Part of
Responding to Polar Questions across Languages and ContextsEdited by Galina B. Bolden, John Heritage and Marja-Leena Sorjonen
[Studies in Language and Social Interaction 35] 2023
► pp. 40–75
Edited by Galina B. Bolden, John Heritage and Marja-Leena Sorjonen
[Studies in Language and Social Interaction 35] 2023
► pp. 40–75
Chapter 2Repetitional responses to polar questions in Russian conversation
This chapter examines repetitional responses to polar questions that implement requests for confirmation, information, or assistance in Russian conversation, contrasting them with particle responses, such as da (‘yes’) and net (‘no’). The analysis will show that Russian repetitional responses tend to be a marked response option deployed to disalign from some dimension of the interrogative or the action it implements. For example, repetitional responses may be deployed to reassert its speaker’s epistemic authority in the service of confirming a candidate understanding, to insist on the veracity of a statement following an enactment of disbelief or doubt, to disalign from the action implemented by an information request, or – in response to requests for service – to contest the stance that the provision of assistance might be problematic. The analysis suggests that different types of repetitional responses (such as lexical vs. longer repeats) may enact more or less disaligning stances vis-à-vis the initiating action. Overall, what exactly is being accomplished via a repetitional response is sensitive to a number of considerations, including the sequential and action environment of its deployment, the design of the repetitional response, and the repertoire of available response options.
Keywords: Russian, polar questions, polar responses, repetitions, response design, question design, requests, repair, news-marks, conversation analysis
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Data and method
- 3.An overview of Russian polar questions
- 4.Forms of repetitional responses
- 5.Responding to negative polarity interrogatives
- 6.Responding to repair initiations in the form of understanding checks
- 7.Responding to news-marks and enactments of surprise
- 8.Responding to requests for information
- 9.Responding to requests for service
- 10.Conclusions
-
Notes -
References -
Appendix
References
Bolden, Galina B.
2008 “Reopening Russian
conversations: The discourse particle -to and the negotiation of interpersonal accountability in
closings.” Human Communication
Research 34: 99–136. 
2009a “Beyond answering:
Repeat-prefaced responses in conversation.” Communication
Monographs 76 (2): 121–143.
2009b “Implementing delayed
actions.” In Conversation Analysis: Comparative
perspectives, ed. by Jack Sidnell, In
Studies in interactional
sociolinguistics, 326–354. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2013 “Unpacking “self”:
Repair and epistemics in conversation.” Social Psychology
Quarterly 76 (4): 314–342.
2016 “A simple da?: Affirming
responses to polar questions in Russian conversation.” Journal of
Pragmatics 100: 40–58.
2017 “Requests for
here-and-now actions in Russian conversation.” In Imperative
turns at talk: The design of directives in action, ed. by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen and Liisa Raevaara, 175–211. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
2018 “Nu-prefaced
responses in Russian conversation.” In Between turn and
sequence: Turn-initial particles across languages, ed. by John Heritage and Marja-Leena Sorjonen, 23–58. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Brown, Penelope
2010 “Questions
and their responses in Tzeltal.” Journal of
Pragmatics 42: 2627–2648.
Comrie, Bernard
1984 “Russian.” In Interrogativity:
A colloquium on the grammar, typology and pragmatics of questions in seven diverse
languages, ed. by William Chisholm, Louis T. Milic and John AC. Greppin, 7–46. John Benjamins.
Craven, Alexandra, and Jonathan Potter
2010 “Directives:
Entitlement and contingency in action.” Discourse
Studies 12 (4): 419–442.
Curl, Traci S., and Paul Drew
2008 “Contingency
and action: A comparison of two forms of requesting.” Research on Language and Social
Interaction 41 (2): 129–153.
Enfield, Nick J., and Jack Sidnell
2015 “Language
structure and social agency: Confirming polar questions in conversation.” Linguistics
Vanguard 1 (1): 131–143.
