Cover not available
Part of
(Non)referentiality in Conversation
Edited by Michael C. Ewing and Ritva Laury
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 344] 2024
► pp. 167–202

Chapter 9
An interactional approach to generic second person expressions in Mandarin conversation

| University of California Los Angeles
This chapter tackles the hitherto under-explored question of when and why conversationalists deploy second person generic expressions that feature a general and vague referential scope. I show that the conversational contexts in which they appear are usually characterized most prominently by their relatively complex and/or controversial subject matters, participants’ incongruent stances, and/or opposing positions to be contested. These contexts and their associated interactional demands are argued to give rise to the patterning of clustering (multiplicity of instances in adjacent units), limited generality (as good-enough-yet-not-too-broad general statements), and primary (or attempted primary) speakership. In general, second person generic statements can be seen as a special and powerful rhetorical device designed for marked interactional occasions.
Keywords: second person singular pronoun, generic expression, reference, indefinite, impersonal, truism, informing, persuasion, argumentation, Mandarin conversation
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Materials and methodology
  • 3.General broad patterns in conversation
    • 3.1Clustering
    • 3.2Locally conditioned generalities
    • 3.3Primary speaker roles
  • 4.Social activities: When and why speakers deploy second person generic expressions?
    • 4.1Complex informing
    • 4.2Persuasion
    • 4.3Argumentation
  • 5.Discussion
    • 5.1The preference for clusters
    • 5.2Limited generality
    • 5.3The association with a primary speaker role (or lack thereof if primary speakership is more dynamically negotiated)
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 1 August 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.344.09tao
References (44)
References
Berry, Roger. 2009. “You Could Say That: The Generic Second-Person Pronoun in Modern English.” English Today 25 (3): 29–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biq, Yung-O. 1991. “The Multiple Uses of the Second Person Singular Pronoun Ni in Conversational Mandarin.” Journal of Pragmatics 16 (4): 307–321. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boersma, Paul and David J. M. Weenink. 2021. Praat: Doing Phonetics by Computer. [URL]. Last retrieved January 2021.
Bolinger, Dwight. 1979a. “To Catch a Metaphor: You as Norm.” American Speech 54 (3): 194–209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1979b. “Pronouns in Discourse.” In Discourse and Syntax, ed. by Talmy Givon, 287–309. New York: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Penelope. 2007. “Principles of Person Reference in Tzeltal Conversation.” In Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives, ed. by N. J. Enfield and Tanya Stivers, 172–202. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Canavan, Alexandra and George Zipperlen. 1996. CALLFRIEND Mandarin Chinese-Mainland Dialect. Linguistic Data Consortium, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace. 1987. “Cognitive Constraints on Information Flow.” In Coherence and Grounding in Discourse, ed. by Russell Tomlin, 21–51. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1994. Discourse, Consciousness, and Time: The Flow and Displacement of Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth and Margret Selting. 2018. Interactional Linguistics: An Introduction to Language in Social Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dahmen, Josua, and Joe Blythe. 2022. “Calibrating Recipiency through Pronominal Reference”. Interactional Linguistics 2 (2): 190–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, John W. 1980. “Beyond Definiteness: The Trace of Identity in Discourse.” In The Pear Stories: Cognitive, Cultural, and Linguistic Aspects of Narrative Production, ed. by Wallace L. Chafe, 203–74. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
2006. Transcription in Action: Resources for the Representation of Linguistic Interaction. [URL]. Last accessed May 22, 2021.
2007. “The Stance Triangle.” In Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction, ed. by Robert Englebretson, 139–182. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, John W., Stephan Schuetze-Coburn, Susanna Cumming, and Danae Paolino. 1993. “Outline of Discourse Transcription.” In Talking Data, ed. by Jane Edwards and Martin Lampert, 45–89. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Ford, Cecilia E. 1994. “Dialogic Aspects of Talk and Writing: Because on the Interactive-Edited Continuum.” Text 14 (4): 531–554.Google Scholar
Garfinkel, Harold. 1967. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Goodwin, M. H. 1996. “Informings and Announcements in Their Environment: Prosody within a Multi-Activity Work Setting.” In Prosody in Conversation: Interactional Studies, ed. by E. Couper-Kuhlen and M. Selting, 436–461. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hanks, William. 2007. “Person Reference in Yucatec Maya Conversation.” In Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives, ed. by N. J. Enfield and Tanya Stivers, 149–171. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John. 1984. “A Change-of-State Token and Aspects of Its Sequential Placement.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage, 299–345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2007. “Intersubjectivity and Progressivity in Person (and Place) Reference.” In Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives, ed. by N. J. Enfield and Tanya Stivers, 255–280. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. “Epistemics in Action: Action Formation and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hsiao, Chi-hua. 2011. “Personal Pronoun Interchanges in Mandarin Chinese Conversation.” Language Sciences 33 (5): 799–821. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kitagawa, Chisato and Adrienne Lehrer. 1990. “Impersonal Uses of Personal Pronouns.” Journal of Pragmatics 14 (5): 739–759. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuo, Sai-Hua. 2002. “From Solidarity to Antagonism: The Uses of the Second-Person Singular Pronoun in Chinese Political Discourse.” Text 22 (1): 29–55.Google Scholar
Laberge, Suzanne and Gillian Sankoff. 1979. “Anything You Can Do.” In Discourse and Syntax, ed. by Talmy Givon, 419–440. New York: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labov, William and David Fanshel. 1977. Therapeutic Discourse: Psychotherapy as Conversation. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lerner, Gene. 1996. “On the Place of Linguistic Resources in The Organization of Talk-in-Interaction: ‘Second Person’ Reference in Multi-Party Conversation.” Pragmatics 6 (3): 281–294.Google Scholar
Lü, Shuxiang. 1985. Jindai Hanyu Zhidaici [Demonstratives and Pronouns in Modern Chinese], Shanghai: Xuelin Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Rubba, Jo. 1996. “Alternate Grounds in the Interpretation of Deictic Expressions.” In Spaces, Worlds, and Grammar, ed. by G. Fauconnier and E. Sweetser, 227–261. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1965/1992. Part II, Lecture 6, “‘You’.” In Lectures on Conversation Vol 1, ed. by Gail Jefferson, with an introduction by Emanuel A. Schegloff, 163–168. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 1966/1992. Part III, Lecture 11, “‘You’.” In Lectures on Conversation Vol. 1, ed. by Gail Jefferson, with an introduction by Emanuel A. Schegloff, 348–353. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 1969/1992. Part II, Lecture 9, “Sound Shifts; Showing Understanding; Dealing with ‘Utterance Completion; Practical Mysticism.” In Lectures on Conversation Vol. 2 (Winter 1969), ed. by Gail Jefferson, 137–149. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 1975. “Everyone Has to Lie.” In Sociocultural Dimensions of Language Use, ed. by Ben G. Blount and Mary Sanches, 57–79. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Sacks, H. and Schegloff, E. A. 1979. “Two Preferences in The Organization of Reference to Persons in Conversation And Their Interaction.” In Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. by George Psathas, 15–21. New York: Irvington.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson. 1974. “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation.” Language 50 (4): 696–735. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siewierska, Anna. 2004. Person. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Song, Zuoyan and Hongyin Tao. 2009. “A Unified Account of Causal Clause Sequences in Mandarin Chinese and Its Implications.” Studies in Language 33 (1): 69–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Dan and D. Wilson. 1995. Relevance: Communication and Cognition (2nd edition). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stirling, Lesley, and Lenore Manderson. 2011. “About You: Empathy, Objectivity and Authority.” Journal of Pragmatics 43 (6): 1581–1602. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, N. J. Enfield, and Stephen C. Levinson. 2007. “Person Reference in Interaction.” In Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives, ed. by N. J. Enfield and Tanya Stivers, 1–20. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tao, Hongyin. 1996. Units in Mandarin Conversation: Prosody, Discourse, and Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wales, Katie. 1996. Personal Pronouns in Present-Day English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Xiang, Xuehua. 2019. “Personal Pronouns in Chinese Discourse.” In The Routledge Handbook of Chinese Discourse Analysis, ed. by Chris Shei, 147–159. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar