This study looks at offer sequences in Estonian with an analytical focus on answers in the imperative form. “Telling someone to do something” has traditionally been considered an initiating action, typically an order. In this study, however, Estonian speakers are shown to produce “orders” in second position, i.e., in response to an initiating action. These imperative responses are grammatically fitted to first actions in at least two ways. First, they reuse the verbs in the first actions, thus constituting one type of verb repeat response that is common in Estonian conversation. Second, they are grammatically restricted to positions after turns formatted in 1st person, termed my-side offers in this study. With the adjacency pair my-side offer – imperative response participants are shown to navigate the landscape of interpersonal deonticity. It is a crucial feature of my-side offers that the speaker defines the future from her own perspective, formulating what she herself will do, albeit with clear consequences and obligations for the recipient. The originator of the offer thus claims deontic rights over the future course of activities that concern both parties, and displays a strong expectation of acceptance by the other. Imperative responses, however, challenge these rights. Instead of merely accepting the offer, they redefine the current speaker as the deontic authority. The analysis is based on phone calls between mothers and young adult daughters – a relationship where entitlement to services, as well as respective deontic rights, can be an issue. It is overwhelmingly mothers who produce offers in these calls, and daughters who answer them in the imperative form. The paper argues that the daughters thereby reclaim agency and rights to independently decide upon their future in the ongoing process of becoming a responsible adult.
2010Imperatives and Commands. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bojczyk, Kathryn E., Tara J. Lehan, Lenore M. McWey, Gail F. Melson, and Debra R. Kaufman
2011 “Mothers’ and Their Adult Daughters’ Perceptions of Their Relationship.” Journal of Family Issues 32 (4): 452–481.
Boyd, Carol J.
1989 “Mothers and Daughters: A Discussion of Theory and Research.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 51: 291–301.
Cicirelli, Victor G.
1993 “Intergenerational Communication in the Mother-daughter Dyad Regarding Caregiving Decisions.” In Discourse and Lifespan Identity, ed. by Nikolas Coupland, and Jon Nussbaum, 215–236. London: Sage.
Clayman, Steven, and John Heritage
2014 “Benefactors and Beneficiaries: Benefactive Status and Stance in the Management of Offers and Requests.” In Requesting in Social Interaction, ed. by Paul Drew, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 55–86. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hakulinen, Auli, Maria Vilkuna, Riitta Korhonen, Vesa Koivisto, Tarja Riitta Heinonen, and Irja Alho
2004Iso suomen kielioppi [The Comprehensive Grammar of Finnish]. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.
Kasterpalu, Riina, and Tiit Hennoste
2016Estonian aa: A multifunctional change-of-state token. Journal of Pragmatics 104: 148–162.
1995 “Adult Mother-daughter Relationships: Subjectivity, Power and Critical Psychology.” Theory and Psychology 5 (4): 483–510.
Henwood, Karen L., and Geraldine Coughlan
1993 “The Construction of ‘Closeness’ in Mother-daughter Relationships across the Lifespan.” In Discourse and Lifespan Identity, ed. by Nikolas Coupland, and Jon Nussbaum, 191–214. London: Sage.
1984Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Blackwell.
2013 “Action Formation and Its Epistemic (and Other) Backgrounds.” Discourse Studies 15 (5): 547–574.
Heritage, John, and Geoffrey Raymond
2005 “The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Assessment Sequences.” Social Psychology Quarterly 68: 15–38.
1987Establishing Agreement: An Analysis of Proposal-acceptance Sequences. Dordrecht/Providence: R.I., Foris Publications.
Huddleston, Rodney, and Geoffrey K. Pullum
2005A Student’s Introduction to English Grammar. New York: Cambridge University Press
Hutchinson, M. Katherine, and Teresa M. Cooney
1998 “Patterns of Parent-teen Sexual Risk Communication: Implications for Intervention.” Family Relations 47 (2): 185–194
Jensen, Alexander C., Shawn D. Whiteman, Karen L. Fingerman, and Kira S. Birditt
2013 “’Life Still Isn’t Fair’: Parental Differential Treatment of Young Adult Siblings.” Journal of Marriage & Family 75 (2): 438–452.
Jones, Bob M.
1999The Welsh Answering System. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
2013 “Two Different Intonation Contours of Estonian jaajaa.” In Nordic Prosody, ed. by Eva Liina Asu, and Pärtel Lippus, 177–186. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Verlag.
1999 “Informatsioonikäsitluse partikkel ahah telefonivestlustes [The information management particle ahah in phone calls].” Emakeele Seltsi Aastaraamat 43: 34–56.
2003From Interaction to Grammar: Estonian Finite Verb Forms in Conversation. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Studia Uralica Upsaliensia 34. Uppsala.
2008 “Internal Development and Borrowing of Pragmatic Particles: The Estonian vaata/vat ‘look’, näed ‘you see’ and vot.” Finnisch-Ugrische Mitteilungen 30/31: 23–54.
2009a “Üldküsimuse lihtvastuste funktsioonid [The functions of simple answers to polar questions].” Keel ja Kirjandus 52 (1): 33–53.
2009b “Käskiv kõneviis nõustuvas voorus ja vastuste tüpoloogia [Imperative in complying turns and the typology of answers].” Emakeele Seltsi Aastaraamat 54: 94–106.
2009c “The Grammar-interaction Interface of Negative Questions in Estonian.” SKY Journal of Linguistics 22: 139–173.
2010 “Minimal Answers to Yes/No Questions in the Service of Sequence Organization.” Discourse Studies 12 (3): 1–27.
2011 “The Terms of Not Knowing.” In The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation, ed. by Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada, and Jakob Steensig, 184–206. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
In press. “Making up One’s Mind in Second Position: Estonian no-preface in Action Plans.” In At the Intersection of Turn and Sequence: Turn-initial Particles across Languages ed. by John Heritage, and Marja-Leena Sorjonen Amsterdam/Philadelphia John Benjamins.
Kendrick, Kobin H., and Paul Drew
2014 “The Putative Preference for Offers over Requests.” In Requesting in Social Interaction, ed. by Paul Drew, and Elizabetg Couper-Kuhlen, 87–114. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kim, Kyungmin, Steven H. Zarit, Kira S. Birditt, and Karen L. Fingerman
2014 “Discrepancy in Reports of Support Exchanges Between Parents and Adult Offspring: Within‑ and Between-family Differences.” Journal of Family Psychology 28 (2): 168–179.
König, Ekehard, and Peter Siemund
2007 “Speech Act Distinctions in Grammar.” In Language Typology and Syntactic Description. Vol 1. Clause Structure, ed. by Timothy Shopen, 276–324. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
1999Language as Social Action: Grammar, Prosody, and Social Action in Swedish Conversation. Skrifter utgivna av institutionen för nordiska språk vid Uppsala universitet 46. Uppsala.
1992 “The Mother–daughter Relationship: Narrative as a Path of Understanding.” Women’s Studies in Communication 15: 1–21.
Pennington, Barbara A.
2004 “The Communicative Management of Connection and Autonomy in African American and European American Mother-daughter Relationships.” Journal of Family Communication 4: 3–34.
1980 “Telling My Side: ‘Limited Access’ as a ‘Fishing Device’.” Sociological Inquiry 50: 186–198.
1995 ““Doing” Mother-daughter: Conversation Analysis and Relational Contexts.” In Parents, Children and Communication: Frontiers of Theory and Research, ed. by Thomas J. Socha, and Glen H. Stamp, 113–125. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
2012 “Bilateral and Unilateral Requests: The Use of Imperatives and Mi X? Interrogatives in Italian.” Discourse Processes 49 (5): 426–458.
Sadock, Jerrold M., and Arnold M. Zwicky
1985 “Speech Act Distinctions in Syntax.” In Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Vol.1. Clause Structure, ed. by Timothy Shopen, 155–196. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
2007Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2012Advice Giving in Telephone Interactions between Mothers and Their Young Adult Daughters. Unpublished PhD thesis, Loughborough University.
2010Conversation Analysis: An Introduction. Wiley-Blackwell.
1996 “On Repeats and Responses in Finnish Conversation.” In Interaction and Grammar, ed. by Elinor Ochs, Emanuel Schegloff, and Sandra Thompson, 277–327. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2009 “Alternative Responses to Assessments.” In Conversation Analysis: Comparative Perspectives, ed. by Jack Sidnell, 281–303. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Steensig, Jakob, and Trine Heinemann
2014 “The Social and Moral Work of Modal Constructions in Granting Remote Requests.” In Requesting in Social Interaction, ed. by Paul Drew, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 145–170. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Stevanovic, Melisa, and Anssi Peräkylä
2012 “Deontic Authority in Interaction: The Right to Announce, Propose, and Decide.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (3): 297–321.
2005 “Modified Repeats: One Method for Asserting Primary Rights from Second position.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 38 (2): 131–158.
Usita, Paula M., and Barbara C. DuBois
2005 “Conflict Sources and Responses in Mother-Daughter Relationships: Perspectives of Adult Daughters of Aging Immigrant Women.” Journal of Women & Aging 17: 151–165.
1997Interaction and the Development of the Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 november 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.