What in the academics doing things is this?: Intensified comments in English, Dutch, and German

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11320%2F26%3ANXZN4HVH" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11320/26:NXZN4HVH - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://www.aup-online.com/content/journals/10.5117/NEDTAA2025.1-2.007.VERE" target="_blank" >https://www.aup-online.com/content/journals/10.5117/NEDTAA2025.1-2.007.VERE</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5117/NEDTAA2025.1-2.007.VERE" target="_blank" >10.5117/NEDTAA2025.1-2.007.VERE</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

What in the academics doing things is this?: Intensified comments in English, Dutch, and German

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Abstract English, Dutch, and German make use of an expressive wh-construction that has a commentary function, evaluates an event negatively, and is rooted in intensifying constructions such as wh- in the world. An English example is What in the Devil Wears Prada is going on?, which expresses incomprehension (like intensified open wh-questions) and conveys negative emotions, but also contains a comment by simultaneously answering the question: the above example can be paraphrased as “What is going on here? This reminds me of the contents of the film The Devil Wears Prada,” whereby the event commented on is negatively evaluated by linking it with another object. This contribution investigates how intensified wh-questions such as wh- in the world are related to such examples of intensified comments (i.e., intensified wh-questions with a commentary function), and how the latter are rooted in the former. It furthermore compares the use of intensified comments in English, Dutch and German. It is demonstrated that intensified comments build on the conventionalised pragmatic functions of intensified wh-questions in all three languages, although the concrete wh-templates differ (wh- in the/de X for English and Dutch, wh- zum X for German). The intensified wh-template that is being used depends on its status in the language: it is in every case the most versatile template that allows for most variation. Data from the social media platform X shows that intensified comments are frequent in English and infrequent in German, yielding a situation in which Dutch (which borrows its intensified-comment template from English) takes the middle road. Moreover, English and Dutch intensified comments are more versatile with regard to their syntactic buildup: non-NP constructions such as Whatin the [academics doing things]VPis this? and gender-mismatched constructions such as Wat in de.utr[Mandela-effect.neut]NPis dit? are unproblematic, while German intensified comments only occur with nouns and year numbers (e.g., Was zum [Grafikfehler]NPist das?, Was zum 2020 is das?).

Název v anglickém jazyce

What in the academics doing things is this?: Intensified comments in English, Dutch, and German

Popis výsledku anglicky

Abstract English, Dutch, and German make use of an expressive wh-construction that has a commentary function, evaluates an event negatively, and is rooted in intensifying constructions such as wh- in the world. An English example is What in the Devil Wears Prada is going on?, which expresses incomprehension (like intensified open wh-questions) and conveys negative emotions, but also contains a comment by simultaneously answering the question: the above example can be paraphrased as “What is going on here? This reminds me of the contents of the film The Devil Wears Prada,” whereby the event commented on is negatively evaluated by linking it with another object. This contribution investigates how intensified wh-questions such as wh- in the world are related to such examples of intensified comments (i.e., intensified wh-questions with a commentary function), and how the latter are rooted in the former. It furthermore compares the use of intensified comments in English, Dutch and German. It is demonstrated that intensified comments build on the conventionalised pragmatic functions of intensified wh-questions in all three languages, although the concrete wh-templates differ (wh- in the/de X for English and Dutch, wh- zum X for German). The intensified wh-template that is being used depends on its status in the language: it is in every case the most versatile template that allows for most variation. Data from the social media platform X shows that intensified comments are frequent in English and infrequent in German, yielding a situation in which Dutch (which borrows its intensified-comment template from English) takes the middle road. Moreover, English and Dutch intensified comments are more versatile with regard to their syntactic buildup: non-NP constructions such as Whatin the [academics doing things]VPis this? and gender-mismatched constructions such as Wat in de.utr[Mandela-effect.neut]NPis dit? are unproblematic, while German intensified comments only occur with nouns and year numbers (e.g., Was zum [Grafikfehler]NPist das?, Was zum 2020 is das?).

Druh

J_ost - Ostatní články v recenzovaných periodicích

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

10201 - Computer sciences, information science, bioinformathics (hardware development to be 2.2, social aspect to be 5.8)

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

—

Rok uplatnění

2025

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Nederlandse Taalkunde

ISSN

1384-5845

e-ISSN

2352-1171

Svazek periodika

30

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

1/2

Stát vydavatele periodika

US - Spojené státy americké

Počet stran výsledku

29

Strana od-do

134-162

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

—