On the place of turn and sequence in grammar: Verb-first clausal constructions in Swedish talk-in-interaction

Jan K. Lindström

Abstract

This study elaborates the concept of a positionally sensitive grammar with respect to the sequentiality of turns and the turn constructional units in conversation. The linguistic object of the analysis is clausal constructions in Swedish that are initiated by the finite predicate verb: Polar questions, receipt questions (news receipts), conditional protases and pro-drop declaratives. These constructions share potentially the same syntactic surface pattern but are constrained by different sequential conditions of use. The study proposes an integrated interactional linguistic analysis which takes into account both syntactic and sequential aspects of turn construction. A grammatical attribute-value matrix, based on the framework of construction grammar (CxG), is introduced. The analysis shows that regularities of sequential organization may provide robust distinctive constructional features while a pure syntactic analysis remains less distinctive. The decisive constructional features are systematically captured by a notation designed for sequential and syntactic organization.

Keywords:
Quick links
A browser-friendly version of this article is not yet available. View PDF
Auer, Peter
(1993) Zur Verbspitzenstellung im gesprochenen Deutsch. [On verb initial placement in spoken German]. Deutsche Sprache 21:3: 193-222.Google Scholar
(2005) Projection in interaction and projection in grammar. Text 25.1: 7-36.  BoP CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2009) On-line syntax: Thoughts on the temporality of spoken language. Language Sciences 31: 1-13. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Auer, Peter, and Jan Lindström
(2011) Verb-first conditionals in German and Swedish: Convergence in writing, divergence in speaking. In P. Auer, and S. Pfänder (eds.), Constructions: Emerging and emergent. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter, pp. 218-262. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Auer, Peter, and Susanne Günthner
(2003) Die Entstehung von Diskursmarkern im Deutschen – ein Fall von Grammatikalisierung? [The emergence of discourse markers in German – a case of grammaticalization?] InList – Interaction and Linguistic Structures, No. 38, December 2003. < http://​www​.inlist​.uni​-bayreuth​.de​/issues​/38​/index​.htm.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth
this volume) What does grammar tell us about action? Pragmatics 24.3: 623-647. Crossref
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth, and Tsuyoshi Ono
(2007) ‘Incrementing’ in conversation. A comparison of practices in English, German and Japanese. Pragmatics 17: 513-52. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth, and Margret Selting
(2001) Introducing interactional linguistics. In M. Selting, and E. Couper-Kuhlen (eds.), Studies in Interactional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 1-22. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth, and Sandra A. Thompson
(2012) Left-right asymmetries: The grammar of pro-repeat responses to informings in English conversation. Paper presented in a workshop on Left/Right Asymmetries in Talk. Freiburg: Freiburg Institute for Advanced Studies, May 16, 2012.Google Scholar
Diderichsen, Paul
(1946) Elementær dansk Grammatik. [Elementary Danish grammar]. København: Gyldendal.Google Scholar
Diessel, Holger
(1997) Verb-first constructions in German. In M. Verspoor, K.D. Lee, and E. Sweetser (eds.), Lexical and syntactical constructions and the construction of meaning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 51-68. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ford, Cecilia E., and Sandra, A. Thompson
(1996) Interactional units in conversation: Syntactic, intonational, and pragmatic resources for the management of turns. In E. Ochs, E.A. Schegloff, and S.A. Thompson (eds.), Interaction and grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 134-184. CrossrefGoogle 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. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Fried, Mirjam, and Jan-Ola Östman
(2004) Construction Grammar: A thumbnail sketch. In M. Fried, and J-O. Östman (eds.), Construction grammar in a cross-language-perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 11-86. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2005) Construction Grammar and spoken language: The case of pragmatic particles. Journal of Pragmatics 37: 1752-1778. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Günthner, Susanne, and Wolfgang Imo
(eds.) (2006) Konstruktionen in der Interaktion [Construction in interaction]. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul J
(2011) Emergent grammar and temporality in interactional linguistics. In P. Auer, and S. Pfänder (eds.), Constructions: Emerging and emergent. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter, pp. 22-44. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Huhtamäki, Martina
(2012) Prosodiska mönster hos frågor. En undersökning av Helsingforssvenska samtal. [Prosodic patterns in questions. A study of Helsinki Swedish conversations]. Språk och Stil 22.2: 153-184.Google Scholar
Karlsson, Susanna
(2006) Positioneringsfraser i interaktion. [Positioning phrases in interaction]. Göteborg: Göteborgsstudier i nordisk språkvetenskap 5.Google Scholar
