Tak skazat and kak skazat: Grammar and prosody of constructions with pragmaticized verbs of speech

Basing on the data from the multimedia subcorpus of the National Corpus of the Russian Language, we examined two discourse markers, which are the result of pragmaticization of the basic verb of speech skazat’ ‘to say’: tak skazat’ lit. ‘so [to] say’ and kak skazat’ ‘how [to] say’. It was revealed that despite the obvious structural similarity and almost complete segmental coincidence, the semantics, grammar and prosody of these markers differ significantly. Tak skazat’ is a marker of the speaker’s self-monitoring: its function is to signal that the speaker disclaims responsibility for the accuracy of the chosen nomination and that he relies on the speech experience of other speakers who have used this nomination in a similar situation. It can be used in pre-, and post-position in relation to its scope. Kak skazat’ is a marker of word searching: its function is to signal that the speaker is having difficulty finding an adequate nomination. Due to its main function, it cannot be used in postposition to its scope and is usually accompanied by such typical signals of speech dysfluency as repetitions, self-corrections, filled pauses, etc. Prosodically, both markers tend to be used parenthetically — atonically, with an accelerated tempo in a narrow tonal range, but can also be used prosodically autonomously — while maintaining phrasal accent. In such cases, in tak skazat’, the phrasal accent is placed on the verb, and in kak skazat’ — on the pronoun. The marker kak skazat’ can also be used as a speech formula, i.e. can form a separate turn in dialogue. Two formulas kak skazat’ were discovered: the first is a reaction to a question, namely, a signal about the absence of an exact answer, the second is a signal about disagreement with the interlocutor’s statement. The formulas have a clear prosodic difference — in the first, the phrasal accent is on kak, in the second — on skazat’. Markers also differ significantly in their frequency: kak skazat’ is twenty times less frequent than tak skazat’. The results obtained show, firstly, that the same lexeme in an almost identical environment can follow different paths of pragmaticization; and secondly, that data from electronic corpora of oral texts available for prosodic analysis makes it possible to describe these paths in more detail and completeness.