Perspective and politeness in Finnish Requests

Elizabeth Peterson


This study makes use of elicited request speech act data in Finnish to view variability of personal perspective and T/V forms across a variety of situations. The speakers exhibited a great deal of congruency when they were scripted as addressing someone familiar, being in a position of equal or higher status than the interlocutor, and when the request was considered a low imposition. In such situations, speakers tended to use a second person perspective, with informal T/V forms. The Finnish T-forms were found to be the default form, showing up in half of the request utterances. The Finnish V-forms showed up in only 10 percent of the requests. A variationist analysis using Varbrul complemented the main findings, but was found to not be a reliable tool for elicited pragmatic data, using sociopragmatic factors as independent variables.

Quick links
A browser-friendly version of this article is not yet available. View PDF
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana
(1982) Learning how to say what you mean in a second language: A study of speech act performance of learners of Hebrew as a second language. Applied Linguistics 3: 29-59. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1990) You don’t touch lettuce with your fingers: Parental politeness in family discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 14: 259–288. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana, Juliane House, and Gabriele Kasper
(eds.) (1989) Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Brown, Roger, and Albert Gilman
(1960) The pronouns of power and solidarity. In Thomas Sebeok (ed.), Style in Language. New York: MIT, pp. 253-276.Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen Levinson
(1978) Politeness: Some universals in language usage. In E.N. Goody (ed.), Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 56-310.Google Scholar
(1987) Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Byon, Andrew Sangpil
(2006) The role of linguistic indirectness and honorifics in achieving linguistic politeness in Korean requests. Journal of Politeness Research 2: 247–276.  BoP CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cedergren, Henrietta, and David Sankoff
(1974) Variable rules: Performance as a statistical reflection of competence. Language 50: 333–355. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Churchill, E
(1999, September). Pragmatic development in L2 request strategies by lower level learners. Presented at Second Language Research Forum, University of Minnesota.
Clyne, Michael, Heinz-Leo Kretzenbacher, Catrin Norrby, and Doris Schüpbach
(2006) Perceptions of variation and change in German and Swedish address. Journal of Sociolinguistics 10/3: 287-319. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dines, Elizabeth R
(1980) Variation in discourse – “and stuff like that.” Language in Society 9.1: 13–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Eelen, Gino
(2001) A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving
(1967) Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. Garden City, New York: Doubleday, Anchor Books.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Harris, Sandra
(2003) Politeness and power: Making and responding to ’requests’ in institutional settings. Text 23: 27–52.  BoP CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hartford, Beverly, and Kathleen Bardovi-Harlig
(1992) Experimental and observational data in the study of interlanguage pragmatics. Pragmatics and Language Learning. Volume 3. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, pp. 33-52.Google Scholar
Helasvuo, Marja-Liisa, and Lea Laitinen
(2006) Zero person in Finnish. A grammatical resource for constructing human reference. In Marja-Liisa Helasvuo and Lyle Campbell (eds.), Grammar from the human perspective: Case, space and person in Finnish. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, Robin
(1973) The logic of politeness; or minding your p’s and q’s. In Papers from the ninth regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society. University of Chicago, pp. 292-305.  BoP
(1975) Language and women’s place. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Lappalainen, Hanna
(2004) Variaatio ja sen funktiot. Erään sosiaalisen verkoston jäsenten kielellisen variaation ja vuorovaikutuksen tarkastelua [Variation and its functions]. Helsinki: Suomen Kirjallisuuden Seura.Google Scholar
(2006a)  Mie vai mää, sinä vai te? Virkaoijoiden kielelliset valinnat itseen ja vastaanottajaan viitattaessa. In Marja-Leena Sorjonen and Liisa Raevaara (eds.), Arjen asiöntia. Keskustelija Kelan tiskin äärellä. Helsinki: Suomen Kirjallisuuden Seura, pp. 241–284.Google Scholar
(2006b) Pronominsubjektin käytöstä ja poisjätöstä Kelan asiointikeskusteluissa. In T. Nordlund, T. Onikki-Rantajääskö and T. Suutari (eds.), Kohtauspaikkana kieli. Näkökulmui persoonaan, muutoksiin ja valintoihin. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura, pp. 37–64.Google Scholar
(2008) Kelan virkailijoiden henkilötunnuspyynnöt Tutkimus rutiininomaisista [Asking for clients’ identity number or identity card at Finnish Social Security offices: A study of routinized activities]. Virittäjä 4: 483–517.Google Scholar
Lavandera, Beatriz
(1978) Where does the sociolinguistic variable stop? Language in society 7.2: 171–182. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey
(1983) Principles of pragmatics. London and New York: Longman.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Locher, Miriam
(2004) Power and Politeness in Action: Disagreemetns in Oral Communication. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Meier, A.J
(1995a) Defining politeness: Universality in appropriateness. Language Sciences 17.4: 345–356. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1995b) Passages of politeness. Journal of Pragmatics 4: 381–392. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Milroy, Lesley
(1980) Language and social networks. Oxford, UK; New York: Blackwell.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Muikku-Werner, Pirkko
(1993) Impositiivus ja kielellinen variaatio. Julkisten keskustelujen käskyt ja kysymykset kelenopetuksen näkökulmasta. Joensuun yliopiston humanistisia julkaisuja 14. Joensuu.Google Scholar
Niendorf, Mariya
(2005) Investigating the future of Finnish congruency: Focus on possessive morphology. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University, Department of Central Eurasian Studies.
Nuolijärvi, Pirkko, and Liisa Tiittula
(2001)  Rakas Tarja ja hyvä ystävä. Puhuttelu minän ja sosiaalisten suhteiden esittämisen keinoina televisiokeskustelussa. Virittäjä 4: 580–601.Google Scholar
Paolillo, John
(2002) Analyzing linguistic variation: Statistical models and methods. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications, Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar
Paunonen, Heikki
(1995) Morphological changes in spoken Finnish possessive forms. Virittäjä 99.4: 501-531.Google Scholar
Peterson, Elizabeth
(2004) Social appropriateness and language variation: A study of Finnish requests. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of General Linguistics, Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University.
Sankoff, David, Sali Tagliamonte, and Eric Smith
(2005) Goldvarb X: A variable rule application for Macintosh and Windows. New York: Department of Linguistics, University of York.Google Scholar
Sankoff, Gillian
(1974) A quantitative paradigm for the study of communicative competence. In R. Bauman and J. Sherzer (eds.), Explorations in the ethnography of speaking. Cambridge University Press, pp. 18-49.Google Scholar
Seppänen, Eeva-Leena
(1989) Henkilöön viittaaminen puhetilanteessa. In Auli Hakulinen (ed.), Suomalaisen keskustelun keinoja I. Kieli 4. Helsinki: The University of Helsinki, Department of Finnish, pp. 195–222.Google Scholar
Sorjonen, Marja-Leena
(2001) Responding in conversation: A study of response particles in Finnish. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Statistics Finland
(2010)  Finland in figures . Retrieved March 15, 2010 from http://​www​.stat​.fi​/index​_en​.html.
Tagliamonte, Sally
(2006) Analysing Sociolinguistic Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Varghese, Manke, and Kristine Billmyer
(1996) Investigating the structure of discourse completion tests. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics 12.1: 39–58.Google Scholar
VISK = Auli Hakulinen, Maria Vilkuna, Riitta Korhonen, Vesa Koivisto, Tarja Riitta Heinonen ja Irja Alho
(2004) Iso suomen kielioppi, web version 2008. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura. Available at http://​scripta​.kotus​.fi​/visk URN:ISBN:978-952-5446-35-7
Watts, Richard J., Sachiko Ide, and Konrad Ehlich
(eds.) (1992) Politeness in language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.  BoP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Yli-Vakkuri, Valma
(2005) Politeness in Finland: Evasion at all costs. In Leo Hickey and Miranda Stewart (eds.), Politeness in Europe. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. CrossrefGoogle Scholar