed.’
(Family conversation).
(31)’ A quote from the Internet
“Nói thật là rất khó”
say THẬT LNK INT difficult
‘To be honest, (it’s) very difficult.’
When thật is used as an adverbial intensifier, it appears typically in the utterance-final position as in (26).43 The usage shows that what is being said exceeds a certain standard according to the speaker’s judgment: This usage of thật can be regarded as a case of subjectification.44 Contrasting ly, when thật is used as a DM, it always appears in the utterance-initial position as in (36).45 These DM usages serve to introduce the speaker’s attitude toward the following content, which is however only partly true. Interestingly, such utterance-initial DMs appear to play a vital role in attracting the attention of potential interlocutors, thus constituting leading to a case of intersubjectification.46 The fact that some ‘truth’-related expressions in Vietnamese have taken on an intersubjective role in discourse leads us to a greater understanding of the way borrowed words of Chinese origin develop into DMs in each language (see Khammee 2024, inter alia).
Further, the functional differentiation of subjective and intersubjective thật-based DMs in terms of discourse-syntactic positions deserves attention. Arguably, Beeching and Detges (2014: 11) propose the following hypothesis: linguistic items such as adverbs and DMs occurring before the proposition serve to express something subjective, whereas those occurring after the proposition serve to express something intersubjective. It is true that certain items in some languages provide evidence in favor of Beeching and Detges’s (2014) hypothesis (see papers therein). However, Vietnamese DMs, at least those presented in this study, provide evidence against the hypothesis (see also papers in Rhee et al. 2021).
5.3. Morphosyntactic expansion in grammaticalization
Third, the formal feature of this grammaticalization is worth reconsideration. When it comes to DMs and relevant expressions such as general extenders (GEs) in the history of English, Overstreet and Yule (2021: 103) suggest that “there is a pattern of change from a longer form to a shorter form, retaining only the first two constituents of the longer expression. As we discovered, this is a typical direction of change throughout the history of English.” While Overstreet and Yule (2021: 175–176) summarize some of the structural differences of GEs in several languages,47 the above-mentioned pathway of change seems generally plausible.48 In grammaticalization studies, it is called ‘erosion,’ that is, “loss of phonetic features that a linguistic expression experiences in the course of grammaticalization” (Narrog & Heine 2021: 334, see Givón 1979: 208–209 for a typical reduction scale).
Contrarily, the Vietnamese DMs summarized in (2) show formal expansion instead of formal reduction, i.e., thật 實 ‘real’ + ra ‘out’ in (2a), thực寔 ‘real’ + ra ‘out’ in (2b), quả果 ‘fruit’ + thực 寔 ‘real’ in (2j), kì 其 ‘its/that’ + thật 實 ‘real’ in (2n) as well as thật 實 ‘real’ + là (linker), discussed in this study. Considering the fact that thật 實 and its cognates in Japanese, Korean, and Thai are all monosyllabic-like unless particles are attached (e.g., shinni [shin ‘truth’ + -ni (adverbializer)] ‘truly’), it would be natural for a short form to recruit other elements to make different types of DMs over time. In fact, we can see similar patterns of change in Thai (Khammee 2024) and in Japanese (Higashiizumi et al. 2024). Therefore, this study raises the possibility that some languages go through morphosyntactic expansion or modification instead of erosion to produce a cluster of related DMs.
5.4. Borrowed as a lexeme and grammaticalized as a DM[49]
Last, it would be useful to suggest how DMs are derived in Asian languages, an issue especially addressed in this special issue. The borrowability of DMs through language contact has been pursued mostly from a synchronic perspective, notably in the field of bilingualism (e.g., Maschler 2000, Goss & Salmons 2000). Some studies regard DMs (or prefabricated multiword units) as among the most frequently borrowed items (e.g., Muysken 1981, Grant 2012). Suppose that DMs are easily borrowed from one language to another; ‘truth’-related DMs of Chinese origin in Japanese, Korean, Thai, and Vietnamese might have been borrowed through either intensive or extensive contact with Chinese at various points in history. Contrary to expectations, however, this is quite unlikely as reported in this special issue (see also Rhee et al. 2021, Higashiizumi & Shibasaki (forthcoming), inter alia). In these languages, certain lexical items were borrowed from Chinese as is, and then, they developed in language-specific (but similar) ways into DMs.50
How, then, can we explain the unborrowable nature of DMs in Asian languages spoken in the region of Chinese characters? It is well known that DMs are typically developed and used in spoken discourse. Therefore, one can easily find studies of borrowing through spoken contact (e.g., Clyne 2003: 225–232 on the use of well and you know in bilingual and trilingual contexts, that is, English, German, Dutch; see also García Vizcaíno and Martínez-Cabeza (2005) for well in English and bueno in Spanish). However, such heavy lexical borrowing of Chinese words into Japanese, Korean, Thai, and Vietnamese became possible only through written contact (see Note 1). Even contemporary DMs, if they can be traced to certain borrowed lexemes form Chinese, are likely to have developed after borrowing in their own ways. Moreover, such written contact-based lexemes are now used in spoken contexts in Vietnamese, as shown in Section 4. As this is a research area to be exploited, I plan to do follow-up research on it, based on both information and inputs from Rhee et al. (2021), Higashiizumi and Shibasaki (forthcoming), and this special issue.
