Semantic and pragmatic manifestation of modalem and specifics of dialogic discourse translation (based on the parallel corpus)

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Department of Applied Language Studies, Comparative Linguistics and Translation, Faculty of Foreign Philology

Mykhailo Dragomanov State University of Ukraine

Semantic and pragmatic manifestation of modalem and specifics of dialogic discourse translation (based on the parallel corpus)

Natalia M. Safonova PhD in Philology, Associate Professor,

Olga M. Aleksieieva PhD in Philology, Associate Professor

Yuliia V. Orlova PhD in Philology, Associate Professor

Kyiv, Ukraine

Abstract

The article centers on the description of the category of subjective modality of dialogic discourse in terms of its semantic and pragmatic nature, exemplify the concept of modalem as a semantic marker of a verbal message, a means of expressing the subjective modality and a semantic quantum of the speaker's remarks in a literary discourse. It alsn provides a semantic typology of modalems and illustrates the role of modalems with equivalent verbal content.

The structure of dialogic discourse includes: producer - reference situation - remark - recipient. These are the components of communicative situation. The semantic load of such a communication conveys an obligatory modal aspect which is formed by the superposition of semantic and pragmatic coordinates. The process of subjectification (modalization) of the speaker's remark in fictional discourse begins with the subjective view and perspective one of objective reality, described through a selected subjective mode of comprehension which represents the subjective modality of discourse. In other words, the subjective modal marking of discourse implies the speaker's intention. Modalization is a complex process of including additional meanings onto the verbal information of a remark, determined by the author-producer's intentions and their attitude towards the referential meaning. It serves as a pragmatic and axiological quantum of information that the producer embeds in their verbal message. The deciphering of modalem in the context of direct communicative interaction, as exemplified by the dialogic discourse of fictional prose, represents the semantic link that binds together “what the speaker said” and “what they meant to say” into a single semantic whole. For beginner translators, working with corpora for identifying the ways to convey modalems in different languages serves both a reliable basis for successful translation activities and an essential source for practicing interpreting and simultaneous translating.

Keywords: dialogic discourse, modalem, modalization, producer, remark, recipient, subjective modality.

Анотація

Статтю присвячено опису категорії суб 'єктивної модальності діалогічного дискурсу щодо її семантико-прагматичної природи, проілюстровано поняття модалеми як смислового маркера вербального повідомлення, форми вияву суб'єктивної модальності й смислового кванта репліки діалогів персонажів художнього дискурсу; запропоновано семантичну типологію модалем; проілюстровано роль модалем у репліках з тотожним вербальним наповненням.

У структурі діалогічного дискурсу виділяються: продуцент - референтна ситуація - репліка - реципієнт. Вони є складниками комунікативної ситуації. Смислове навантаження цієї комунікації містить обов'язковий модальний аспект, який витворюється накладанням семантичної та прагматичної координати. Процес суб 'єктивації (модалізації) персонажем художнього дискурсу своєї репліки починається з прийняття ним певного суб'єктивного погляду й перспективи бачення певного феномена об'єктивної дійсності, який описується через вибраний суб'єктивний спосіб осмислення, яким і є суб'єктивна модальність дискурсу. Тобто суб'єктивно-модальна маркованість дискурсу завжди продиктована інтенцією мовця. Модалізація є складним процесом нашарування на реплікову вербальну інформацію додаткових смислів, залежних від інтенцій автора-мовця та його ставлення до референтного значення. Вона є прагматичним і аксіологічним квантом інформації, що вкладається продуцентом у його вербальне повідомлення. Дешифрування модалеми в умовах прямої комунікативної взаємодії, прикладом якої є діалогічний дискурс художнього прозового твору, є тією смисловою ланкою, яка скріплює в єдине смислове ціле «те, що сказав мовець-персонаж» і «те, що він хотів цим сказати». Для перекладача-початківця робота з корпусами і вияв способів передачі модалем у різних мовах є прекрасною практикою успішної перекладацької діяльності, зокрема це доречна підготовка до усного і синхронного перекладу.

