24 Pragmatic Markers: Synchronic and Diachronic
1.4.2 Semantic Pathways
In a ground- breaking study, Traugott ( 1982 ) argues that pragmatic mark-
ers, among other forms, follow a semantic– pragmatic path in their evolution
from propositional meaning to textual meaning to interpersonal meaning (see
Section 1.2.3 ). The development of while from the propositional meaning ‘at
the time that’ to the textual meaning ‘during’ to the interpersonal concessive
meaning ‘although’ has been cited as a clear example of such a progression (see
Section 3.2 ). Traugott ( 1989 : 34– 35, 1988 : 409– 410; also Traugott and König
1991 : 208– 209) then formalize these changes in a set of three “tendencies”:
(a) Tendency I: Meanings based in the external described situation > meanings
based in the internal (evaluative/ perceptual/ cognitive) described situation.
(b) Tendency II: Meanings based in the external or internal described situation
meanings situated in the textual and metalinguistic situation.
(c) Tendency III: Meanings tend to become increasingly situated in the speaker’s
subjective belief state/ attitude toward the proposition (“subjectifi cation ”).
Traugott and Dasher ( 2002 : 40, 281) abandon this linear progression and pro-
pose a set of correlated changes:
truth- conditional > non- truth- conditional^26
content > content/ procedural > procedural
nonsubjective > subjective > intersubjective
scope within the proposition > scope over the proposition > scope
over discourseAs many studies have shown, pragmatic markers are understood as express-
ing procedural meaning , and historically they derive from lexical, phrasal,
and clausal forms with full content meaning. In the framework expounded
by Traugott and Dasher ( 2002 ), procedural meaning arises through invited
inferences that occur in the context of use. For example, the original spatial
meaning of as/ so long as coexists with the temporal meaning as “coded mean-
ings.” An invited inference of the temporal meaning which can arise in impera-
tive contexts is the conditional sense ‘provided that’ (e.g., Keep it as long as
you need it = Keep it for the length of time you need it/ Keep it ‘provided
that’ you need it or until you no longer need it). In this context, both the new
inferential meaning and the original meaning are available. This indetermin-
ate (or ambiguous) context is understood as a “bridging” context (Evans and
Wilkins 2000 ) necessary for the change to pure procedural meaning. The form
is then expanded to contexts in which the original meaning is no longer salient
(though it is still present) (e.g., People will always be able to make excuses, as
26 See footnote 10 above.