On the Development of Adversative BUT in Thai: Cognitive and Discourse Perspectives
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1609.36Keywords:
discourse marker, noncommittal attitude, grammaticalization, tɛ̀ɛ ‘but’, ThaiAbstract
The notion of ‘contrast’ is among the human perceptual and conceptual primitives since human perception relies on contrast-based categorization (Taylor, 1995, 1989). Disjunctives constitute a grammatical category signaling contrast, and adversative exponents tend to develop into discourse markers (DMs), signaling diverse contrast-related notions crosslinguistically. The Thai DM tɛ̀ɛ and its related forms are polyfunctional across discourse domains (Khammee & Rhee, 2022). A corpus-based analysis of recent developments of tɛ̀ɛ reveals a range of interesting intersubjective and discursive functions, notably that of signaling the speaker’s stance toward the foregoing propositions or utterances. This development, by virtue of the lack of expressed contrast, indicates substantial semantic bleaching from the source and extensive intersubjectification between interlocutors. By deploying the DM tɛ̀ɛ utterance-finally, the speaker signals their tepid, non-committal attitude, whereby foregoing serious comments and statements are suddenly relegated to notions outside the speaker’s concern, thus creating a type of disalignment with the interlocutor’s expectations and a sudden withdrawal of significance of the speaker’s foregoing utterances. Thus, the utterance-final DM tɛ̀ɛ creates a pseudo-self-derogation or pseudo-aloofness, which often induces humorous effects and even laughter. This paper analyzes the development of the DM tɛ̀ɛ and its derivatives from a grammaticalization perspective.
References
Aijmer, K. (2002). English discourse particles: Evidence from a corpus. Benjamins.
Aijmer, K. (2013). Understanding pragmatic markers: A variational pragmatic approach. Edinburgh University Press.
Allport, G. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley.
Brinton, L. J. (1996). Pragmatic markers in English: Grammaticalization and discourse functions. Mouton de Gruyter.
Brinton, L. J. (2017). The evolution of pragmatic markers in English: Pathways of change. Cambridge University Press.
Bundhumedha, N. (2011). Waiyakorn Thai [Thai Grammar] (6th ed.). Chulalongkorn University Press. (in Thai)
Byrd, D., & Saltzman, E. (2003). The elastic phrase: Modeling the dynamics of boundary-adjacent lengthening. Journal of Phonetics, 31(2), 149–180.
Clark, H. H., & Fox Tree, J. E. (2002). Using uh and um in spontaneous speaking. Cognition, 84, 73–111.
Cooke, J. R. (1989). Thai sentence particles and other topics. Pacific Linguistics, Series A-80. The Australian National University.
Diewald, G. (2006). Discourse particles and modal particles as grammatical elements. In K. Fischer (Ed.), Approaches to discourse particles (pp. 403-425). Elsevier.
Erman, B., & Kotsinas, U.-B. (1993). Pragmaticalization: the case of ba and you know. Studier i modern sprakvetenskap, 10, 76-92.
Fedriani, C., & Molinelli, P. (2019). Italian MA ‘but’ in deverbal pragmatic markers: Forms, functions, and productivity of a pragma-dyad. Cuadernos de filologia italiana, 26, 29-55.
Fraser, B. (1988). Types of English discourse markers. Acta Linguistica Hungarica, 38, 19-33.
Fraser, B. (1996). Pragmatic markers. Pragmatics, 6(2), 167–190.
Hancil, S. (2014). The final particle but in British English: An instance of cooptation and grammaticalization at work. In S. Hancil & E. König (Eds.), Grammaticalization: Theory and data (pp. 235-256). Benjamins.
Hancil, S. (2016). Final but, theticality and subjectification. Anglophonia: French Journal of English Linguistics, 22, 1-16.
Hansen, M.-B. M. (1998). The semantic status of discourse markers. Lingua, 104(3-4), 235–260.
