1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Chinese Language and Discourse
  4. Volume 10, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 10, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1877-7031
  • E-ISSN: 1877-8798
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study draws on a conversational analysis (CA)-oriented micro-analytical approach and examines the form, placement and function of interviewer (IR) questions prefaced by turn-initial 所以 ‘so’ and 但(是) ‘but’ in Chinese TV news interviews. It is found that IRs often employ the resultative connective as the first item of their turn immediately after a question-answer (QA) sequence. They do so to preface a declarative, alone or followed by a question tag that invokes an interviewee (IE) opinion on, or the gist of, IE prior talk. While such a design can be a device that IRs use to signal the closing of the ongoing topic, the recipient may orient to it as eliciting confirmation or agreement. By contrast, the adversative connective in the turn-initial position prefaces either a wh-question or a yes/no question and brings forth a point of contrast and transition for questioning. As a practice with which IRs re-direct the IE’s response to a previous unaddressed concern with the agenda tightened, the -prefaced questions do not convey opposition or disagreement. Rather, they function to deal with the resumption in a way that renders it unproblematic. I argue that both types of connective-prefaced questions together with the responses they elicit demonstrate a particular kind of alignment between IRs and IEs in Chinese TV news interviews.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/cld.18013.gao
2019-07-12
2025-04-28

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/cld.18013.gao
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bolden, G. B.
    (2006) Little words that matter: discourse markers “so” and “oh” and the doing of other-attentiveness in social interaction, Journal of Communication, 56: 661–688. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.2006.00314.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00314.x [Google Scholar]
  2. (2008) “So what’s up?”: Using the discourse marker so to launch conversational business, Research on Language and Social Interaction41 (3): 302–337. 10.1080/08351810802237909
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810802237909 [Google Scholar]
  3. (2010) ‘Articulating the unsaid’ via and-prefaced formulations of others’ talk, Discourse Studies, 12 (1): 5–32. 10.1177/1461445609346770
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445609346770 [Google Scholar]
  4. Clayman, S. E.
    (1992) Footing in the achievement of neutrality: the case of news-interview discourse. InP. Drew, & J. Heritage (eds.), Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, 163–198. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. (2010) Questions in broadcast journalism. InA. Freed, & S. Ehrlich (eds.) Why Do You Ask?, 256–278. New York: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Clayman, S. E., & Heritage, J.
    (2002) The News Interview: Journalists and Public Figures on the Air. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511613623
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511613623 [Google Scholar]
  7. Clayman, S. E., Elliott, M. N., Heritage, J., & McDonald, L. L.
    (2006) Historical Trends in Questioning Presidents 1953–2000. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 36 (4), pp.561–583. 10.1111/j.1741‑5705.2006.02568.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5705.2006.02568.x [Google Scholar]
  8. Emmertsen, S.
    (2007) Interviewers’ challenging questions in British debate interviews, Journal of Pragmatics, 39 (3): 570–591. 10.1016/j.pragma.2006.07.011
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.07.011 [Google Scholar]
  9. Fang, Mei
    (2000) Ziran kouyu zhong ruohua lianci de huayu biaoji gongneng [Reduced conjunctions as discourse markers in natural conversations]. Zhongguo Yuwen [Chinese Language] 5. 459–470.
  10. Gao, Hua
    (2005) Hanyu zhong de chenshu yiwenju [On Chinese declarative questions]. InShao, Jingmin & Luke, K. K. (eds.) Hanyu Yufa Yanjiu de Xin Tuozhan [New Explorations in Chinese Grammatical Research] (Vol.2), 307–328. Hangzhou: Zhejiang Education Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Guthrie, A. M.
    (1997) On the systematic deployment of okay and mmhmm in the academic advising sessions. Pragmatics7 (3): 397–415. 10.1075/prag.7.3.06gut
     https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.7.3.06gut [Google Scholar]
  12. Heritage, J.
    (1985) Analyzing news interviews: aspects of the production of talk for an overhearing audience. InT. van Dijk （ed.）, Handbook of Discourse Analysis (Vol. 3): Discourse and Dialogue, 95–117. London: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. (2002) Ad hoc inquiries: two preferences in the design of routine questions in an open context.. InD. W. Maynard, H. Houtkoop-Steenstra, N. C. Schaeffer, & J. V. Zouwen, Standardization and Tacit Knowledge: Interaction and Practice in the Survey Interview (pp.313–333). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. (2003) Designing questions and setting agendas in the news interview. InGlenn P., LeBaron C. D. & L. Mandelbaum (eds.), Studies in Language and Social Interaction: In Honor of Robert Hopper, 57–90. London, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. (2010) Questioning in medicine. InA. Freed, & S. Enrlich (eds.) Why Do You Ask?, 20–41. New York: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. (2012) Epistemics in action: action formation and territories of knowledge, Research on Language and Social Interaction45:1–25. 10.1080/08351813.2012.646684
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.646684 [Google Scholar]
  17. (2013) Turn-initial position and some of its occupants. Journal of Pragmatics, 57:331–337. 10.1016/j.pragma.2013.08.025
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.08.025 [Google Scholar]
  18. (2017) Turn-initial particles in English: the cases of oh and well, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320998381
