Cover not available
Part of
Between Turn and Sequence: Turn-initial particles across languages
Edited by John Heritage and Marja-Leena Sorjonen
[Studies in Language and Social Interaction 31] 2018
► pp. 59–96

Chapter 3
Bueno-, pues-, and bueno-pues-prefacing in Spanish conversation

| University of Colorado, Boulder

This chapter reports on two turn-initial particles in Spanish: bueno and pues. While previous research has equated both of these to well-prefacing in English in that they project “unexpectedness”, here the aim is to explicate the distinct interactional work that each particle performs. Focusing on responses to questions, I show that bueno-prefaced responses do not overtly problematize the prior utterance, but rather accept its terms before departing from them, and thereby acquiesce to the prior turn’s design. Pues-prefaced responses, by contrast, are directly addressed to the prior turn, but they cast that prior turn’s action or design as problematic in some way. I conclude by illustrating how these two uses are not mutually exclusive by examining the compound preface bueno-pues.

Keywords: particle bueno , particle pues , Spanish, conversation analysis/CA, discourse marker, answers, responses
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Distinguishing Bueno from Pues
  • 3. Bueno-prefacing
  • 4. Pues-prefacing
  • 5. Bueno-Pues-prefacing
  • 6.Discussion: A cross-linguistic and cross-dialectical perspective on ‘order at all points’
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 19 July 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slsi.31.03ray
References