Ключові слова: діалогічний дискурс, модалема, модалізація, продуцент, репліка, реципієнт, суб 'єктивна модальність.

Introduction

The research focus on observing subjective modality as a functional and semantic category primarily directs researchers' attention towards studying its field (functional and semantic) structure and means of expression, with hierarchisation and identification of the latter core and peripheral representatives. Despite the semantic significance of the subjective modality, it has traditionally only been noted for its capacity to express a broad spectrum of meanings without identifying or qualifying them. However, this has not always been the case, and it is assumed that the status of subjective modality in linguistics may be requalified. This is evidenced by the evolution of the scientific description of this category.

Literature review

The concept of modality was first introduced by Aristotle in his work `Metaphysics', where he distinguished three main modal concepts: necessity, possibility, and actuality. This concept developed further in Western European linguistics, particularly in the works of Sh. Balli and V. Vynogradov. Sh. Balli's concept of modality consists of the main content (dictum) and its modal part (modus), while V. Vynogradov established the theory of modality dual essence, differentiating it into objective and subjective. This category remains a focal point of scholarly interest, as evidenced by the scientific works of V. Cholkan, N. Huivaniuk, S. Shabat, V. Shynkaruk, V. Tkachuk, I. Vykhovanets, A. Zahnitko, and many others. dialogical semantic modalema verbal

Aim and Objectives.

The aim of this article is to classify modalems as markers of verbal communication with subjective modal meanings, using artistic speech as the object of study. The objectives of the work are:

to analyse how subjective modal meanings are considered in the process of translating;

to study the category of subjective modality of dialogic discourse in terms of its semantic and pragmatic nature;

to illustrate the concept of modalem as a semantic marker of a verbal message;

to provide a semantic typology of modalems;

to illustrate the role of modalems in the remarks with equivalent verbal content. It is important to consider the influence of all extralinguistic factors on the overall semantic load of the text in its discursive aspect.

Methodology

The study employed various scientific methods such as observation, analysis, and comparison, hypothetical and deductive methods. Additionally, functional linguistics methods were used to clarify the functional and semantic nature of the category of subjective modality. Comparative analysis of the source and target language texts was also conducted. Furthermore, methods of distributional and discourse analysis were used to interpret the subjective modal meaning of dialogue remarks.

Results and Discussion

Scholars have successfully provided comprehensive answers to questions concerning the essence, manifestation, and implementation of the category of modality in speech. However, new aspects related to modality continue to emerge, requiring further study. Our observations lead us to assert that the subjective modality of a text, especially in discourse, does not equate to the subjective modal meanings of individual sentences. The process of creating subjective meanings is more complex in discourse than in the functional and semantic nature of sentence-level subjective modality. Additionally, subjective modal meanings in discourses with a pronounced category of anthropocentricity are often latent. Recognizing the subjective modal component in a message or in its part is crucial for translation quality, as the semantics of the discourse hinges on it. Discourse inherently includes a pragmatic coordinate structure, which is expressed in dialogic discourse through speakers-characters, the speech situation with its extralinguistic object, and the dialogue temporal and local attachment. It is important to consider the influence of all extralinguistic factors on the overall semantic load of the text in its discursive aspect.

The subjective modality of discourse is a semantic and pragmatic category inherent to any texts with a specific producer of the verbal message that, in turn, has tastes, preferences, and moods that are understood or anticipated by the recipient (reader or participant in a communicative interaction). Therefore, it is hypothesized that by possessing explicit and implicit (verbalized and non-verbalized) means of expression, this category conveys additional meanings (subjective modal).