Conclusion remarks
In this study, I presented a variety of Vietnamese thật-based DMs, by analyzing data from the 17th-century and contemporary Vietnam. The following points were derived from the analysis. Thật-related expressions seem to have followed the well-attested path from “true” to “intensive” (Kuteva et al. 2019: 443) and further into DMs (Section 5.1). The subjective and intersubjective usages of thật forms are distributed in a complementary manner: The subjective usage appears in utterance-final position, while the intersubjective usage appears at utterance-initial position. Theoretically as well as descriptively, this finding suggests that researchers to reconsider Beeching & Detges’s (2014) hypothesis (Section 5.2). Thật has also recruited other elements to create multiword-unit DMs, which implies that DMs do not always undergo formal reduction (Section 5.3). As to whether DMs are borrowed through language contact, examples from Vietnamese and from Japanese (Higashiizumi & Shibasaki forthcoming)and Thai (Khammee 2024) suggest that lexical elements are first borrowed as they are and then grammaticalized as DMs in language-specific but similar ways (Section 5.4).
These findings are theoretical contributions to gain a better understanding of the way DMs emerged and developed in Vietnamese, through a descriptive analysis of historical and contemporary data. However, a comparison of data from the 17th century and from present-day Vietnamese is neither balanced nor sufficient: there is a need to examined the 18th- to 19th-century texts51 written in Chinese scripts, Chữ nôm and Quốc ngữ (See 2.1) as well. Languages do not change in a uniform way at a uniform rate. Therefore, I will conduct a follow-up review and research in to further test the results of the study.
The current paper was originally presented at the panel: Discourse-pragmatic markers of Chinese origin in East Asian languages, at the 18th International Pragmatics Conference (organized by Seongha Rhee, Reijirou Shibasaki and Wenjiang Yang, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, June 10, 2023). I express my gratitude to the organizers for accepting my contribution. I wish to thank special issue editors and the reviewers. I also thank Reijirou Shibasaki for useful discussions. I would like to thank Masaaki Shimizu (Osaka University) for introducing me to Catechisms in eight days. I would also like to express my gratitude to Laurel Brinton for her engaging discussions. I am indebted to my consultant for her time and patience. I am grateful to the conversational participants for the record permission. Any remaining errors are solely my responsibility. This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers JP18K12363 and JP22K13099.
Abbreviations
CLF classifier
COMP complementizer
DEM.DIST distal demonstrative
DEM.MED medial demonstrative
DEM.PROX proximal demonstrative
INT intensifier
LNK linker
NEG negation
PFT perfect
PL plural
PN proper noun
POSSIB possibility
Q question
UFP utterance-final particle
1 Tomita (1988: 761) indicates that the direct control of Vietnam by China from 111 B.C. to 938 A.D. led to the spread of Chinese culture and language in Vietnam. Furthermore, according to Kawamoto (2011: 1901), by the 11th century, the phonetic system of Sino-Vietnamese vocabulary had individualized from Chinese.
2 Maspero, Henri. 1912. Études sur la phonétique historique de la langue annamite. Les initiales. Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 12. 1–124.
3 Interestingly, the Sino-Vietnamese lexeme chân meaning ‘true,’ which is derived from 真, is not used as a DM in Vietnamese. One reason may be that, as noted in Section 2.1, Sino-Vietnamese words have been largely used in written and formal discourse. This fact offers a possible account for the rarity of spoken and colloquial-oriented elements common to Chinese and Vietnamese (Alves 2007a: 357).
4 The author added glossing with Chinese characters and English.
5 There is another dialectal variant thiệt often used in the southern dialect (Phạm et al. 2009: 388).
6 In the Nguyễn dynasty (19th century), 實 thật was changed to 寔, and its pronunciation was changed to thực, because 實 violated the naming taboo of Empress Tá Thiên, Emperor Thiệu Trị’s mother (Chèn 1982: 570–571). Therefore, it is not expected that thực would be observed in the documents of the 17th century.
7 See Brinton (2017: 2–8) and Heine et al. (2021: 6) for more recent and comprehensive definitions of DMs as well as pragmatic markers (PMs). For a functional differentiation of DMs and PMs see Shibasaki and Higashiizumi (forthcoming).
8 Shimizu (2024) is known as a linguistic study based on PGTN, which probes into the historical development of the Vietnamese durative/continuous/progressive marker đang, which originated from the Sino-Vietnamese word當.
9 The original texts regarding thật in TĐVBL are as follows. The author added English translations in the brackets to them.
thặt verdade [truth], certo [right] veritas [truth], atis [truly], verus [true], a, vm, nói thặt fallar verdade [tell the truth]: verum loqui [to speak the truth]. cho thặt: certamente [certainly]: certè [sure], profectò [surely], ſanè [really]. thề thặt : iurar verdade ([to swear the truth]: verum iurate [to swear the truth]. thề ngay, idem [the same]. thặt thà fiel [faithful], ſincero [sincerely)]: veridicus [truthful], a, vm, ſincerus [sincere], a. vm.
10 The language consultant is a female native Vietnamese speaker who was born in Hanoi, Vietnam. She is in her 50s as of 2024.
11 Data for the present study comprised an 8-hour audio recording of a collection of family dinner conversations. These conversations were recorded in Hanoi by the author in 2014. Glossed excerpts with Japanese translations were included in Adachi (2021) as an appendix. Table 0 provides background information about the family members, all of whom are native speakers of Vietnamese who were born and raised in Hanoi.
Table 0. Background information of discourse participants in the Vietnamese family conversation database
Name |
| Occupation |
Father | (F) | Wholesaler |
Mother | (M) | Language teacher |
Daughter | (D) | Junior high school student |
12 Regarding examples in 4.1, I provide original texts of PGTN cited from Wikisource in the first line, followed by glossing in the second line. The English translation is quoted from Phan (2015). And if necessary, a literal translation is added by the author.
14 The word là “is a copular verb” and also “functions as a consecutive conjunction, a focus marker or a complementizer. (Do-Hurinville & Dao 2019: 58, Note 1).” In this paper, I consider là as a polyfunctional linker and gloss it as LNK, similar to thì (refer to Note 13 in this paper).
15 When the adverbial thật modifies a predicate adjective as an intensifier, inserting the marker là after thật is grammatically optional. Lien (2009: 748) analyzes the copula-derived si7 是as a focus marker that follows sit8 實 ‘really’ based on the following example of early Southern Min. Similarly, in Vietnamese, copula-derived marker là that follows thật and precedes an adjective can also be considered a focus marker, as demonstrated in (9). For a more in-depth discussion on the multifunctionality of the marker là, refer to Note 14 in this paper.
b. sit8 si7 chhing1-khi3 (07.000, WL)
實 是 清氣
really FM clean‘It is really clean.’ (Lien 2009: 748)
16 UFP đấy functions as an assertive marker when the speaker thinks that the information is new to the addressee with the meaning ‘which you may not know about’ or ‘for your information’ (Adachi 2021: 81–84).
17 The elicited examples (10), (18), (26), and (28) were provided by the language consultant. Refer to Note 10 of this paper for the original source.
18 Công ty TNHH Phương Nam VINA. 2014. Có nên sử dụng tên thật của mình trên facebook hay không? [Should I use my real name on Facebook or not?] https://websitechuyennghiep.vn/co-that-su-dung-ten-that-tren-facebook.html (published on 5 August, 2014; accessed on 9 September 2024)
19 Mereu (2024: 2) defines backchanellings as “the short productions uttered by one participant in the conversation when the other participant occupies the floor.”
20 Supplemental information may be added within brackets.
21 Khánh Hòa. 2013. Làm món nướng thật ngon [Make really delicious grilled dishes.], Vnexpress https://vnexpress.net/lam-mon-nuong-that-ngon-2755290.html (published on 16 May, 2013 accsessed on 9 September 2024).