Enfield, Nick J., Tanya Stivers, Penelope Brown, Christina Englert, Katarina Harjunpää, Makoto Hayashi, Trine Heinemann, Certie Hoymann, Tiina Keisanen, Mirka Rauniomaa, Chase Wesley Raymond, Federico Rossano, Kyun-Eun Yoon, Inge Zwitserlood, and Stephen C. Levinson
2019 “Polar
answers.” Journal of
Linguistics 55 (2): 277–304.
Enfield, Nick J., Tanya Stivers, and Stephen C. Levinson
2010 “Question-response
sequences in conversation across ten languages: An introduction.” Journal of
Pragmatics 42 (10): 2615–2619.
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.
Girvan, William H.
1989 Russian handbook of spoken
usage. Springfield, VA: U.S. Department of Commerce, NTIS.
Hayashi, Makoto, and Kaoru Hayano
2018 “A-prefaced
responses to inquiry in Japanese.” In Between turn and
sequence: Turn-initial particles across languages, ed. by John Heritage and Marja-Leena Sorjonen, 191–224. John Benjamins.
Heinemann, Trine
2006 “’Will
you or can’t you?’: Displaying entitlement in interrogative requests.” Journal of
Pragmatics 38 (7): 1081–1104.
Hepburn, Alexa, and Galina B. Bolden
2017 Transcribing
for social
research. London: Sage.
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. New York: Cambridge University Press.
2003 “Designing
questions and setting agendas in the news
interview.” In Studies in language and social interaction: In
honor of Robert Hopper, ed. by Phillip J. Glenn, Curtis D. LeBaron and Jenny S. Mandelbaum, 57–90. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
2010 “Questioning
in medicine.” In ”Why do you ask?”: The functions of
questions in institutional discourse, ed. by Alice F. Freed and Carol M. Ehrlich, 42–68. New York: Oxford University Press.
2012 “Epistemics
in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge.” Research on Language and
Social
Interaction 45 (1): 1–29.
Heritage, John, and Steven Clayman
2010 Talk
in action: Interactions, identities, and institutions. Language in society. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
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 J. P. De Ruiter, 179–192. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hirst, Daniel, and Albert Di Cristo
1998 “A
survey of intonation systems.” In Intonation systems: A
survey of twenty languages, ed. by Daniel Hirst and Albert Di Cristo, 1–44. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Holmberg, Anders
2015 The
syntax of yes and no. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jefferson, Gail
1980 “On
“trouble-premonitory” response to inquiry.” Sociological
Inquiry 50 (3/4): 153–185.
1981 The
abominable ‘Ne?’: A working paper exploring the phenomenon of post-response pursuit of
response. Department of Sociology, University of Manchester.
1988 “On
the sequential organization of troubles-talk in ordinary conversation.” Social
Problems 35 (4): 418–442.
Keevallik, Leelo
2010 “Minimal
answers to yes/no questions in the service of sequence organization.” Discourse
Studies 12 (3): 283–309.
Koenig, Christopher J.
2011 “Patient resistance as
agency in treatment decisions.” Social Science &
Medicine 72: 1105–1114.
Labov, William, and David Fanshel
1977 Therapeutic
discourse: Psychotherapy as conversation. New York: Academic Press.
Lindström, Anna
2005 “Language
as social action: A study of how senior citizens request assistance with practical tasks in the Swedish home help
service.” In Syntax and lexis in
conversation, ed. by Auli Hakulinen and Margret Selting, 209–230. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Meyer, Roland, and Ina Mleinek
2006 “How
prosody signals force and focus – A study of pitch accents in Russian yes-no
questions.” Journal of
Pragmatics 38: 1615–1635.
Pomerantz, Anita
1978 “Compliment
responses: Notes on the co-operation of multiple
constraints.” In Studies in the organization of
conversational interaction, ed. by Jim Schenkein, 79–112. New York: Academic Press.
Raymond, Geoffrey
2003 “Grammar
and social organization: Yes/No type interrogatives and the structure of
responding.” American Sociological
Review 68: 939–967.
