This paper offers an alternative analysis to theSubjectivity, Intersubjectivity and Peripheries Hypothesisor SIPH (Beeching, Degand, Detges, Traugott and Waltereit 2009;Traugott 2012;Beeching and Detges 2014;Higashizumi, Onodera and Sohn 2016). The SIPH focuses on theleftandright peripheriesof a single reference unit:sentence,utteranceorturn. Against thisunidimensionalanalysis, this paper argues in favour of abidimensionalanalysis such as the one offered by the Val.Es.Co. model where eight different-scope units and four positions per unit offer a more flexible way to capture the evolution of discourse markers. The analysis of Sp.¿no?(huh?),mira(look),oye(hey) and¡vaya!(wow!) reveals that the subjective and intersubjective positioning of the speakers is better accounted for by taking the discourse unit and the meaning of the DM into account, rather than its structural position at the left or right periphery of an utterance.

This paper argues in favour of a discourse position called Absolute Initial Position (AIP). AIP is the place where conversationalists set up the basis for a new conversation, what implies choices regarding the number of participants, their role, the private/public character of the communicative event or the (non) predetermined character of turn-taking. As a result, AIPs are places where major changes in context can take place. AIPs are filled in by a very reduced set of linguistic alternates: greetings, formulae, vocatives and a very narrow subset of discourse markers. Beyond their heterogeneity, AIP-markers share two common functions: they either validate the hearer or validate the message. As a result of the existence of AIPs, discourse markers can be divided into three differents groups: DMs which fit into an AIP; b) DMs which do not fit into an AIP; c) DMs which, when placed into an AIP, invoke a previous context

This paper explores novel ways to consider semantic–pragmatic cycles using a dual strategy: an inwards strategy, whereby the distinctive traits of a pragmatic cycle are established, and an outwards strategy, whereby the categories that delimit semantic–pragmatic cycles are described. The result of this exploration is the distinction between “pragmatic cycle”, “replication”, “concomitance” and “paradigmatic increase” as four different yet related processes. In addition, this study integrates Construction Grammar into the description of each process and shows that the study of semantic–pragmatic cycles can benefit from a constructional approach, adoptingTraugott and Trousdale’s (2013)andTraugott’s (2018)models, and including concepts from European structuralism, particularly the notions of “paradigm”, “diasystem” and “functional language” (“lengua funcional”).

Este artículo se ocupa del concepto de ciclicidad y de su aplicación a los cambios de índole pragmática. En la primera parte, se revisa el concepto de ciclo semántico-pragmático propuesto por Hansen (2014, 2018, 2020), se propone una redefinición y se caracteriza el ciclo a partir de una serie de rasgos básicos. En la segunda parte, se ilustra la propuesta con el estudio de un caso: el reemplazo de macho por tío en la segunda mitad del siglo XX. Macho se utilizaba como vocativo desde al menos la década de los cincuenta; dos décadas más tarde, tío comenzó a emplearse como vocativo en contextos similares a macho, se popularizó entre los jóvenes hasta el punto de reemplazar en gran medida a macho; con el paso de los años se ha expandido al grupo etario medio –mejor dicho, estos hablantes han continuado utilizando tío/a–, de modo que se ha consolidado la tendencia dispar en la frecuencia de uso –creciente en tío/a, decreciente en macho– de la que resulta un cambio sin retorno, que permite hablar de ciclo semántico-pragmático.

Unstressed que-inital constructions have been traditionally treated as instances of conjunction-headed structures, preceded or not by an implicit performative verb. In this paper it is argued that such an explanation runs into problems when gwe-constructions are faced with their interrogative counterparts, which also show unstressed-initial que. As an alternative, que is considered a modality marker, whose main function is to show, in these constructions, the speaker's stance with regard of the proposition. In this light,, a unified account of interrogative, affirmative and exclamative instances of unstressed que-initial sentences can be provided.