22 VOV2. Tôi không nỡ bán vườn, xa quê [I can’t bring myself to sell the garden and be far away from home]. https://vov2.vov.vn/toi-khong-no-ban-vuon-xa-que-12575.vov (published on 3 February, 2015; accessed on 9 September 2024).
23 Đăng Huỳnh. Thật không chịu nổi! [Really unbearable!]. Cần Thơ online. https://baocantho.com.vn/that-khong-chiu-noi--a69162.html (published on 15 July, 2012; accsessed on 9 September 2024).
24 Huỳnh Trung Phong. 2024. Declan Rice: “Tôi thật không hiểu nổi” [Declan Rice: “Really incomprehensive!”]. Tin thể thao [Sports news]. https://www.tinthethao.com.vn/declan-rice-toi-that-khong-hieu-noi-d766912.html (published on 24 June, 2024; accsessed on 9 September 2024).
25 See Note 15 in this paper for a focus marker là.
26 Soha tratu. 2024. Thật [true]. http://tratu.soha.vn/dict/vn_vn/Th%E1%BA%ADt (accessed on 9 September 2024).
27 Hoài Nam. 2024. Không phải lúc nào cũng nên nói thật [Talking candidly isn’t always the best choice.] Dân Trí [People’s Intellectual] https://dantri.com.vn/nhip-song-tre/khong-phai-luc-nao-cung-nen-noi-that-1206978735.htm (published on 1April, 2008; retrieved on 9 September 2024)
28 Lam Điền. 2022. Nhà văn nói về nghề: Nhà văn phải là người nói thật, sống thật [A writer must be someone who tells the truth and lives honestly.]. Tuổi trẻ [Youth]. https://vanchuongthanhphohochiminh.vn/nha-van-noi-ve-nghe-nha-van-phai-la-nguoi-noi-that-song-that (published on 8 June, 2022; retrieved on 9 September 2024)
29 Utterance-final particle ấy is used to remind the addressee of something the addressee already knew (‘remember?’) (Adachi 2021: 90–99).
30 Chết ‘die’ alone and chết rồi ‘(die + PFT) Lit. ‘have been dead’ also have interjectional use meaning ‘Oh no!’.
31 Công ty SONY Electronics Việt Nam. 2024. Thông báo sau xuất hiện thường xuyên: Thật không may, dịch vụ Google Play đã ngừng. [The following message appears frequently: Unfortunately, Google Play services has stopped]. https://www.sony.com.vn/electronics/support/articles/00141861 (published on 1 October, 2016; accessed on 9 September 2024).
32 Intel Software Advantage Program Support Center. 2024. Thật không may, tựa phần mềm này không còn trong kho [Unfortunately, this title is permanently out of inventory]. https://tgahelp.zendesk.com/hc/vi/articles/13531897639693-Th%E1%BA%ADt-kh%C3%B4ng-may-t%E1%BB%B1a-ph%E1%BA%A7n-m%E1%BB%81m-n%C3%A0y-kh%C3%B4ng-c%C3%B2n-trong-kho (published on 8 March, 2024; accessed on 9 September 2024).
33 Glosb. 2024. Thật không may [Unfortunately]. https://vi.glosbe.com/vi/en/th%E1%BA%ADt%20kh%C3%B4ng%20may (Accessed on 9 September 2024).
34 Remy Charlip 2014. Thật Là May – Fortunately. Fahasa.com. https://www.fahasa.com/that-la-may-fortunately.html?srsltid=AfmBOoqbqUesqUr_U7MGVeEN-Y8heeft6TITv6eyUDu-Lq5PfuXTwvDP (Accessed on 9 September 2024).
35 Nhất Nam. 2017. Chuyên gia Nhật: “Phải nói thật là chất lượng xây dựng các tòa nhà tại Việt Nam quá kém.” [A Japanese expert: “To be honest, the quality of the building construction in Vietnam is too low.”] Đầu tư Bất động sản [Real Estate Investment]. https://baodautu.vn/batdongsan/chuyen-gia-nhat-phai-noi-that-la-chat-luong-xay-dung-cac-toa-nha-tai-viet-nam-qua-kem-d59560.html (published on 1 March, 2017; Retrieved on 9 September 2024)
36 Hà Vũ 2024. Liên kết phát triển miền Trung: “Nói thật là rất khó” [Central region development linkage: “To be honest, it is very difficult”] VnEconomy. https://vneconomy.vn/lien-ket-phat-trien-mien-trung-noi-that-la-rat-kho.htm (Accessed on 9 September 2024)
37 Đại sứ quán Cộng hòa xã hội chủ nghĩa Việt Nam tại Matxcova - Liên bang Nga [The embassy of Socialist Republic of Viet Nam in the Russian Federation]. 2022. Nỗi niềm người Việt sơ tán từ Ucraina [Concerns of Vietnamese evacuees from Ukraine] https://vnembassy-moscow.mofa.gov.vn/vi-vn/News/EmbassyNews/Trang/N%E1%BB%97i-ni%E1%BB%81m-ng%C6%B0%E1%BB%9Di-Vi%E1%BB%87t-s%C6%A1-t%C3%A1n-t%E1%BB%AB-Ucraina.aspx (published on 14 March, 2022; Accessed on 9 September 2024)
38 In Vietnamese, kinship terms often function as personal pronouns. both among family members and in broader social contexts. These terms vary according to according to gender, age, familiarity, and social relationships. For example, terms like anh ‘elder brother’, chị ‘elder sister’ and em ‘younger sibling’ indicate the power dynamics, intimacy and solidarity between participants in a conversation. Nguyễn (1997: 129) explains that couples, referred to in Vietnamese as vợ chồng ‘wife and husband’, use the terms anh ‘elder brother’ and em ‘younger sister’ to signify their relationship. In this context, anh implies ‘I’ (when the boy or husband is speaking) and em implies ‘you’ (when the girl or wife is speaking), or vice versa.
39 Chùa Hạnh Đức. 2023. Thật ra, không phải lúc nào cố gắng cũng là tốt [Actually, it’s not always good to exert effort] https://chuahanhduc.com/bai-viet/5-nep-song-dao/18550-that-ra-khong-phai-luc-nao-co-gang-cung-la-tot (Published on 4 December, 2023; Retrieved on 9 September 2024).
40 Glosb. 2024. Thật ra [Actually]. https://vi.glosbe.com/vi/en/th%E1%BA%ADt%20ra (accessed on 9 September 2024).
41 VietJack khoa hoc. 2024. ‘Câu hỏi [Question]’ https://khoahoc.vietjack.com/question/464607/qua-that-toi-khong-biet-nen-giai-quyet-van-de-bay-nhu-the-nao-va (published on 14 July, 2024; accessed on 9 September 2024).
42 Alves (2007b: 219) contends that most Vietnamese intensifiers of Chinese origin were not originally grammatical forms in Chinese, but rather became grammatical after being incorporated into Vietnamese. This supports the argument presented in this paper.
43 Of course, it is possible to take this usage as a DM instead of as an adverbial intensifier. However, differentiating from DMs and adverbial intensifiers is a matter I intend to pursue in future research.
44 See Rhee (2021: 342) fors discussion of mirativity based on 事實上 (sasilsang).
45 As presented in Section 2.2, thật is not just used as a single component but often as a part of formulaic sequences such as nói thật là ‘to be honest’. Note that this particular formulaic expression may have been conventionalized enough to be reduced to thật là ‘to be honest’. Nevertheless, this does not necessarily mean the prevalence of ‘erosion’ among Vietnamese DMs (see Section 5.3 for this issue).
46 This attention-getting function of (nói) thật là ‘to be honest’ may be termed ‘projector’. See Hopper & Thompson (2008) and Shibasaki (2014) on projectors.
47 The languages examined therein are English Creoles (Trinidad and Hawai‘i), Brazilian Portuguese and Spanish, Lithuanian, Russian, German, French, Swedish, and Persian. Note that Overstreet and Yule (2021) make no in-depth survey of any of the Asian languages addressed in the special issue.
48 In addition to Overstreet and Yule (2021), the it/there is no X construction with a variety of nouns such as doubt, question, way, wonder, etc. in the slot X underwent clausal reduction to no X as DMs (e.g., Davidse & de Wolf 2012, Gentens et al. 2016, Nykiel & Shibasaki, forthcoming).