Laury, Ritva
(ed.) (2008) Crosslinguistic studies of clause combining. The multifunctionality of conjunctions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Lindström, Jan
(2006) Grammar in the service of interaction: Exploring turn organization in Swedish. Research on Language and Social Interaction 39.1: 81-117. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2008) Tur och ordning. Introduktion till svensk samtalsgrammatik. [Turn and order. An introduction into Swedish conversational grammar]. Stockholm: Norstedts Akademiska Förlag.Google Scholar
Lindström, Jan, & Susanna Karlsson
(2005) Verb-first constructions as a syntactic and functional resource in (spoken) Swedish. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 28: 97-131. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lindström, Jan, and Anne-Marie Londen
(2008) Constructing reasoning: The connectives för att (causal), så att (consecutive) and men att (adversative) in Swedish conversations. In J. Leino (ed.), Constructional reorganization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 105-152. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Linell, Per
(2003) Responsiva konstruktioner i samtalsspråkets grammatik. [Responsive constructions in the grammar of conversational language]. Folkmålsstudier 42: 11-39.Google Scholar
(2005) The written language bias in linguistics. Its nature, origins and transformations. London & New York: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Linell, Per, Johan Hofvendahl, and Camilla Lindholm
(2003) Multi-unit question turns in institutional interactions: Sequential organizations and communicative functions. Text 23-4: 539-571.
Mörnsjö, Maria
(2002) V1 declaratives in spoken Swedish. Syntax, information structure, and prosodic pattern. Lund: Lund University.Google Scholar
Norén, Niklas
(2010) Pronominella returfrågor i tre vardagliga svenska samtal. [Pronominal return questions in three everyday conversations]. In C. Lindholm, and J. Lindström (eds.), Språk och interaktion 2. Helsinki: Department of Finnish, Finno-Ugrian and Scandinavian Studies, pp. 29-71.Google Scholar
Ono, Tsuyoshi, and Sandra A. Thompson
(1995) What can conversation tell us about syntax? In P.W. Davis (ed.), Descriptive and theoretical modes in alternative linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 213-271. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Östman, Jan-Ola
(2005) Construction discourse: A prolegomenon. In J-O. Östman, and M. Fried (eds.), Construction grammars. Cognitive grounding and theoretical extensions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 121-144. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2007) On formalizing ‘context’. Or, why complexity does not equal impossibility. In J. Härmä, E. Havu, M. Helkkula, M. Larjavaara, M. Lehtinen, and U. Tuomarla (eds.), SILF 2005. Actes du XXIXème Colloque International de Linguistique Fonctionnelle. Helsinki: Département des langues romanes de l’Université de Helsinki, pp. 205-212.Google Scholar
Platzack, Christer
(1987) The case of narrative inversion in Swedish and Icelandic. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 31: 9-14.Google Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey
(2003) Grammar and social organization: Yes/no interrogatives and the structure of responding. American Sociological Review 68: 939-967. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson
(1974) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50: 696-735. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A
(1996) Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In E. Ochs, E.A. Schegloff, and S.A. Thompson (eds.), Interaction and grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 52-133. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Searle, John
(1975) Indirect speech acts. In P. Cole, and J.L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics, 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, pp. 59-82.Google Scholar
Steensig, Jakob
(2001a) Sprog i virkeligheden. Bidrag til en interaktionel lingvistik. [Language in the reality. Contributions to an interactional linguistics]. Aarhus: Aarhus Universitetsforlag.Google Scholar
(2001b) Notes on turn-construction methods in Danish and Turkish conversation. In M. Selting, and E. Couper-Kuhlen (eds.), Studies in interactional linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 259-286. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Teleman, Ulf, Staffan Hellberg, and Erik Andersson
(1999) Svenska Akademiens grammatik. [The Swedish Academy’s grammar], volume 4. Stockholm: Svenska Akademien.Google Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A., Barbara A. Fox, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen
forthcoming) Grammar and everyday talk: Building responsive actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Crossref
Wide, Camilla
(2009) Interactional Construction Grammar: Contextual features of determination in dialectal Swedish. In A. Bergs, and G. Diewald (eds.), Context and constructions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 111-142. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2014) The functions of subjectless declarative main clauses in spoken Swedish. Journal of Pragmatics 63: 35-47. CrossrefGoogle Scholar