Fictional dialogues, which we propose to call dialogic discourses, effectively exemplify this phenomenon. The verbal content of the dialogue participants' remarks constitutes the actual semantic plane of fictional discourse. Additional semantic meanings may arise due to the subjective-evaluative characteristics that the speakers (characters of fictional discourse) impart to their verbal or non-verbal messages. This allows the dialogue partner to receive a verbal sign that reflects the speaker's attitude towards the extralinguistic reality reflected in the remark. After breaking down the dialogue discourse into its constituent elements, namely producer, reference situation, remark, and recipient, it becomes clear that the modality is formed by the superposition of semantic and pragmatic axes. The components of the vertical axis, producer and recipient, tend towards the pragmatic side of the deployment of communicative interaction, while the reference situation and remark, as components of dialogic discourse, tend towards the semantic axis. This semiotic approach allows for the qualification of the subjective modality of dialogic discourse as a pragmatic and semantic textual category. A single sentence is inherently devoid of the vertical (pragmatic) axis. Consequently, it renders sentence-level approaches to defining subjective modality overly restrictive for a comprehensive understanding at the discourse level. The extension of modality beyond the sentence into the textual dimension implies a broader conceptual and semantic status of this category. This is particularly relevant given the contaminated nature of the functioning of units in the replicated discourse that belong to the modality sphere. This suggests a transcategorical status of the subjective modality in a work of fiction.

Means of expressing subjective modality serve as modifiers of the core modal predicative qualification, usually conveyed through the verb mood. These means are capable of overlapping objective modal characteristics, with the object of evaluative judgment extending beyond the predicative base to any informatively significant part of the communicated content. This scenario may result in the sentence's periphery simulating an additional predicative nucleus or a distinguished semantic component.

The supplementary subjective modal meaning, which is layered by a speaker onto their verbal message, is grounded in their linguistic and conceptual understanding of the world. Speakers, as conveyors of subjective modal meanings, possess both a conceptual and a linguistic worldview, just like any other speaker. According to O. Selivanova (2006), the conceptual aspect refers to the global image of the world that underlies the human worldview. It reflects the essential properties of the world in human understanding, which result from spiritual activity. This global image can be seen as a stereotype of the reflection of the external world. The linguistic worldview, as T. Kosmeda (2000) outlines, translates the conceptual worldview through linguistic means, providing additional information through the inherent meanings of words in a language. Moreover, in the realm of dialogic fictional discourse, information is naturally constrained by temporal limits. This restriction necessitates that the speakers express themselves in a manner that is both succinct and vivid, without losing the essence of the content, all while presenting through the prism of individual subjective perception, hence enriching the dialogue with subjective modal meanings. The linguistic worldview of a fictional character is inherently subjective and does not directly reflect actual reality but rather interprets it, influenced by a complex mix of national and cultural worldview, mentality, evaluative criteria, and cultural-historical experience extratextual factors inherent to the society of a specific era.

The process by which a character in fictional discourse subjectivizes their dialogue begins with adopting a specific subjective viewpoint. This perspective on a certain phenomenon within objective reality is described through a chosen mode of perception - the discourse's subjective modality. It leads to the reasoned argument that the discourse subjective modal marking is invariably dictated by the speaker's intent.

In dialogic discourse, each character's remark is subjectively and modally determined. This means that the remark sentence is saturated with additional accompanying information that modifies its propositional meaning. It is important to note that the concentration of subjective modal meanings in dialogue discourse is higher than in other genres. This density is attributed to the speakers, who, through the dynamics of fictional conflicts, express their modal evaluative attitudes more profoundly.

The overlay of additional meanings onto a character's verbal output, contingent upon the author-speaker's intentions and their stance on the referential content, is defined as the modalization process (Safonova, 2010). The remarks modalization by a character is bidirectional: it aims towards self-expression, emotional articulation, and the evaluation of thoughts for the speaker themselves, while also targeting the recipient with the goal of eliciting sympathy or aversion, motivating actions, or fostering cooperation and dialogue engagement, among other things. The addressee's modification of a verbal message should be understood as a subjective coding of the propositional content. Even in a neutral verbal remark, additional inclusions of positive or negative semantics may arise: despair, confusion, arrogance, self-esteem, mockery, sadness, disgust, threat, praise, emotion, or pity.

Dialogue remarks are always directed towards a specific recipient, making modalization a process of subjective decoding from the addressee's point of view. Such decoding process inherently operates in reverse: it progresses from the content as apprehended by the recipient to the formation of a sign. This sign emerges from the synthesis and interpretation of both objective and subjective inputs. The foundation of modalization rests on the communicants' viewpoints, which are informed by their linguistic and conceptual worldviews. These perspectives are further modulated by the evaluative processes elicited by their psychological and emotional states. When participants in a dialogue encode and decode verbal information with subjective meanings, they activate a comprehensive array of psycholinguistic and cultural competencies. Among these are linguistic competence, encyclopedic knowledge, logical reasoning, and rhetorical-pragmatic skills. These competencies are crucial for navigating the layers of implicit modal meanings. Despite the substantial level of implicitness characterizing the subjective-modal meanings, the entire semantic content of the remarks becomes fully accessible and decipherable to all participants within the communicative exchange. This comprehensive understanding is facilitated by the mutual familiarity among the characters in the narrative context, coupled with their shared communicative experiences. Consequently, to achieve clarity and ensure their messages are comprehended as intended, they meticulously choose the most suitable methods and means for information delivery.

The semantics of the subjective modality in fictional dialogic discourse is a complex phenomenon. It originates from characters with distinct personalities, worldviews, beliefs, and preferences.

Dialogues are marked by an increased level of emotional tension, as their primary function is to present a communicative contest of diverse perspectives regarding the nature of communication itself. Within a dialogue, information invariably carries an individual evaluative character, rendering the mode of communicative interaction inherently subjectively expressive. The core objective of such dialogues is to exert influence on the recipient through the conveyance of personal worldviews, articulating values, and assigning positive and negative judgments. This is done in a manner that ensures the subjectivity of the expression is distinctly perceived within the discourse.

Hence, the integral semantic core of subjective modality is encapsulated in the speaker's perspective, made accessible to the reader through prior engagement with the character (either through the author's descriptions, characterizations by others, or selfreflection) or revelations within the dialogue itself (from the character's dialogues or characterization by other literary figures). The integral core fundamentally rests on the evaluative category, shaped by variables such as the character's social status, age, educational background, psychological condition, attitudes towards the subject of discourse, mentality, and ideology. These elements modalize the verbal message. This process renders them semantically significant as they introduce additional, informationally pivotal segments into the semantic domain. This combines the dominant semantic of the subjective modality of dialogue discourse with its pragmatic conditionality. The representation of the speaker's personality through their stance on the transmitted information via linguistic resources is proposed to be recognized as the subjective modal framework of a dialogue remark. The infusion of discourse with subjective modal meanings does not entail the creation of a new verbal sign to impute characteristics of an extralinguistic reality sign. Instead, it involves the introduction of subjective content into the objective content of the remark, reflecting reality as an existence external to the individual. This process incorporates features of the individual's perception of extralinguistic reality into the discourse (Safonova, 2010).

The process of modalization in dialogic discourse involves the superimposition of additional subjective meanings onto the verbal content of a remark. These meanings are elicited by the psychological state of the speaker and their subjective stance towards the referential situation. Such layering modifies the conceptual meaning of the utterance or imparts to it a new connotation, distinct from its explicit verbal expression. This mechanism underlines the core of modalization within the framework of dialogic discourse.

Modalizers, defined as markers that infuse dialogic discourse with subjective modal meanings, encompass a range of paralinguistic tools employed by the author surrounding a character's remark. These tools include: 1) the tone of speech, encompassing a spectrum from playful to formal, ironic, mocking, intimate, to disdainful; 2) the situational context of the communication, detailing the circumstances under which the dialogue unfolds; 3) gestures, carrying clear semantic implications; 4) facial expressions, whether canonical or subject to interpretation; 5) the volume of speech; 6) pronunciation nuances; 7) intonation, as the primary means of expressing subjective modal meaning of a remark. Specific modal representation mechanisms within dialogic discourse participate in the expression modalization process, interfacing with both lexical and syntactic markers. Key among these traditional markers are: 1) connotative vocabulary determined by context; 2) phraseology and paraphrasing; 3) inversion; 4) exclamatory sentences; 5) rhetorical questions or statements; 6) polite expressions; 7) complete sentences; 8) particles; 9) interjections; 10) repetitions; 11) parenthetical remarks; 12) segmentation; 13) addresses / vocalizations.