49 This subsection is developed from Shibasaki and Higashiizumi (forthcoming).
50 Matras (2007: 57) states that there is no clear evidence of borrowing of DMs in Vietnamese.
51 According to Alves (2005: 320), based on data from Truyện Kiều, a poem written in chữ nôm characters in the 19th century, the adverb thật primarily functions before main verbs rather than adjectives. This observation suggests that DM usage such as thật ra ‘actually’ may occur in the late 19th century or possibly after.
About the authors
Mayumi Adachi
Tokyo University of Foreign Studies
Author for correspondence.
Email: adachi@aa.tufs.ac.jp
ORCID iD: 0009-0007-9174-3932
Associate Professor at the Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies. Her research interest covers Vietnamese pragmatics, specifically, demonstratives, in addition to demonstrative-derived sentence-final particles and interjections. In recognition of her research on spatial and discourse deixis in Vietnamese and the sociolinguistic study of the Vietnamese community in Japan, she was awarded the Shinmura Izuru Research Encouragement Prize FY2022.
Tokyo, JapanReferences
- Adachi, Mayumi. 2021. Betonamugo kuukan daikushisu to sono tenkai: shijishi kara bunmatsushi, kandoushi he [Spatial Deixis and its Development in Vietnamese: From Demonstratives to Sentence-final Particles and Interjections]. Tokyo: Bensei Publishing.
- Alves, Mark J. 2001. What’s so Chinese about Vietnamese? In Graham W. Thurgood (ed.), Papers from the Ninth Annual Meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society, 221-242. Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University, Program for Southeast Asian Studies.
- Alves, Mark J. 2005. Sino-Vietnamese grammatical vocabulary and triggers for grammaticalization. In Vietnam National University, Hanoi. (ed.), Proceedings of the 6th Pan-Asiatic International Symposium on Linguistics, 315-332. Hanoi: Nhà xuất bản Khoa học Xã hội [Social Sciences Publishing House].
- Alves, Mark J. 2007a. Sino-Vietnamese grammatical borrowing: An overview. In Yaron Matras & Jeanette Sakel (eds.), Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective, 343-361. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199192.343
- Alves, Mark J. 2007b. Categories of grammatical Sino-Vietnamese vocabulary. The Mon-Khmer Studies Journal 37. 217-237.
- Alves, Mark J. 2009. Loanwords in Vietnamese. In Martin Haspelmath & Uri Tadmor (eds.), Loanwords in the world’s languages: A comparative handbook, 617-637. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
- Beeching, Kate & Ulrich Detges. 2014. Introduction. In Kate Beeching & Ulrich Detges (eds.), Discourse Functions at the left and right periphery: Crosslinguistic investigations of language use and language change, 1-24. Leiden: Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004274822_002
- Brinton, Laurel J. 2010. Discourse markers. In Andreas H. Jucker & Irma Taavitsainen (eds.), Historical pragmatics, 285-314. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214284.5.285
- Brinton, Laurel J. 2017. The Evolution of Pragmatic Markers in English: Pathways of Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316416013
- Bui, Thi Hoang Anh. 2012. Traduire les marqueurs discursifs (MD) du vietnamien en français. Doctoriales en Sciences du Langage (DoSciLa) 2012-Linguistique et métiers de la traduction, Mar 2012, Paris, France.
- Bui, Thi Hoang Anh. 2015. Etude des marqueurs discursifs du vietnamien dans une perspective comparative avec les marqueurs discursifs du français. Thèse de l’Université Paris Diderot.
- Chèn, Ching-ho. 1982. Dainanjisturoku to genchoshuhon ni tsuite [On Đại Nam thực lục and Châu bản triều Nguyễn] In Ine, fune, Matsuri kankou sewanin [Rice, boats, festivals publishing liaisons] (ed.), Ine, fune, Mtsuri: Matsumoto Nobuhiro sensei tsuitou ronbunshuu [Rice, boats, festivals: Essays marking the death of Professor Matsumoto Nobuhiro], Tokyo: Rokkou shuppan.
- Clyne, Michael. 2003. Dynamics of Language Contact: English and Immigrant Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511606526
- Davidse, Kristin & Simon De Wolf. 2012. Lexicalization and grammaticalization: The development of idioms and grammaticalized expressions with no question. Text & Talk 32. 569-591. https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2012-0027
- Do-Hurinville, Danh-Thành & Huy-Linh Dao. 2019. The Vietnamese polyfunctional marker mà as a Generalized linker: A multilevel approach. Journal of the Southeeast Asian Linguistcs Society 12 (2). 58-71.
