My reply to whom it may concern or the story of expressions like BUT, HOWEVER, etc

cf: Topic: Dịch hộ tôi với, dễ mà khó!

1. Nhưng and Còn as equivalents of denial but and contrast but

... An example in English

(1) Susan is tall but Mary is short.
(2) John is a Republican, but he?Ts honest.

... Thus in (1) the function of but is to signal the contrast between the proposition it prefaces and the one proceeding it. In (2) but indicates that the hearer is expected to have derived the proposition in (3) from the proposition in the first clause.
(3) John is not honest.

In other words, but indicates that the proposition it introduces is relevant as a denial of an ?~expectation?T created by the proposition of the first clause.

Let us now turn our attention to some data in Vietnamese. Consider the example below.
My friend studying in Germany telephoned to inform me that he got an excellent grade for his MA degree. In response, I jokingly said,

(4) Xin chúc mừng. Nhưng tao bắt đầu nghi ngờ cái gọi là trí thông minh siêu việt của bọn Đức rồi đấy.

The denial but is well translated into Vietnamese by nh­ưng. I will argue that nh­ưng is there to constrain the interpretation of the proposition it introduces. First consider my response not using nh­ng as in (5)

(5) Xin chúc mừng. Tao bắt đầu nghi ngờ cái gọi là trí thông minh siêu việt của bọn Đức rồi đấy.

On hearing this utterance, my friend would probably challenge its relevance. Among other possibilities, he might be led to believe that there was something not relating to his MA degree that made me question the superintelligence of the Germans. For example, he might think that a German classmate of mine performed so poorly that I was beginning to question the intelligence of the Germans. It is very likely that he would treat my utterance as bearing no relation to his information, thus not realising the joke intended on him. But my purpose is to play a joke on him. Then in the absence of nhưng my purpose of communicating to him a joke was not realized, my friend stopped spending extra effort, gave up the search for the relevance of the intended interpretation, communication failed. Or he might need to ask for clarification. So what can I do to prevent this scenario from happening? The answer is that I can use some device to guide his interpretation, in this case my use of như­ng as in (4) above. (4) is preferred to (5) because (4) provides more guarantee that the information is worth processing for the hearer. Alternatively, it can be said that (4) communicates my intention much more strongly, i.e., my intention of playing a joke can be picked up much more easily by my friend in (4) than in (5). As a result, my friend is likely to become more willing to spend more effort to expand the context until the utterance indeed yields adequate contextual effects. Nhưng is there to guide my friend?Ts train of thought towards the intended interpretation, thus saving him unjustifiable processing effort.

Let us consider some further examples, (6) and (7) below.

(6) Tôi học tiếng Anh còn nó học tiếng Pháp.
(7) Tôi học tiếng Anh nhưng nó học tiếng Pháp

I will argue that còn in (6) is functioning like contrast but while như­ng in (7) like denial but. In (6) the two propositions on both sides of còn may be treated as contrasting each other. The contrast between is ignited by the presence of the marker còn between them. When we read (6), it is the idea of contrast that comes to mind and this idea must be brought about by the inclusion of còn. It is not difficult to think of a situation where this utterance is possible. My friend and I were at his uncle?Ts house on a visit. The uncle asked, ?~What do you do at university??T My response was (6). This situation would not allow (7) as my response because there is no motivation to encode a denial here. It would render (7) as a very odd response. This is confirmed if we look at further examples in (8) and (9) below.

(8) Nó nghèo nhưng không tham.
(9) *Nó nghèo còn không tham. (Note: * means unacceptable)

In (7), the role of nh­ưng is to show the hearer that contrary to his/her possible expectation that he study English as I do, he studies French. Similarly in (8), như­ng helps to draw the hearer?Ts train of thought away from the common sense that being poor ''befriends'' with being greedy to a perhaps surprising fact that he is not greedy. Còn cannot substitute for nh­ưng in this case as shown in (9) as còn does not encode the (procedural) meaning that nh­ưng does. , nhưng and còn are there to guide the hearer in his/her interpretation of the utterance. The guiding power of nhưng or còn is so strong that it is still felt in the absence of the proposition it precedes as in (10) and (11) below where it is not very difficult to guess what may come in the blanks.

(10) Nó nghèo như­ng ?
(11) Tôi học tiếng Anh còn nó ?

2. Mà lại and vậy là as equivalent of after all and so

Consider the following examples .

(12) Cửa hậu vẫn khoá chặt.
(13) Chúng nó vào bằng cửa tr­ước.

Suppose that we have to interpret the above utterances of a discourse. Without any further information we would have difficulty establishing not only how each is relevant but also whether or how each of them is related to the other. They could be just a list of two facts or beliefs or one could be construed as providing evidence for the other. In that case, one of the propositions would be a conclusion, and the other evidence *****pport the conclusion. The problem is that either proposition could be a conclusion, and either could be supporting evidence, depending on the circumstances and the speaker?Ts intention. It is of course possible that in some circumstances only one interpretation is possible. But this is not always so. In cases where misinterpretation is potential, it is argued that constraints on interpretation play a vital role. For example, if we end (13) with mà lại, we immediately know which utterance is to be taken as conclusion and which as evidence as seen in (12) and (14) below, where (12) is taken as conclusion and (14) as supporting evidence.

(12) Cửa hậu vẫn khoá chặt.
(14) Chúng nó vào bằng cửa tr­ước mà lại.

Or if we preface (13) with vậy là/thì ra (thì ra is suggested by Ly_Trung_Binh. Tks) situation is now reversed with (12) being the supporting evidence and (15) conclusion.

(12) Cửa hậu vẫn khoá chặt.
(15) Vậy là chúng nó vào bằng cửa tr­ước.

In both cases, the speaker expects the hearer *****pply further assumptions, and these are not the same for one case as for the other. Thus, in (12/14) the speaker expects the hearer to access assumption (a), while on the other hand in (12/15) it is assumption (b).

(a) If they break in through the front door then the back door remains locked.
(b) If the back door remains locked then they break in through the front door.

In sum, it seems that these expressions (discourse connectives or conjunctions in Britney''''s terminology) encode (procedural) meanings which guide the interpretation processes of the utterances they preface or follow. In other words they tell the hearer how to ''''take'''' the host utterance, i.e the one that contains them.

...

Yeungon

cf: Topic: Dịch hộ tôi với, dễ mà khó!




Được yeungon sửa chữa / chuyển vào 23:43 ngày 13/11/2003