<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel rdf:about="http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/3336">
<title>Testi e linguaggi. Volume 10 (2016)</title>
<link>http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/3336</link>
<description/>
<items>
<rdf:Seq>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/3422"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/3421"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/3420"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/3418"/>
</rdf:Seq>
</items>
<dc:date>2026-04-20T08:26:38Z</dc:date>
</channel>
<item rdf:about="http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/3422">
<title>Il concetto di replica affermativa e nozioni affini</title>
<link>http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/3422</link>
<description>Il concetto di replica affermativa e nozioni affini
Solís García, Inmaculada
Our paper analyzes different definitions of affirmation and related concepts such as confirmation,
agreement, settlement, etc. The analysis leads us to defend the idea that these concepts have pragmatic
nature and that every contextual interpretation arises from the contribution of different linguistic and
non-linguistic factors.
</description>
<dc:date>2016-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/3421">
<title>Oui et ses variantes en français: l’expression de l’accord dans les débats présidentiels</title>
<link>http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/3421</link>
<description>Oui et ses variantes en français: l’expression de l’accord dans les débats présidentiels
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine
This article is about the expression of agreement in a particular type of talk-in-interaction: debates
occurring between the two ballots of French presidential elections. The main way of expressing agreement
in French being the morpheme oui, we shall examine at first how the system of the three forms
oui/non/si works in French (standard and non standard uses), which can give rise to some misunderstandings
with people whose linguistic system is different. Then we shall wonder what are the values
of oui and similar forms in theses debates, according mainly to the type of speech act to which this
form react; and finally, what are the functions of agreement in these exchanges which are fundamentally
of a confrontational type.
</description>
<dc:date>2016-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/3420">
<title>Rôle de voilà dans l’affirmation: valeur confirmative et marque d’intégration d’informations</title>
<link>http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/3420</link>
<description>Rôle de voilà dans l’affirmation: valeur confirmative et marque d’intégration d’informations
Col, Gilles
Voilà is a linguistic unit characterized by two groups of paired values and statuses: [signpost value +
interjection status] and [predicative value + pivotal status]. From these issues, we formulate a functional
hypothesis in terms of cognitive grouping: voilà would mark the integration of informational
elements by grouping them on the verbal scene. This hypothesis may also help explain the use of voilà
as an acknowledgement marker. This assumption was addressed in a psychology experiment. The
results suggested that voilà enables speakers to express his or her agreement with information presented
previously. It also facilitates verbal interactions by making grounded information more salient in
situations in which dialogue partners experience increased cognitive load.
</description>
<dc:date>2016-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/3418">
<title>L’auxiliaire do dans les affirmations non polémiques en anglais</title>
<link>http://elea.unisa.it/xmlui/handle/10556/3418</link>
<description>L’auxiliaire do dans les affirmations non polémiques en anglais
Douay, Catherine
When used in affirmative sentences the English auxiliary do is often characterized as expressing more
or less polemical values. Yet do often occurs in affirmative utterances where no (potential) disagreement
between interlocutors is involved. In the following article we will first show how polemical values
of affirmative do result from contextually inferred interpretations. Our claim is that for a unified
account of all uses of the auxiliary do (and grammatical morphemes at large), the notions of agreement/
disagreement between interlocutors must first be examined at the systemic level where no such
pragmatic notions exist. In line with the interlocutive model we have developed (Douay, Roulland,
2014), we will define do as the marker of a specific interlocutive pattern. Such characterization at a
systemic level where roles and not individuals are involved will allow us to bring into focus what is
constant in the meaning of the form as opposed to what is context-dependent.
Introduction.
</description>
<dc:date>2016-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
</rdf:RDF>
