Advertisement

Corpus Pragmatics

, Volume 2, Issue 4, pp 375–398 | Cite as

Apologies in the History of English: Evidence from the Corpus of Historical American English (COHA)

  • Andreas H. Jucker
Original Paper

Abstract

This paper explores two different methods of tracing a specific speech act in a historical corpus. As an example, the development of apologies is investigated in the two hundred years covered by the Corpus of Historical American English (COHA, 1810–2009). One method retrieves apologies through their typical illocutionary force indicating devices (IFIDs), such as sorry, excuse, apologise and pardon, while the other retrieves passages in which apologies are explicitly mentioned (metapragmatic expression analysis). Both methods require a considerable amount of manual analysis of retrieved hits, which has to be verified through elaborate inter-rater reliability testing. The searches are restricted to fictional texts because they show a greater frequency of apologies than the alternative genres available in COHA, and they often allow the identification of behaviour as apologetic because it is discursively described as such by the fictional characters or the narratorial voice. The results show that the frequency of apologies increased considerably throughout the period covered by COHA. In the earliest period the IFID sorry was no more frequent than pardon and forgive. In the most recent period its frequency has multiplied almost six-fold and is more than three times larger than all the others taken together. The metapragmatic expression analysis allows an analysis of the development of strategies used to perform apologies. IFIDs have become more important while Taking on Responsibility and Explanation receded somewhat in their frequencies. On the basis of these results it is speculated that the force of apologies has decreased. What used to be sincere requests for exoneration has in many cases turned to token displays of regret.

Keywords

Apologies Speech acts Diachronic corpus analysis COHA History of American English 

Notes

Acknowledgements

First and foremost, my thanks must go to Nina Helg-Kurmann and Lukas Zbinden, Master students at the University of Zurich, who worked as my research assistants and carried out the majority of the coding work reported in this paper. They both spent many hours pondering extracts of texts from the COHA, trying to make sense of the interactions between the characters. I also offer heartfelt thanks to Magdalena Leitner and Mirjam Schmalz, who read a draft version of this paper and provided a wealth of insightful comments and suggestions for its improvement. The usual disclaimers apply.

Data sources

Corpus of Contemporary American English. Official website: https://corpus.byu.edu/coca/. Corpus of Historical American English. Official website: https://corpus.byu.edu/coha/. Corpus of Historical American English. Accessed through the Dependency Databank at the English Department, University of Zurich. http://es-dbank.uzh.ch.

References

  1. Aijmer, K. (1996). Conversational routines in English. Convention and creativity. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  2. Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (Eds.). (1989a). Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  3. Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (1989b). Investigating cross-cultural pragmatics: An introductory overview. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies (pp. 1–34). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  4. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Studies in interactional sociolinguistics (Vol. 4). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Busse, U., & Hübler, A. (Eds.). (2012). Investigations into the meta-communicative Lexicon of English. A contribution to historical pragmatics. Pragmatics & beyond new series (Vol. 220). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  6. Culpeper, J. (2009). The metalanguage of impoliteness: Using sketch engine to explore the Oxford English Corpus. In P. Baker (Ed.), Contemporary corpus linguistics. Contemporary studies in linguistics (pp. 64–86). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  7. Deutschmann, M. (2003). Apologising in British English. Skrifter från moderna språk (Vol. 10). Umeå: Institutionen för moderna språk, Umeå University.Google Scholar
  8. Drew, P., Hepburn, A., Margutti, P., & Galatolo, R. (2016). Introduction to the special issue on apologies in discourse. Discourse Processes, 53(1-2), 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goffman, E. (1971). Relations in public: Microstudies of the public order. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  10. Heritage, J., & Raymond, C. W. (2016). Are explicit apologies proportional to the offenses they address? Discourse Processes, 53(1-2), 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Holmes, J. (1990). Apologies in New Zealand English. Language in Society, 19(2), 155–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jaworski, A., Coupland, N., & Galasiński, D. (Eds.). (2004). Metalanguage. Social and ideological perspectives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  13. Jucker, A. H. (2017). Speech acts and speech act sequences: Greetings and farewells in the history of American English. Studia Neophilologica, 89(1), 39–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jucker, A. H., & Locher, M. A. (2017). Introducing pragmatics of fiction: Approaches, trends and developments. In M. A. Locher & A. H. Jucker (Eds.), Pragmatics of fiction. Handbooks of pragmatics (Vol. 12, pp. 1–21). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  15. Jucker, A. H., Schneider, G., Taavitsainen, I., & Breustedt, B. (2008). Fishing for compliments: Precision and recall in corpus-linguistic compliment research. In A. H. Jucker & I. Taavitsainen (Eds.), Speech acts in the history of English. Pragmatics & beyond new series (Vol. 176, pp. 273–294). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jucker, A. H., & Taavitsainen, I. (2008). Apologies in the history of English: Routinized and lexicalized expressions of responsibility and regret. In A. H. Jucker & I. Taavitsainen (Eds.), Speech acts in the history of English. Pragmatics & beyond new series (Vol. 176, pp. 229–244). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jucker, A. H., & Taavitsainen, I. (2013). English historical pragmatics. Edinburgh textbooks on the English language. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Jucker, A. H., & Taavitsainen, I. (2014). Complimenting in the history of American English: A metacommunicative expression analysis. In I. Taavitsainen, A. H. Jucker, & J. Tuominen (Eds.), Diachronic corpus pragmatics. Pragmatics & beyond new series (Vol. 243, pp. 257–276). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kohnen, T. (2017). Non-canonical speech acts in the history of English. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 65(3), 303–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lakoff, R. T. (2001). Nine ways of looking at apologies: The necessity for interdisciplinary theory and method in discourse analysis. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. E. Hamilton (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 199–214). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  21. Lutzky, U., & Kehoe, A. (2017a). “Oops, I didn’t mean to be so flippant”: A corpus pragmatic analysis of apologies in blog data. Journal of Pragmatics, 116, 27–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lutzky, U., & Kehoe, A. (2017b). “I apologise for my poor blogging”: Searching for apologies in the Birmingham Blog Corpus. Corpus Pragmatics, 1, 37–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Manes, J., & Wolfson, N. (1981). The compliment formula. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), Conversational routine. Explorations in standardized communication situations and prepatterned speech (pp. 115–132). The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
  24. Meier, A. J. (1998). Apologies: What do we know? International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(2), 215–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ogierman, E. (2018). Discourse completion tasks. In A. H. Jucker, W. Bublitz, & K. P. Schneider (Eds.), Methods in pragmatics. Handbooks of pragmatics (Vol. 10, pp. 229–255). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  26. Olshtain, E. (1989). Apologies across languages. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies (pp. 155–173). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  27. Owen, M. (1983). Apologies and remedial interchanges. A Study of Language Use in Social Interaction. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar
  28. Robinson, J. D. (2004). The sequential organization of “explicit” apologies in naturally occurring English. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 37(3), 291–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts. An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Trosborg, A. (1987). Apology strategies in natives/non-natives. Journal of Pragmatics, 11, 147–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Trosborg, A. (1995). Interlanguage pragmatics. Requests, complaints and apologies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.English DepartmentUniversity of ZurichZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations