Page 52 - A GRAMMAR OF BHOJPURI _ PhD Dissertation 2020 TU

f. Topicalization referential coherence
g. Relativization referential coherence, event grounding

(2) Verb phrase grammar
Structures Functions
VP grammar Event coherence

a. Tense temporal grounding of event
b. Aspect aspectual grounding of event

c. Modality epistemic-deontic grounding of event
d. Speech act epistemic-deontic grounding of event to speaker/hearer

(3) Cross-clausal grammar
Structures Functions

Cross-clausal grammar Event-chain coherence
a. Inter-clausal connective event grounding, chain grounding
b. Chain-initial adverbials chain grounding

c. Presentative constructions referential grounding, chain grounding
As can be seen in (1-3), some grammatical systems can function in more than one

discourse-pragmatic domain. Thus, for example, relativization (2g) and contrastive
focus (2h) are part of the grammar of both referential coherence and event

coherence/grounding. Tense (3a), aspect (3b) and modality (3c) are used to signal
both temporal-aspectual-modal grounding and event coherence. And the grammar of

inter-clausal connectives in (3a) integrates devices that signal both referential
coherence and event-coherence, albeit often at higher hierarchic levels.
The distinctness of propositional semantics from discourse pragmatics does

not mean the lack of overlap or interaction between the two. Thus, for example,
morphological case marking codes both the discourse pragmatic functions of subject

(nominative) and direct object (accusative), and the propositional semantic functions
of agent, patient, dative, locative, instrumental or associative cases. Similarly, tense,
aspect, modality (henceforth, TAM) and negation display both propositional semantic

and discourse pragmatic functions. While the morphology of TAM system is part of
clausal structure, its functional scope is not the propositional semantics of the atomic

event or state, but rather the pragmatics, or connectivity, of the clause in relation to its

26