  19. Heritage, J., & Greatbatch, D.
    (1991) On the institutional character of institutional talk: the case of news interviews. InD. Boden, & D. H. Zimmerman (eds.) Talk and Social Structureu: Studies in Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis, 93–137. Berkeley: University of California Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Heritage, J. C., & Roth, A. L.
    (1995) Grammar and institution: question and questioning in the broadcast news interview. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 28 (1): 1–60. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi2801_1
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi2801_1 [Google Scholar]
  21. Heritage, J., & Sorjonen, M.-L.
    (1994) Constituting and maintaining activities across sequences: And-prefacing as a feature of question design. Language in Society, 23: 1–29. 10.1017/S0047404500017656
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500017656 [Google Scholar]
  22. Jing-Schmidt, Z.
    (2019) Grammatical constructions and Chinese discourse. InChris Shei (ed.) The Routledge Handbook of Chinese Discourse Analysis, 102–115. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315213705‑7
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315213705-7 [Google Scholar]
  23. Johnson, A.
    (2002) So …?: pragmatic implications of so-prefaced questions in formal police interviews. InCotterill, J. (ed.) Language in the Legal Process, 91–110. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230522770_6
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230522770_6 [Google Scholar]
  24. Labov, W., & Fanshel, D.
    (1977) Therapeutic Discourse: Psychotherapy as Conversation. New York: Academic.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Li, C. N. & Thompson, S.
    (1981) Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar. Los Angeles and Berkeley: UC Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Matsumoto, K.
    (1999) And-prefaced questions in institutional discourse, Linguistics, 37 (2): 251–274. 10.1515/ling.37.2.251
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.37.2.251 [Google Scholar]
  27. Mazeland, H. & Huiskes, M.
    (2001) Dutch ‘but’ as a sequential conjunction: its use as a resumption marker. InSelting, M. & E. Couper-Kuhlen (eds.) Studies in Interactional Lingustics, 141–169. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sidag.10.08maz
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.10.08maz [Google Scholar]
  28. Montgomery, M.
    (2011) The accountability interviews, politics, and change in UK public service broadcasting. InEkstrom, M. and M. Patrona (eds.) Talking Politics in Broadcast Media, 33–56. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/dapsac.42.06mon
     https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.42.06mon [Google Scholar]
  29. Nevile, M.
    (2006) Making sequentiality sailent: and-prefacing in the talk of airline pilots. Discourse Studies, 8 (2): 279–302. 10.1177/1461445606061797
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445606061797 [Google Scholar]
  30. Raymond, G.
    (2003) Grammar and social organization: Yes/no interrogatives and the structure of responding. American Sociological Review68: 939–67. 10.2307/1519752
     https://doi.org/10.2307/1519752 [Google Scholar]
  31. Schegloff, E. A.
    (1982) Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of “uh huh” and other things that come between sentences. InD. Tannen (ed.) Analyzing Discourse, 71–93. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. (1984) On some questions and ambiguities in conversation. InJ. M. Atkinson, & P. Drew (eds.) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversational Analysis, 28–52. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. (2007) Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511791208
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208 [Google Scholar]
  34. Schiffrin, D.
    (1987) Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511611841
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611841 [Google Scholar]
  35. Stivers, T. & Hayashi, M.
    (2010) Transformative answers: one way to resist a question’s constraints, Language in Society, 39: 1–25. 10.1017/S0047404509990637
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404509990637 [Google Scholar]
  36. Tao, H. & Thompson, S. A.
    (1994) The discourse and grammar interface: preferred clause structure in Mandarin conversation. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association29(3): 1–34.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. van Dijk, T. A.
    (1979) Pragmatic connectives. Journal of Pragmatcs, 3: 447–456. 10.1016/0378‑2166(79)90019‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(79)90019-5 [Google Scholar]
  38. Wang, Chueh-chen & Huang, Lillian M.
    (2006) Grammaticalization of connectives in Mandarin Chinese: a corpus-based study. Language and Linguistics, 7 (4): 991–1016.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/cld.18013.gao
Loading
Devices of alignment
Chinese Language and Discourse 10, 36 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1075/cld.18013.gao
/content/journals/10.1075/cld.18013.gao
/content/journals/10.1075/cld.18013.gao
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Chinese TV news interview; connective; interaction; question design

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error