Hata, K. (2016). Contrast-terminal: The sequential placement of trailoff but in extensive courses of action. Journal of Pragmatics, 101, 138-154.
Hayashi, M., & Yoon, K.-E. (2006). A cross-linguistic exploration of demonstratives in interaction: With particular reference to the context of word-formulation trouble. Studies in Language, 30, 485-540.
Heine, B. (2013). On discourse markers: Grammaticalization, pragmaticalization, or something else? Linguistics, 51(6), 1205-1247.
Heine, B., Claudi, U., & Hünnemeyer, F. (1991). Grammaticalization: A conceptual framework. University of Chicago Press.
Heine, B., Kaltenböck, G., & Kuteva, T. (2015). Some observations on the evolution of final particles. In S. Hancil, A. Haselow, & M. Post (Eds.), Final Particles (pp. 111-140). De Gruyter.
Heine, B., Kaltenböck, G., & Kuteva, T. (2016). On insubordination and cooptation. In N. Evans & H. Watanabe (Eds.), Insubordination (pp. 39-63). Benjamins.
Heine, B., Kaltenböck, G., Kuteva, T., & Long, H. (2021). The rise of discourse markers. Cambridge University Press.
Higbie, J., & Thinsan, S. (2006). Thai reference grammar: The structure of spoken Thai. Orchid Press.
Hopper, P. J., & Traugott, E. C. (2003). Grammaticalization (2nd ed). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1993)
Horne, M., Hansson, P., Bruce, G., Frid, J., & Filipsson, M. (2001). Cue words and the topic structure of spoken discourse: The case of Swedish men ‘but’. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 1061-1081.
Iwasaki, S., & Dechapratumwan, P. (2022). Creating versatility in Thai demonstratives. Studies in Language, 46(3), 517-558.
Iwasaki, S., & Ingkaphirom, P. (2005). A reference grammar of Thai. Cambridge University Press.
Izutsu, M. N., & Izutsu, K. (2014). Truncation and backshift: Two pathways to sentence-final coordinating conjunctions. Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 15(1), 62-92.
Izutsu, M. N., & Izutsu, K. (2020). American and Irish English speakers’ perceptions of the final particles so and but. World Englishes, 41(2), 207-223.
Jucker, A. H. (2002). Discourse markers in Early Modern English. In R. Watts & P. Trudgill (Eds.), Alternative histories of English (pp. 210-230). Routledge.
Khammee, K. (2024). From objective to subjective and to intersubjective functions: The case of the Thai ‘truth’-lexeme. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 28(4), 942-965.
Khammee, K. (2025). Proper names in Thai. Asian Languages and Linguistics, 6(1), 142-162.
Khammee, K., Liang-Itsara, A., & Rhee, S. (2024). Demonstratives and speaker stance in Thai. Journal of Pragmatics, 227, 19-36.
Khammee, K., & Rhee, S. (2022). On pragmatics of contrastiveness: The discourse marker ‘but’ in English, Thai, and Korean. The Journal of Linguistic Science, 100, 1-18.
Kim, S. H., & Sohn, S.-O. S. (2015). Grammar as an emergent response to interactive needs: A study of final kuntey ‘but’ in Korean conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 83, 73-90.
Koo, H. J. (2018). Hankwuke tamhwaphyoci yenkwuuy tonghyangkwa cenmang [Research trends and prospect of Korean discourse markers]. In Y.-K. Shin (Ed.), Hankwuke yenkwuuy saylowun hulum [New research trends of Korean] (pp. 221-255). Pakijong Publishing. (in Korean)
Kuryłowicz, J. (1976). The evolution of grammatical categories. In E. Coseriu (Ed.), Esquisses Linguistiques II (pp. 38-54). Fink. (Original work published 1965)
Lamiroy, B., & Swiggers, P. (1991). Imperatives as discourse signals. In S. Fleischman & L. R. Waugh (Eds.), Discourse-pragmatics and the verb: The evidence from Romance (pp. 121-146). Routledge.
Lippmann, W. (1922). Public opinion. Harcourt, Brace & Co.
Meillet, A. (1958). L'évolution des formes grammaticales. In Linguistique historique et linguistique générale (pp. 130-148). Champion. (in French) (Original work published in Scientia [Rivista di Scienza], 1912)
Mulder, J., & Thompson, S. A. (2008). The grammaticalization of but as a final particle in conversation. In R. Laury (Ed.), Crosslinguistic studies of clause combining: The multifunctionality of conjunctions (pp. 179-204). Benjamins.
Mulder, J., Thompson, S. A., & Williams, C. P. (2009). Final but in Australian English conversation. In P. Peters, P. Collins, & A. Smith (Eds.), Comparative grammatical studies in Australian and New Zealand English (pp. 337-358). Benjamins.
Noss, R. B. (1964). Thai reference grammar. US Government Printing Office.
Peters, P. (1995). The pocket Macquarie writers’ guide. The Jacaranda Press.
Peyasantiwong, P. (1981). A study of final particles in conversational Thai [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Michigan.
Phanuphong, W. (1989). The structure of Thai: Grammatical system. Ramkhamhaeng University. (in Thai)
Pons Bordería, S. (1998). Los apelativos oye y mira o los límites de la conexión. In M. A. Martín Zorraquino & E. Montolío (Eds.), Marcadores discursivos: teoría y práctica (pp. 213-228). Arco. (in Spanish)
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. Longman.
Redeker, G. (1991). Linguistic markers of discourse structure. Linguistics, 29, 1139-1172.
Rhee, S. (2020). On determinants of discourse marker functions: Grammaticalization and discourse-analytic perspectives. Linguistic Research, 37(2), 289-325.
Rhee, S. (2021). From truth to reality to effect: The journey of sasilsang in Korean. East Asian Pragmatics, 6(3), 331-353.
Rhee, S. (2025). Strategically acknowledging roughness: The tale of the two preemptive discourse markers in Korean. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 16(5), 1464-1474.
Rhee, S., & Koo, H. J. (2021). On divergent paths and functions of ‘background’-based discourse markers in Korean. In A. Haselow & S. Hancil (Eds.), Studies at the grammar-discourse interface (pp. 77-100). Benjamins.
Rhee, S., & Koo, H. J. (2015). Analogy-driven inter-categorial grammaticalization and (inter)subjectification of -na in Korean. Lingua, 166, 22-42.
Royal Thai dictionary, The. (n.d.). Available at https://dictionary.orst.go.th/. Accessed September 2020 through February 2026.
Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge University Press.
Sohn, S.-O. S. (2016). Development of the discourse marker kulentey (‘but, by the way’) in Korean: A diachronic and synchronic perspective. Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 17(2), 231-254.
Strawson, P. F. (1952). Introduction to logical theory. Methuen & Co.
Stross, B. (1999). The hybrid metaphor: From biology to culture. Journal of American Folklore, 112(445), 254-267.
Taylor, J. R. (1995). Linguistic categorization (2nd ed.). Clarendon. (Original work published 1989)
thai-language.com. (n.d.) Accessible at http://www.thai-language.com. Accessed September 2020 through February 2026.
Traugott, E. C. (2016). On the rise of types of clause-final pragmatic markers in English. Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 17, 26-54.
Traugott, E. C. (2022). Discourse structuring markers in English. John Benjamins.
Upakitsilapasan, P. (2002). Lak Phaasaa Thai [Principles of the Thai language] (11th ed.). Thai Watthana Phanit Press. (in Thai)
Van Dijk, T. A. (1979). Pragmatic connectives. Journal of Pragmatics, 3, 447-456.
Yokomori, D., & Endo, T. (2022). Projective/retrospective linking of a contrastive idea: Interactional practices of turn-initial and turn-final uses of kedo ‘but’ in Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics, 196, 24-43.
