Japanese turn-final tteyuu as a formulation device
San Diego State University
This paper offers a conversation analytic study of the Japanese turn-final construction tteyuu as
a conversational practice of formulation. Tteyuu is normally used in clausal noun modification, being placed
between its preceding clausal component and a following head noun. However, tteyuu also appears to be employed
utterance-finally without a following head noun. Through microanalysis of mundane conversation data, this study documents a
previously unstudied aspect of the turn-final tteyuu as a formulation device. This study especially focuses on
how informing recipients utilize tteyuu formulations to summarize or explicate the gist of some part of their
conversations, while indicating their high degree of epistemic access to the formulated information. Furthermore, this research
examines what conversation participants accomplish by mobilizing this particular type of formulations. This study aims to
contribute to the research of formulation by unveiling how a language-specific item can be deployed as a resource for
turn-constructional formatting of formulation.
This paper offers a conversation analytic study of the Japanese turn-final construction tteyuu as a
conversational practice of formulation. Tteyuu is a complementizer, composed of the quotative particle
tte and the verb yuu “say.” Tteyuu is normally placed between its preceding
clausal component and a following head noun, and it functions in clausal noun modification. However, the use of the utterance-final
tteyuu, which lacks a following head noun, in both written and spoken data has been reported in recent literature
(Kato 2010; Kim 2014; Koda 2015; Matsumoto 2018; Ohori 1995, 1997; Uemura 2014), and
it is considered as an “innovative construction” (Matsumoto 2018, 92). This study documents
a hitherto unstudied aspect of the turn-final tteyuu as a formulation device.
Antaki, Charles, Rebecca Barnes, and Ivan Leudar
Formulations in Psychotherapy.” Discourse
Studies 7 (6): 627–647.
Semantics: A Systematic Approach to Meaning in Talk.” Human
Studies 34: 129–153.
2010 “ ‘Articulating
the Unsaid’ via And-prefaced Formulations of Others’ Talk.” Discourse
Studies 12 (1): 5–32.
Study of Formulations as a Key to an Interactional Semantics.” Human
Studies 34: 115–128.
Analysis of Talk-in-Interaction in Different Institutional Settings: A
Sketch.” In Studies in Language and Social Interaction: In Honor of
Robert Hopper, ed. by Phillip.
J. Glenn, Curtis.
D. LeBaron, and Jennifer Mandelbaum, 293–308. Mahwah,
Drew, Paul, and John Heritage
Analysing Talk at Work.” In Talk at Work, ed.
by Paul Drew, and John Heritage, 3–65. Cambridge: Cambridge
Relevance of Husserl’s Theory to Language Socialization.” Journal of Linguistic
Anthropology 19 (2): 205–226.
E., and Sandra
Units in Conversation: Syntactic, Intonational and Pragmatic Resources for the Management of
Turns.” In Interaction and Grammar, ed.
by Elinor Ochs, Emanuel
A. Schegloff, and Sandra
A. Thompson, 134–184. Cambridge: Cambridge
Garfinkel, Harold, and Harvey Sacks
Formal Structures of Practical Actions.” In Theoretical
Sociology, ed. by John
D. McKinney, and Edward.
A. Tiryakian, 337–366. New
York: Appleton-Century Crofts.
A Practice of Situated Categorization in Talk.” Human
Studies 34 (2): 183–198.
Epistemic Primacy in Japanese: Yo-marked Assessments in
Japanese.” In The Molarity of Knowledge in
Conversation, ed. by Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada, and Jakob Steensig, 58–81. Cambridge: Cambridge
of Knowledge in Japanese Conversation.” PhD diss. Radboud
(Not) to Claim Epistemic Independence: The Use of Ne and Yone in Japanese
Conversation.” East Asian
Pragmatics 2 (2): 163–193.
a ‘Noticing of Departure’ in Talk: Eh-prefaced Turns in Japanese
Conversation.” Journal of
Pragmatics 41 (10): 2100–2129.
Overview of the Question-Response System in Japanese.” Journal of
Pragmatics 42: 2685–702.
Hayashi, Makoto, Yuri Hosoda, and Ikuyo Morimoto
yuu ka as a Repair Preface in Japanese.” Research on Language and Social
Interaction 52 (2): 104–123.
and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge/New York: Polity
News Interviews.” In Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Vol.
3, ed. by Teun. A.
van Dijk, 95–117. London: Academic
and Progressivity in Person (and Place) Reference.” In Person
Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives, ed.
by Tanya Stivers, and N. J. Enfield, 255–280. Cambridge: Cambridge
Heritage, John, and Rod
1979 “Formulations as
Conversational Objects.” In Everyday Language: Studies in
Ethnomethodology, ed. by George Psathas, 123–162. New
2005 “ ‘Active
Listening’: Formulations and the Elicitation of Feelings Talk in Child Counselling.” Research
on Language and Social
Interaction 38 (3): 303–329.
in Grammar and Discourse: Theoretical Considerations and a Case Study of Japanese Spoken
Discourse. Amsterdam: John
Explorations of the Organizations of Overlapping Talk in Conversation: (a) Notes on Some Orderliness of Overlap Onset and (b)
On a Failed Hypothesis: ‘Conjunctionals’ as Overlap-vulnerable.” Tilburg Papers in Language and
Literature 28: 1–33.
Stepwise Transition from Talk about a Trouble to Inappropriately Next-positioned
Matters.” In Structures of Social Action, ed.
Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 191–221. Cambridge: Cambridge
Exposed and Embedded Correction in Conversation.” In Talk and Social
Organization, ed. by Graham Button, and John.
R. E. Lee, 86–100. Clevedon,
UK: Multilingual Matters.
Speaker: Preliminary Notes on Recipient Topic-shift Implicature.” Research on Language and
Social Interaction 26: 1–30.
Jefferson, Gail, and John
R. E. Lee
Rejection of Advice: Managing the Problematic Convergence of a ‘Troubles-telling’ and a ‘Service
Encounter’.” In Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional
Settings, ed. by Paul Drew, and John Heritage, 521–48. New
York: Cambridge University Press.
2010Hanashi-kotoba ni okeru Inyoo-hyoogen [Quotative Expressions in
Spoken Language]. Tokyo: Kurosio
2014 “Kankokugo no inyoo-shuushokusetsu no shusetsu-ka: Nihongo tono taihi o
tsuujite. [Main clause phenomena of quotatitve clauses in Korean: Contrast
with Japanese].” In Nihongo fukubun-koobun no
kenkyuu [Form and meaning in Japanese complex sentence
constructions], ed. by Takashi Masuoka, Motoo Oshima, Osamu Hashimoto, Kaoru Horie, Naoko Maeda, and Takehiko Maruyama, 695–717. Tokyo: Hituzi
Reported Thought and Speech to Enhance a Story.” The Japanese Journal of Language in
Society 17 (2): 24–39.
Understanding and Acknowledging Assistance: Managing Trouble Responsibility in Response to Understanding Check in Japanese
Talk-in-interaction.” Journal of
Pragmatics 43 (11): 2716–2739.
Labov, William, and David Fanshel
Discourse: Psychotherapy as Conversation. New
York: Academic Press.
2004 “On the Place of Linguistic
Resources in the Organization of Talk-in-Interaction: Grammar as Action in Prompting a Speaker to
Elaborate.” Research on Language and Social
Interaction 37 (2): 154–184.
1987 “Pragmatics and the Grammar of
Anaphora.” Journal of
Linguistics 23: 379–434.
Form and Meaning of the Dangling Mitaina Construction in a Network of
Constructions.” In Pragmatics of Japanese: Perspectives on Grammar,
Interaction and Culture, ed. by Mutsuko
E. Hudson, Yoshiko Matsumoto, and Junko Mori, 75–98. Philadelphia: John
2003Bad News, Good News: Conversational
Order in Everyday Talk and Clinical Settings. Chicago,
IL: University of Chicago Press.
Workings of the Japanese Token Hee in Informing Sequences: An Analysis of Sequential Content, Turn Shape, and
Prosody.” Journal of
Pragmatics 38: 1175–1205.
on Suspended Clauses: A Contribution to Japanese
Phraseology.” In Essays in Semantics and Pragmatics: In Honor of
Charles J. Fillmore, ed. by Masayoshi Shibatani, and Sandra
A. Thompson, 201–218. Amsterdam: John
Effects in Japanese Non-final Clauses: Toward an Optimal Grammar-Pragmatics
Interface.” Proceedings of the Twenty-third Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society:
General Session and Parasession on Pragmatics and Grammatical
I, and RU Clauses in Japanese Recipes: A Quantitative Study.” Studies in
Language 14: 73–92.
Ono, Tsuyoshi, Sandra.
A. Thompson, and Yumi Sasaki
Negotiation through Emerging Final Particles in Everyday Talk.” Discourse
Processes 49 (3–4): 243–272.
Action: The Stand-alone ‘So’ in Ordinary Conversation.” Research on Language and Social
Interaction 37 (2): 185–218.
2009 “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, 87–107. New York: Oxford University Press.
on Conversation. Cambridge,
on Conversation. Vol. 2. Oxford: Basil
Sacks, Harvey, Emmanuel
A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson
Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-taking for
Conversation.” Language 50: 696–735.
1982 “Discourse as an Interactional
Achievement: Some Uses of ‘Uh huh’ and Other Things That Come between
Sentences.” In Georgetown University Roundtable on Languages and
Linguistics: Analyzing Discourse: Text and Talk, ed. by Deborah Tannen, 71–93. Washington
D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
1996a “Turn Organization: One
Intersection of Grammar and Interaction.” In Interaction and
Grammar, ed. by Elinor Ochs, Emmanuel
A. Schegloff, and Sandra
A. Thompson, 52–133. Cambridge: Cambridge
1996b “Confirming Allusions: Toward
an Empirical Account of Action.” American Journal of
Sociology 104 (1): 161–216.
Dispensability.” Research on Language and Social
Interaction 37 (2): 95–149.
2007Sequence Organization in Interaction: A
Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge
Analysis: An Introduction. Malden,
Steensig, Jakob, and Tine Larsen
and Disaffiliative Uses of You Say X Questions.” Discourse
Studies 10 (1): 113–33.
Alignment, and Affiliation during Storytelling: When Nodding is a Token of
Affiliation.” Research on Language and Social
Interaction 41 (1): 31–57.
in Japanese Conversation: A Study in Grammar and
Interaction. Amsterdam: John
Functions of Japanese -Toiu in So-called Suspended-sentence: An Investigation on Usage as a Sentence-final
Particle.” Papers in linguistic
science 20: 31–48.
Natural Conversation Corpus with Transcripts and Recordings (March, 2021), NINJAL Institute-based Projects: Multiple
Approaches to Analyzing the Communication of Japanese Language Learners.