- Edmondson, Jerold A. 2006. Vietnamese. In Keith Brown (ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (Second edition). 432-436. Amsterdam/Tokyo: Elsevier.
- García Vizcaíno, María José & Miguel A. Martínez-Cabeza. 2005. The pragmatics of well and bueno in English and Spanish. Intercultural Pragmatics 2 (1). 69-92. https://doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2005.2.1.69
- Gentens, Caroline, Ditte Kimps, Kristin Davidse, Gilles Jacobs, An Van linden & Lieselotte Brems 2016. Mirativity and rhetorical structure: The development and prosody of disjunct and anaphoric adverbials with ‘no’ wonder. In Gunther Kaltenböck, Evelien Keizer & Arne Lohmann (eds.), Outside the clause, 125-56. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.178.05gen
- Givón, Talmy. 1979. On Understanding Grammar. New York: Academic Press. (Revised edition, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2018)
- Goss, Emily L. & Joseph C. Salmons. 2000. The evolution of a bilingual discourse marking system: Modal particles and English markers in German-American dialects. International Journal of Bilingualism 4 (4). 469-84. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069000040040501
- Grant, Anthony P. 2012. Contact, convergence, and conjunctions. In Claudine Chamoreau & Isabelle Léglise (eds.), Dynamics of contact-induced language change, 311-358. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110271430.311
- Hansen, Maj-Britt Mosegaard. 2018a. Cyclic phenomena in the evolution of pragmatic markers: Examples from Romance. In Salvador Pons Bordería & Óscar Loureda Lamas (eds.), Beyond grammaticalization and discourse markers: New issues in the study of language change, 51-77. Leiden: Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004375420_004
- Hansen, Maj-Britt Mosegaard. 2018b. The role of inferencing in semantic/pragmatic cyclicity: The case of Lain nunc and French or/maintenant. Open Linguistics 4. 127-146. https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2018-0007
- Heine, Bernd, Gunther Kaltenböck, Tania Kuteva & Haiping Long. 2021. The Rise of Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108982856
- Higashiizumi, Yuko, Reijirou Shibasaki & Keiko Takahashi. 2024. From truth to truly: The case of shinni ‘truly’ in Japanese. Russian Journal of Linguistics 28(4). 843-864. https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-40518
- Higashiizumi, Yuko & Reijirou Shibasaki (eds.). (forthcoming) The Emergence of Pragmatic Markers in East Asian Languages. Leiden: Brill.
- Hopper, Paul J. & Sandra A. Thompson. 2008. Projectability and clause combining in interaction. In Ritva Laury (ed.), Cross-linguistic studies of clause combining, 99-123. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.80.06hop
- Hopper, Paul J. & Elizabeth C. Traugott 1993. Grammaticalization (1st edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165525
- Khammee, Kultida. 2024. From objective to subjective and to intersubjective functions: The case of the Thai ‘truth’-lexeme. Russian Journal of Linguistics 28 (4). 942-965. https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-40496
- Kishimoto, Emi. 2018. Kirishitan gogakusho no tenkai: Joan rodorigesu to arekusandoru do roodo [The development of Christian language textbooks: João Rodrigues and Alexandre de Lord], Gobun [Language] 110. 52-66.
- Kishimoto, Emi & Sirai Jun. 2022. Kirishitan gogaku nyuumon [Introduction to Missionary Linguistcs]. Tokyo: Yagi Shoten.
- Kuteva, Tania, Bernd Heine, Bo Hong, Haiping Long, Heiko Narrog & Seongha Rhee. 2019. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization (2nd edition). Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316479704
- Lien, Chinfa. 2009. The Focus marker si7 是and lexicalization of si7 mih8 是乜into what wh-words in earlier Southern Min texts. Language and Linguistics 10 (4). 745-764.
- Lyons, John. 1982. Deixis and subjectivity: Loqior, ergo sum? In Robert J. Jarvella & Wolfgang Klein (eds.), Speech, place and action, 101-123. Wiley: Chichester.
- Maschler, Yael. 2000. What can bilingual conversation tell us about discourse markers?: Introduction. International Journal of Bilingualism 4 (4). 437-45. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069000040040101
- Matras, Yaron. 2007. The borrowability of structural categories. In Yaron Matras & Jeanette Sakel (eds.), Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective, 31-73. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199192.31
- Mereu, Daniela, Francesco Cangemi & Martine Grice. 2024. Backchannels are not always very short utterances. The case of Italian Multi-Unit Backchannels. Journal of Pragmatics 228. 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2024.05.003
- Miyajima, Tatsuo. 2019. Gengoshi no keiryōteki kenkyū [Quantitative Study of Language History]. Tokyo: Kasamashoin.
- Murakami, Yutaro & Akio Imai. 2010. Gendai Betonamugo ni okeru Kan-etsugo no kenkyuu (1) Betonamu heno wasei kango no denpa Joukyou [A study on Chinese vocabularies in Vietnamese (1) The reception of Chinese vocabularies from modern Japanese in Vietnamese Southeast Asian studies]. Toukyou Gaidai Tounan Ajiagaku [Southeast Asian studies, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies] 15. 19-32.
- Muysken, Pieter. 1981. Halfway between Quechua and Spanish: The case for relexification. In Arnold Highfield & Albert Valdman (eds.), Historicity and variation in creole studies, 52-78. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma.
- Narrog, Heiko & Bernd Heine. 2021. Grammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Nguyễn, Ðình Hoà. 1961. The Vietnamese Language. Vietnam Culture Series 2. Saigon: Department of National Education.
- Nguyễn, Đình-Hòa 1997. Vietnamese: Tiếng Việt không son phấn [Vietnamese without veneer]. London Oriental and African Language Library 9. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
- Nykiel, Jerzy N. & Reijirou Shibasaki. (forthcoming) On the rise and fall of (it/there is) no nay in the history of English. Paper originally presented at the seventh Colloque Bisannuel de la Diachronie de l’Anglais (CBDA-7) online, January 27, 2023.
- Overstreet, Maryann & George Yule. 2021. General Extenders: The Forms and Functions of a New Linguistic Category. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108938655
- Rhee, Seongha. 2021. From truth to reality to effect: The journey of sasilsang in Korean. Grammaticalization of discourse markers in East Asian Languages. East Asian Pragmatics 6 (3). 331-353. https://doi.org/10.1558/eap.21135
- Rhee, Seongha, Reijirou Shibasaki & Xinren Chen 2021. Grammaticalization of discourse markers in East Asian Languages. East Asian Pragmatics 6 (3). [Special issue]. 271-280.
- Rhee, Seongha & Lin Zhang. 2024. The way of the truth: The case of Korean DM cincca in comparison with Chinese DMs zhenshi and zhende. Russian Journal of Linguistics 28 (4). 818-842. https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-40500
- Schreiter, Robert J. 2015. Foreword. In Peter. C. Phan (ed.), Mission and catechesis: Alexandre de Rhodes & inculturation in seventeenth-century Vietnam, 7-9. Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books.
- Shibasaki, Reiijrou. 2014. On the grammaticalization of the thing is and related issues in the history of American English. In Michael Adams, Laurel J. Brinton & Robert D. Fulk (eds.), Studies in the history of the English language VI, 100-121. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110345957.99
- Shibasaki, Reijirou & Yuko Higashiizumi. (forthcoming) An introduction. In Yuko Higashiizumi & Reijirou Shibasaki (eds.), The emergence of pragmatic markers in East Asian languages. Leiden: Brill.
- Shimizu, Masaaki. 2024. A philological study of the Vietnamese grammatical marker đang. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics 22 (1). 47-65. https://doi.org/10.6519/TJL.202401_22(1).0002
- Tomita, Kenji. 1988. Vietnamugo. In Takashi Kamei, Rokurou Kouno & Eiichi Chino (eds.), The Sanseido encyclopedia of linguistics, Vol. 1, Languages of the world, Part one, 759-787. Tokyo: Sanseido.
- Tomita, Kenji. 2000. Vetonamugo no sekai: Vetonamugo kihon bunten [The World of Vietnamese: Vietnamese Basic Grammar Book]. Tokyo: Daigakusyorin.
- Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2003. From subjectification to intersubjectification. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), Motives for language change, 124-140. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486937.009
- Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2010. (Inter)subjectivity and (inter)subjectification: A reassessment. In Davidse Kristin, Lieven Vandelotte & Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), Subjectification, intersubjectification and grammaticalization, 29-71. Berlin: Mouteon de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110226102.1.29
- Zwartjes, Otto. 2018. Missionary Grammars, Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.384 (Accessed on 9 September 9 2024)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1d67c/1d67c0928459bf82f4647fb5ba6a9f76fe1ea22a" alt=""