References

Aijmer, Karin
2002 English Discourse Particles: Evidence From a Corpus. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alcina Franch, Juan, and José M. Blecua
1975 Gramática española [Spanish Grammar]. Barcelona: Ariel.Google Scholar
Bauhr, Gerard
1994 “Funciones discursivas de „bueno‟ en español moderno [Discursive functions of ‘bueno’ in modern Spanish].” Lingüística Española Actual 16:79–121.Google Scholar
Beach, Wayne A.
1993 “Transitional Regularities for Casual “okay” Usages.” Journal of Pragmatics 19:325–352. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blas Arroyo, José L.
2011 “From Politeness to Discourse Marking: The Process of Pragmaticalization of Muy Bien in Vernacular Spanish.” Journal of Pragmatics 43:855–874. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight
1972 Thatʹs That. La Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Briz, Antonio, and Antonio Hidalgo
1988 “Conectores pragmáticos y estructura de la conversación [Pragmatic connectors and the structure of conversation].” In Los marcadores del discurso: Teoría y análisis, ed. by María A. Martín Zorraquino, and Estrella Montolío Durán, 121–142. Madrid: Arco Libros, S.L.Google Scholar
Briz Gómez, Antonio
1998 El español coloquial en la conversación: Espozo de pragmagramática [Colloquial Spanish in conversation: A pragmagrammatical sketch]. Barcelona: Ariel.Google Scholar
Cortés Rodríguez, Luis
1991 Sobre connectores, expletivos y muletillas en el español hablado [On connectors, expletives, and fillers in spoken Spanish]. Málaga: Editorial Librería Ágora.Google Scholar
Cuadrado, Luis A. H.
1994 “Sobre el funcionamiento de ‘pues’ en el enunciado discursivo [On the function of ‘pues’ in discursive formulations].” In Tendencias actuales en la enseñanza del español como lengua extranjera I: actas del quinto Congreso Internacional de ASELE (Santander, 29, 30 de septiembre y 1 de octubre de 1994), ed. by Salvador Montesa Peydró, and Pedro Gomís Blanco, 43–50. Santander: Asociación Enseñanza Español Lengua Extranjera.Google Scholar
Cuenca, Maria-Josep
2008 “Pragmatic Markers in Contrast: The Case of ‘Well’.” Journal of Pragmatics 40:1373–1391. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davidson, Judy
1984 “Subsequent versions of invitations, offers, requests, and proposals dealing with potential or actual rejection.” Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage, 102–129. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Drew, Paul, and John Heritage
1992 “Analyzing Talk at Work: An Introduction.” In Talk at Work, ed. by Paul Drew, and John Heritage, 3–65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Eckert, Penelope
2008 “Variation and the Indexical Field.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 12 (4):453–476. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Evans, Nicholas, and Stephen C. Levinson
2009 “The Myth of Language Universals: Language Diversity and its Importance for Cognitive Science.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32:429–492. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Félix-Brasdefer, J. César
2006 “Linguistic Politeness in Mexico: Refusal Strategies Among Male Speakers of Mexican Spanish.” Journal of Pragmatics 38:2158–2187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fox, Barbara A., and Sandra A. Thompson
2010 “Responses to Wh-questions in English Conversation.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 43 (2):133–156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fuentes Rodríguez, Catalina
1993 “Comportamiento discursivo de ‘bueno’, ‘bien’, ‘pues bien’ [Discursive behavior of ‘bueno’, ‘bien’, ‘pues bien’].” Estudios de Lingüística 9:205–221.Google Scholar
García Vizcaíno, María J., and Miguel A. Martínez-Cabeza
2005 “The Pragmatics of Well and Bueno in English and Spanish.” Intercultural Pragmatics 2 (1):69–92.Google Scholar
García Vizcaíno, María José
2005 “Consideraciones sobre la naturaleza y funcionamiento de la cortesía verbal en el español peninsular. [On the nature and function of verbal politeness in Peninsular Spanish].” Revista Internacional de Lingüística Iberoamericana 5 (3),49–63.Google Scholar
Hakulinen, Auli
1993 “The Grammar of Opening Routines.” In Sky 1993: Yearbook of the Linguistic Association of Finland 15, ed. by Susanna Shore, and Maria Vilkuna, 149–170. Helsinki.Google Scholar
Haverkate, Henk
1994 La cortesía verbal: estudio pragmatalingüístico [Verbal politeness: A pragmatalinguistic study]. Madrid: Editorial Gredos.Google Scholar
Heritage, John
1984a “A Change-of-State Token and Aspects of its Sequential Placement.” In Structures of Social Action, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 299–345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1984b Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
1998 “ Oh-Prefaced Responses to Inquiry.” Language in Society 27 (3):291–334. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2002a “The Limits of Questioning: Negative Interrogatives and Hostile Question Content.” Journal of Pragmatics 34 (10–11):1427–1446. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2002b “ Oh-Prefaced Responses to Assessments: A Method of Modifying Agreement/Disagreement.” In The Language of Turn and Sequence, ed. by Cecilia Ford, Barbara Fox, and Sandra Thompson, 196–224. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2010 “Questioning in Medicine.” In “Why Do you Ask?”: The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse, ed. by Alice F. Freed, and Susan Ehrlich, 42–68. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2012 “Epistemics in Action: Action Formation and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1):1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013 “Turn-Initial Position and Some of its Occupants.” Journal of Pragmatics 57:331–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015  Well-Prefaced Turns in English Conversation: A Conversation Analytic Perspective. Journal of Pragmatics 88: 88–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John, and Steven E. Clayman
2010 Talk in Action: Interactions, Identities and Institutions. Oxford: Blackwell-Wiley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John, and Geoffrey Raymond
2012 “Navigating Epistemic Landscapes: Acquiescence, Agency and Resistance in Responses to Polar Questions.” In Questions: Formal, Functional and Interactional Perspectives, ed. by Jan P. De Ruiter, 179–192. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail
1983 “Caveat Speaker: Preliminary Notes on Recipient Topic-Shift Implicature.” In Two Papers on Transitory Recipientship, ed. by Gail Jefferson, 1–28. Tilburg University: Tilburg Papers in Language and Literature 30.Google Scholar
Keevallik, Leelo
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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labov, William, and David Fanshel
1977 Therapeutic Discourse: Psychotherapy as Conversation. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Landone, Elena
2009 Los marcadores del discurso y cortesía verbal en español [Discourse markers and verbal politeness in Spanish]. Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C.
2000 Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Llorente Arcocha, María T.
1996 Organizadores de la conversación: Operadores discursivos en español [Conversational organizers: Discursive operators in Spanish]. Salamanca: Universidad Pontífica, Caja Salamanca y Soria.Google Scholar