The contamination of mechanisms for expressing subjective modality or their independent utilization in the remarks of dialogic discourse augments the characters' statements with additional semantic depth. Our analysis suggests that these additional, subjectively marked semantic elements within verbal messages can be identified by attributing specific meanings to them, thereby facilitating their classification. Consequently, it is proposed to adopt the term modalem to denote a semantically significant component within a discourse remark.

Psycholinguistics defines the essence of modality as a crucial semantic element within the structure of expression, conceptualized as residing “in the mind” of an individual. This concept takes the form of patterns of reference embedded within personal experience and manifested automatically in one's linguistic output. This manifestation adheres to the same prescriptive norms that apply to the units of all the other facets of language competence. Such patterns of reference conveying subjective modal meanings may therefore be designated as modalems.

Modalem is defined as a standard within the cognitive repertoire of the speaker that is utilized for qualifying extralinguistic reality. In specific communicative contexts, it acquires a definite meaning that hinges on the evaluative and emotional disposition of the producer. This pattern can be manifested both explicitly and implicitly. Furthermore, modalem not only imbues remarks with a particular significance but also functions as a quantum of information that the producer aims to transmit to their communicative partner. Intrinsically, modalem, as a semantic component of subjective modality within discourse, inherently involves an evaluation - be it positive or negative. However, this evaluation is articulated through the psychological state of the speaker, whose linguistic proficiency delineates the meaning of modalem. Therefore, if a character enters into a communicative exchange while in an emotional state of interest, praise, amicability, concern, ire, hostility, or grief, their utterance similarly reflects such sentiment; thus, the meaning of modalem receives a corresponding qualification reflective of the speaker's emotional condition. The emergence of modalem is situated within the process of intentional, axiological, and expressive qualification of the verbal message.

In the process of translating a segment explicitly identified as dialogue, it is imperative for the translator to recognize the existence of a modalem (which is invariably present), assess its nature, and then identify an array of strategies and a catalogue of tools for its accurate rendition into the target language. Following these preliminary steps, the translator may proceed with the translation of the dialogic discourse, ensuring the retention of the identified modalem within the target text.

Two categories of modalems could be identified: modalems of positive qualification (M+) and modalems of negative qualification (M-). Those are distinguished by their evaluative orientation, which is either positive or negative. However, there is a large group of modalems whose polarity can be ambiguous outside of the context, i.e. they can be both positive and negative (M+/-). This ambiguity stems not from the verbal sign itself, intended to convey specific emotions, but rather from the emotions the speaker experiences when using this sign in their message, the intentional aspect of the remark, and the linguistic register of the message. Therefore, the modalem aligns with the speaker's emotions as conveyed through their verbal message. The decoding of such modalem signs is always contextually bound in dialogic discourse. As the analysis of the facts shows, the phenomenon of enantiosemia of subjective modal meanings often occurs in the remarks, especially with an ironic modality: when a positive verbalized emotional evaluative qualification expressed by a character has an antonymic intention, or vice versa, a negative subjective modal frame expresses the speaker's approving intention. These modalems are identified as modalities of enantiosemic qualification (M±). Furthermore, a speaker's use of modalem may not explicitly express an emotional or expressive evaluation but rather superimpose the remark with the speaker's current emotions; in such instances, the modalem transcends mere evaluative categorization to convey additional semantic dimensions such as impatience, hesitation, doubt, or pride. Neglecting this semantic layer (information quantum) compromises the accurate interpretation of the remark comprehensive semantic intent, diverging from the speaker's original conceptualization. It is also observed that instances where the modal meaning of a remark, specifically the accurate identification of modalem, overtakes the verbal content of the remark, thus becoming dominant in driving communicative interaction, are frequent. Typically, these are modalems of imagery, such as praise, anger, and admiration, where for the recipient, the manner of expression is more critical than the actual content conveyed.