2010a “Grammar
and social relations: Alternative forms of yes/no type initiating actions in health visitor
interactions.” In Why do you ask?: The function of questions
in institutional discourse, ed. by Alice F. Freed and Susan Ehrlich, 69–107. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2010b “Prosodic
variation in responses: The case of type-conforming responses to yes/no
interrogatives.” In Prosody in
interaction, ed. by Dagmar Barth-Weingarten, Elisabeth Reber and Margret Selting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
2013 “At
the intersection of turn and sequence organization: On the relevance of “slots” in type-conforming responses to polar
interrogatives.” In Units of talk – Units of
action, ed. by Beatrice Szczepek and Geoffrey Raymond, 169–206. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Sacks, Harvey
1987 “On
the preferences for agreement and contiguity in sequences in
conversation.” In Talk and social
organization, ed. by Graham Button and John R E. Lee, In
Intercommunication, 54–69. Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.
Sacks, Harvey, and Emanuel A. Schegloff
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, 97–121. New York: Irvington Publishers.
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson
1974 “A
simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for
conversation.” Language 50: 696–735.
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1996a “Confirming allusions:
toward an empirical account of action.” American Journal of
Sociology 104 (1): 161–216.
1996b “Turn organization: one
intersection of grammar and interaction.” In Interaction and
grammar, ed. by Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff and Sandra A. Thompson, In Studies in
interactional
sociolinguistics, 52–133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2007 Sequence organization in
interaction: A primer in conversation
analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schegloff, Emanuel A., Gail Jefferson, and Harvey Sacks
1977 “The
preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in
conversation.” Language 53: 361–382.
Selting, Margret
1996 “Prosody
as an activity-type distinctive cue in conversation : the case of so-called “astonished” questions in repair
initiation.” In Prosody in conversation: Interactional
studies, ed. by Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen and Margret Selting, 231–270. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Shaw, Chloe, Alexa Hepburn, and Jonathan Potter
2013 “Having
the last laugh: On post-completion laughter
particles.” In Studies of laughter in
interaction, ed. by Phillip J. Glenn and Elizabeth Holt, 91–106. London: Bloomsbury.
Sorjonen, Marja-Leena
2001a Responding
in conversation: A study of response particles in
Finnish. Vol. 70 Pragmatics &
beyond. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
2001b “Simple
answers to polar questions: The case of Finnish.” In Studies
in interactional linguistics, ed. by Margret Selting and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, In
Studies in discourse and
grammar, 405–431. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Stivers, Tanya
2005a “Modified
repeats: One method for asserting primary rights from second position.” Research on
Language and Social
Interaction 38 (2): 131–158.
2005b “Parent
resistance to physicians’ treatment recommendations: One resource for initiating a negotiation of the treatment
decision.” Health
Communication 18 (1): 41–74.
2010 “An
overview of the question-response system in Americal English conversation.” Journal of
Pragmatics 42 (10): 2772–2781.
2011 “Morality
and question design: ‘of course’ as contesting a presupposition of
askability.” In The Morality of Knowledge in
Conversation, ed. by Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada and Jakob Steensig, 82–106. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2019 “How
we manage social relationships through answers to questions: The case of
interjections.” Discourse
Processes 2 (4): 191–209.
Stivers, Tanya, and Makoto Hayashi
2010 “Transformative
answers: One way to resist a question’s constraints.” Language in
Society 39 (1): 1–39.
Svetozarova, Natalia
1998 “Intonation
in Russian.” In Intonation systems: A survey of twenty
languages, ed. by Daniel Hirst and Albert Di Cristo, 261–274. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Thompson, Sandra A., Barbara A. Fox, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen
2015 Grammar
and everyday talk: Building responsive
actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Timberlake, Alan
2004 A
Reference grammar of Russian. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Vasilyeva, A N.
1972 Particles in colloquial
Russian. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
Wilkinson, Sue, and Celia Kitzinger
2006 “Surprise
as an interactional achievement: Reaction tokens in conversation.” Social Psychology
Quarterly 69 (2): 150–182.