Martín Zorraquino, María A.
1994 “ ‘Bueno’ como operador pragmático en el español actual [‘Bueno’ as a pragmatic operator in modern Spanish].” In II Encuentro de lingüistas y filólogos de España y México, ed. by Beatriz Garza Guarón, José A. Pascual, and Alegría A. Gonzales, 403–412. Salamanca: Universidad de Salamanca – Junta de Castilla y León.Google Scholar
Martín Zorraquino, María A., and José Portolés Lázaro
1999 Los marcadores del discurso [Discourse markers]. In Gramática descriptiva del español: Entre oración y discurso, ed. by Ignacio Bosque, and Violeta Demonte, 4051–4213. Madrid: Espasa.Google Scholar
Matte Bon, Fransisco
1992 Gramática comunicativa del español [Communicative grammar of Spanish]. Madrid: Edelsa.Google Scholar
Niemi, Jarkko
(2014) Two 'yeah but' formats in Finnish: The prior action engaging 'nii mut' and the disengaging 'joo mut' uttterances. Journal of Pragmatics 60, 54–74Google Scholar
Ocampo, Fransisco
2006 “La evolución de ‘bueno’ de adjetivo a partícula discursiva: Un proceso de discursivización [The evolution of ‘bueno’ from adjective to discursive particle: A process of discursivization].” Oralia 9:231–257.Google Scholar
Páez Urdaneta, Iraset
1982 “Conversational Pues in Spanish: A Process of Degrammaticalization?.” In International Conference on Historical Linguistics, ed. by Anders Ahlqvist, 332–340. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita
1984 “Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes.” In Structures of social action, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pons Bordería, Salvador
2000 “Los conectores [Connectors].” In ¿Cómo se comenta un texto coloquial?, ed. by Antonio Briz Gómez, and Grupo Val.Es.Co, 193–220. Barcelona: Ariel Practicum.Google Scholar
2003 “From Agreement to Stressing and Hedging.” In Partikeln und Höflichkeit, ed. by Gudrun Held, 219–236. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Portolés Lázaro, José
1989 “El conector argumentativo ‘pues’ [The argumentative connector ‘pues’].” Cuadernos de Filología Hispánica (8):117–133.Google Scholar
2001 Marcadores del discurso [Discourse markers]. Barcelona: Ariel.Google Scholar
Raymond, Chase W.
2014 On the Sequential Negotiation of Identity in Spanish-Language Discourse: Mobilizing Linguistic Resources in the Service of Social Action. Ph.D. dissertation. Los Angeles: University of California.Google Scholar
2015 “Questions and Responses in Spanish Monolingual and Spanish-English Bilingual Conversation.” Language & Communication 40:50–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016a “Linguistic Reference in the Negotiation of Identity and Action: Revisiting the T/V distinction.” Language 92(3):636–670.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016b “Reconceptualizing Identity and Context in the Deployment of Forms of Address.” In Forms of Address in Spanish across the Americas, ed. by María Irene Moyna, and Susana Rivera-Mills, 263–285. Amsterdam: John Benjamins DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey, and John Heritage
2006 “The Epistemics of Social Relations: Owning Grandchildren.” Language in Society 35:677–705. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Real Academia Española
2001 Diccionario de la lengua española (22a ed.) [Dictionary of the Spanish language (22nd ed.)]. Madrid. Url: [URL].
Sacks, Harvey
1987 [1973] “On the Preferences for Agreement and Contiguity in Sequences in Conversation.” In Talk and Social Organisation, ed. by Graham Button, and John R. E. Lee, 54–69. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
1992 Lectures on Conversation, Vols. 1–2. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1996 “Turn Organization: One Intersection of Grammar and Interaction.” In Interaction and Grammar, ed. by Elinor Ochs, Sandra Thompson, and Emanuel Schegloff, 52–133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis, Volume 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A., and Gene H. Lerner
2009 “Beginning to Respond: Well-Prefaced Responses to Wh-questions.” Research on Language and Social Interaction (42):91–115. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Serrano, María J.
1995 “El uso de ‘la verdad’ y ‘pues’ como marcadores discursivos de respuesta [The use of ‘la verdad’ and ‘pues’ as responsive discourse markers].” Español Actual 64:5–16.Google Scholar
1999 “ Bueno como marcador discursivo de inicio de turno y contraposición: estudio sociolingüístico [‘Bueno’ as a turn-initial and contrastive discourse marker: A sociolinguistic study].” International Journal of the Sociology of Language 140:115–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sidnell, Jack
2007 “ ‘Look’-Prefaced Turns in First and Second Position: Launching, Interceding and Redirecting Action.” Discourse Studies 9:387–408. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steensig, Jakob, and Birte Asmuß
2005 “Notes on Disaligning ‘Yes But’ Initiated Utterances in German and Danish Conversations: Two Construction Types for Dispreferred Responses.” In Syntax and Lexis in Conversation: Studies on the Use on Linguistic Resources in Talk-in-interaction, ed. by Auli Hakulinen, and Margret Selting, 349–73. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stenström, Anna-Brita
2006 “The Spanish Pragmatic Marker ‘Pues’ and its English Equivalents.” In The Changing Face of Corpus Linguistics, ed. by Antoinette Renouf, and Andrew Kehoe, 263–281. Amsterdam/New York: Editions Rodopi B.V.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya
2005 “Modified Repeats: One Method for Asserting Primary Rights from Second Position.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 38(2):131–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 “Stance, Alignment and Affiliation During Story Telling: When Nodding is a Token of Affiliation.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 47 (1):31–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, and Jeffrey D. Robinson
2006 “A Preference for Progressivity in Interaction.” Language in Society 35(3):367–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A., Barbara A. Fox, and Elizabeth, Couper-Kuhlen
2015 Grammar in Everyday Talk: Building Responsive Actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Travis, Catherine
1998 “ Bueno: A Spanish Interactive Discourse Marker.” In Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society Vol. 7, ed. by Benjamin K. Bergen, Madelaine C. Plauché, and Ashlee C. Bailey, 268–279. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
2006 “The Natural Semantic Metalanguage Approach to Discourse Markers.” In Approaches to Discourse Particles, ed. by Kerstin Fischer, 219–241. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Vázquez Carranza, Ariel
2013 “Responding and Clarifying: An Analysis of ‘Pues’ as a Sequential Marker in Mexican Spanish Talk-in-Interactions.” Spanish in Context 10 (2):284–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 Sequential Markers in Mexican Spanish Talk: A Conversation-Analytic Study. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Essex.Google Scholar
Zavala, Virginia
2001 “Borrowing Evidential Functions from Quechua: The Role of Pues as a Discourse Marker in Andean Spanish.” Journal of Pragmatics 33:999–1023. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 10 other publications