Modalems are categorized according to their inherent core meaning, which, when introduced into an utterance, integrates additional nuanced interpretations across a spectrum of intensity variations. This essentially forms synonymic sequences. Research has enabled the identification and classification of a repertoire of modal expressions recurring within dialogic discourses, albeit expressed variably. The deployment of specific modal expressions in linguistic exchanges is dictated by existential rather than grammatical dynamics. Frequently, multiple modal expressions contaminate within a single remark, thereby resulting in the meaning of subjective modality.

Our analysis categorizes modalems of negative qualification within verbal communication to include: hopelessness (despair, desolation, hopelessness, inevitability, desperation); mockery (scoffing, snark, sharpness, snideness, sarcasm, taunting); anger (outrage, fury, wrath, frenzy, rage, madness); reproach (scolding, reprimand); envy; confusion (bewilderment, disorientation, perplexity, panic); malice (spite, malevolence, cruelty, irritability); schadenfreude (malicious pleasure); distrust (skepticism, suspicion, wariness); dissatisfaction (discontent, annoyance, irritation); animosity (antipathy, hatred, hostility); offense (hurt, humiliation, contempt, disdain, shame); disgust (revulsion, repulsion, loathing); condemnation (judgment, denunciation, censure, reproof, disapproval); arrogance (haughtiness, pride, conceit, disdain); contempt; threat; scorn; sadness (grief, sorrow, misery, mourning, melancholy). To exemplify, let's detail some of these modalems:

Example 1

Often, the presence of a subjective evaluative tone in a remark is indicated by the author's commentary, which provides insights into the communicative register being employed, for instance:

Example 2

Within the spectrum of verbal message modalems bearing positive qualifications, we delineate categories such as gratitude; dignity; admiration; pleasure (bliss, euphoria, contentment); commendation; affection (sympathy, endearment, adoration); joy (triumph); tenderness (emotional touch, delight); and sincerity (authenticity). Specific examples will be provided to illustrate these modalems:

Example 3

The third category of modalems that we have delineated is characterized by marking speakers' remarks with additional meanings, correlating directly to the emotions they experience during speech. These include hesitation (doubt, indecision); vanity (self-love, conceit); pride; regret; confusion (embarrassment, concern); surprise; interest (curiosity, attention, attentiveness, inquisitiveness); assertiveness (uncompromisingness, decisiveness); flirtatiousness (playfulness, jest); misunderstanding (hesitation, bewilderment, astonishment); unrest (anxiety, worry); impatience; disregarding the producer's remark (ignoring, indifference); compliance (obedience, submission); timidity (fearfulness); entreaty (pleading); disconcertment (embarrassment, shyness, fear); remorse (self-reproach); empathy (kindness, compassion); fear (dread, apprehension, fright); concern (worriedness, worry, perturbation); boasting (bragging). This variant of modalems finds distinct manifestation in discourse, exemplified as follows:

Example 4

Translators should give special attention to segments of the text where literal translation is not feasible. In these sample remarks, rendering subjective modal information accurately is of utmost importance, which requires a thorough decoding of the semantic content of the modalems, exemplified as follows:

Example 5

Deciphering a modalem in the context of direct communicative interaction, as observed in the dialogic discourse of fictional prose, constitutes the semantic linkage that cohesively integrates what the speaker articulated with what they aimed to convey. For inexperienced translators, working with corpora and examining how modal expressions are conveyed in different languages is valuable practice for future translation tasks. This serves as preparatory groundwork for interpretation and simultaneous translation. It is important to note that a single remark can contain multiple modalities, not just one.

The importance and imperative of modalem decoding come to the forefront particularly in sample utterances where remarks within dialogic discourses possess equivalent verbal content. An analysis of the nature of reduplications in dialogic discourse leads to the conclusion that the employment of a verbally identical utterance by one character that originally belongs to another is a deliberate and logical phenomenon. This is attributed to the fact that such utterances convey fundamentally different meanings, based on the respective speakers' viewpoints. The semantic content of these verbal segments invariably differs, with the modalem serving as the key determinant of this divergence. For example:

Example 6

As can be seen from the above examples, the remarks of different speakers with almost identical verbal content express different meanings only because of the modalem.

Conclusions

The paper presents the results of the comprehensive analysis of modalem.

Modalem constitutes a norm within the speaker's cognitive repertoire for assessing extralinguistic reality, serving as a semantic quantum of information. In specific communicative scenarios, it acquires a precise meaning influenced by the speaker's disposition, based on emotional and evaluative judgments, and spanning cognitive-epistemic, emotional-expressive, and evaluative-axiological dimensions. The manifestation of modalem as a semantic element of subjective modality within a discourse emerges through the speaker's psychological state, with his or her linguistic proficiency demarcating the meaning of modalem. For example, if a person enters a communicative exchange experiencing emotions such as interest, approval, friendliness, concern, anger, hostility or grief, their remarks will take on a corresponding tone. As a result, the meaning of modalem is qualified according to the speaker's state, effectively framing the remark and modalizing its content. Thus, the emotional-evaluative response of the speaker is congruent with the subjective modal meaning of their remarks. The consideration and precise decoding of the modalem semantic load is crucial for understanding the common informational context that encompasses both the individual remark and discourse as a whole.

Prospects for further research involves investigating the role of modalems in influencing the trajectory of dialogic interactions. Equally compelling are studies aimed at detailing the linguo-cognitive processes involved in generating composite modalems, as well as analysing speech deviations resulting from recipients' misinterpretation of the producer's intended modalems. This is especially relevant in the context of translation job and translation process.

References

1. Bezugla, L. R. (2007). Verbalizatsiia implitsytnykh smysliv u nimetskomovnomu dialohichnomu dyskursi [Verbalisation of implicit meanings in German-language dialogue discourse]. Kharkiv: V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University [in Ukrainian].

2. Zagnitko, A. (2012). Slovnyk suchasnoi linhvistyky: poniattia i terminy [Dictionary of modern linguistics: concepts and terms: in 4 vols]. Donetsk, DonNU. [in Ukrainian].

3. Kosmeda, T. A. (2000). Aksiolohichni aspekty prahmalinhvistyky: Formuvannia i rozvytok katehorii otsinky: monohrafiia [Axiological aspects of pragmalinguistics: Formation and development of the evaluation category: monograph]. Lviv: Ivan Franko National University of Lviv. [in Ukrainian].

4. Safonova, N. M. (2010). Modalema yak semantyko-prahmatychnyi marker subiektyvno-modalnykh smysliv dramaturhichnoho dyskursu [Modalem as a semantic and pragmatic marker of subjective-modal meanings of dramatic discourse]. Linguistic studies, 20, 237-245.

5. Selivanova, O. O. (2006). Suchasna linhvistyka: terminolohichna entsyklopediia [Modern linguistics:a terminological encyclopedia]. Poltava, Dovkillia-K Publ. 711 p. [in Ukrainian].

6. Smushchinskaya, I. V. (2003). Modalnist frantsuzkoho khudozhnoho tekstu: typy ta zasoby vyrazhennia [Modality of the French literary text: types and means of expression]. PhD thesis: 10.02.05. Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].

7. Tkachuk, V. M. (2002). Katehoriia subiektyvnoi modalnosti [The category of subjective modality]. Candidate of Philological Sciences: 10.02.15. Donetsk National University. Donetsk. [in Ukrainian].

Размещено на Allbest.ru