Acosta Córdoba, Luisa Fernanda, L.F. Acosta Córdoba & V. Piccoli
2020. «Sororidad», rire et émotion montrée en interaction : étude sur la construction de l’identité femme-féministe dans un débat informel à Medellin, Colombie. SHS Web of Conferences 81 ► pp. 01002 ff. DOI logo
Bolden, Galina B., John Heritage & Marja-Leena Sorjonen
2023. Chapter 1. Introduction. In Responding to Polar Questions across Languages and Contexts [Studies in Language and Social Interaction, 35], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Carranza, Ariel Vázquez
2022. Ritualized disbelief in Mexican Spanish talk-in-interaction. Spanish in Context 19:3 ► pp. 481 ff. DOI logo
Floyd, Simeon
2021. Conversation and Culture. Annual Review of Anthropology 50:1 ► pp. 219 ff. DOI logo
Hayano, Kaoru & Makoto Hayashi
2023. Chapter 9. Post-confirmation modifications. In Responding to Polar Questions across Languages and Contexts [Studies in Language and Social Interaction, 35], ► pp. 272 ff. DOI logo
Kim, Stephanie Hyeri & Mary Shin Kim
2020. Chapter 2. Requesting here-and-now actions with two imperative formats in Korean interaction. In Mobilizing Others [Studies in Language and Social Interaction, 33], ► pp. 19 ff. DOI logo
Persson, Rasmus
2020. Taking Issue with a Question While Answering It: Prefatory Particles and Multiple Sayings of Polar Response Tokens in French. Research on Language and Social Interaction 53:3 ► pp. 380 ff. DOI logo
Raymond, Chase Wesley
2016. Reconceptualizing identity and context in the deployment of forms of address. In Forms of Address in the Spanish of the Americas [Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 10], ► pp. 267 ff. DOI logo
Raymond, Chase Wesley & Barbara A. Fox
2020. Chapter 6. Asserting no-problemness in Spanish. In The ‘Noun Phrase’ across Languages [Typological Studies in Language, 128], ► pp. 120 ff. DOI logo
Satti, Ignacio
2023. When it’s “now or never”. Narrative Inquiry 33:1 ► pp. 222 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 april 2024. 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.