Volume 16, Issue 2-3
  • ISSN 1018-2101
  • E-ISSN: 2406-4238


This study examined the use of regulatory talk at dinnertime in twenty Swedish families with children between the ages of four and seventeen years. The aim of the study was to explore activity regulation in the light of contextual factors, such as the age of the participating children, the number of participants and the different kinds of conversational contexts. Regulatory talk extracted from twenty videotaped dinner conversations was transcribed, coded and analysed within the framework of theories about the impact of context on control acts, indirect speech and politeness. Regulatory utterances, about 7 % of all utterances produced by all family members, were mostly formulated as direct requests and about 15 % of them were mitigated, softening the impact of coerciveness. Indirect regulators occurred, however, in nearly one half of the cases whereas hints were rather uncommon. Age of the children, as well as activity and conversational context had an obvious impact on the way regulatory utterances were performed. Most instrumental regulators (related to the dinner routine) were direct (somewhat more than 60 %) and most non-instrumental regulators were indirect (nearly 60 %). Furthermore, the intended goal i.e. what action was required from the addressee seemed to affect the use of regulators: Regulation at the dinner table mostly concerned nonverbal actions and requests for objects and was related to the main activity. Compared with the American and Israeli groups in Blum-Kulka’s study (1997), the Swedish parents together tended to be more indirect but less mitigating. However, in instrumental contexts i.e. when regulating routine actions relating to the meal, most parental regulators were direct (60 %) whereas about 75 % of the utterances were indirect in non-instrumental contexts. A comparison of these findings with the data from Blum-Kulka (1997) and with other similar intercultural studies leads to the conclusion that situational factors, such as family structure, conversational genres and communicative goals, might have more impact on regulatory talk than socio-cultural background.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Austin, J.L
    (1962) How to do Things with Words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bates, E
    (1976) Language and Context: The Acquisition of Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bellinger, D
    (1979) Changes in explicitness of mothers´directives as children age. Journal of Child Language18: 41-49.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Blum-Kulka, S
    (1987) Indirectness and politeness in requests: Same or different? Journal of Pragmatics11: 131-146. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(87)90192‑5
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(87)90192-5 [Google Scholar]
  5. (1990) You don´t touch lettuce with your fingers: Parental politeness in family discourse. Journal of Pragmatics14: 259-288. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(90)90083‑P
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(90)90083-P [Google Scholar]
  6. (1994) The dynamics of family dinner-talk: Cultural contexts for the children´s passages to adult discourse. Research on Language and Social interaction27: 1-15. doi: 10.1207/s15327973rlsi2701_1
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi2701_1 [Google Scholar]
  7. (1997) Dinner talk: Cultural patterns of sociability and socialization in family discourse.London: Lawrence Erlbaums Associates, Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Brown, P. , and S. Levinson
    (1978) Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In E. Goody (ed.), Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 56-311.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. (1987) Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Brumark, Å
    (1989) Blindness and the context of language acquisition. MINS 31. (Diss. Stockholm University).
    [Google Scholar]
  11. (1991) Om referens och informationsstruktur i direkt närkommunikation. In B. Nordberg (ed.), Svenskans beskrivning 18, FUMS, The University of Uppsala.
  12. (2003) What do we do when we talk at dinner. Working Papers. Huddinge: Södertörn University college.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. . (in press) Democracy starts at the dinner table. Working Paper 2003/6. Stockholm: Södertorn University College.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Cherry, R.D
    (1988) Politeness in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics12: 63-81. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(88)90020‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(88)90020-3 [Google Scholar]
  15. Coulthard, M
    (1978) An Introduction to Discourse Analysis. Harlow, United Kingdom: Longman Group Ltd.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Cross, T.G
    (1977) Mother´s speech adjustments: The contribution of selected child listener variables. In C.E. Snow , & C.A. Ferguson (eds.), Talking to Children: Language input and Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. De Geer, B. , and T. Tulviste
    (2002) Behaviour regulation in the family context in Estonia and Sweden. Pragmatics12.3: 329-346.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Donaldson, S.K
    (1987) Some Constraints of Consideration on Conversation: Interactions of Politeness and Relevance with Grice´s Secon Maxim of Quantity. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International (Diss. Urbana: Univ. of Illinois-Champaign, 1984).
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Dore, J
    (1977) Children´s illocutionary acts. Discourse Processes1: 227-244.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Ervin-Tripp, S
    (1976) Is Sybil there? The structure of some American English directives. Language in Society5: 26-66. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500006849
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500006849 [Google Scholar]
  21. (1982) “Ask and it shall be given you”: Children´s requests. In H. Byrnes (ed.), Georgetown Roundtable on Languages and Linguisitics. Vol. 35. Washingtown DC: Georgetown University, pp. 235-245.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Ervin-Tripp, S. , and D. Gordon
    (1986) The development of children´s requests. In R.E. Schieffelbush (ed.), Communicative competence: Assessment and intervention. San Diego, CA: College Hill Press, pp. 61-96.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Ervin-Tripp, S. , J. Guo , and M. Lampert
    (1990) Politeness and persuasion in children`s control acts. Journal of Pragmatics14: 307-331. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(90)90085‑R
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(90)90085-R [Google Scholar]
  24. Fraser, B
    (1990) Perspectives on politeness. Journal of Pragmatics14: 219-236. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(90)90081‑N
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(90)90081-N [Google Scholar]
  25. Garcia, C
    (1993) Making a request and responding to it: A case study of Peruvian Spanish speakers. Journal of Pragmatics19: 127-152. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(93)90085‑4
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(93)90085-4 [Google Scholar]
  26. Garvey, C
    (1977) Contingent queries and their relation in discourse. In E. Ochs , & B. Schieffelin (eds.), Developmental Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Goffman, E
    (1967) Interactional ritual: Essays on face to face behaviour. New York: Doubleday.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. (1974) Frame analysis. New York: Penguin.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. (1981) Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Goodwin, M.H
    (1990) He-Said-She-Said. Talk as social organization among black children. Bloomington and Indianapolis. Indiana University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Grice, H. Paul
    (1975) Logic and conversation. In P. Cole and J. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech acts. New York: Academic Press, pp. 41-58.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Handelman, D
    (1990) Models and mirrors. Toward an anthropology of public events. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Hellspong, L
    (1988) Regulation of dialogue. A theoretical model of conversation with an empirical application. MINS 30. (Diss. Stockholm University).
  34. Hymes, D
    (1974) Foundations in Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach. Philadelphia: University of Pensylvania Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Kasper, G
    (1990) Linguistic politeness: Current research issues. Journal of Pragmatics14: 193-218. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(90)90080‑W
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(90)90080-W [Google Scholar]
  36. Lakoff, R
    (1977) Politeness, pragmatics and performatives. In A. Rogers , B. Wall and J.P. Murphy (eds.), Proceedings of the Texas Conference on Performatives, Presuppositions and Implicatures. Washington: Center for Applied Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Leech, G.N
    (1980) Language and Tact. Pragmatics and Beyond Series. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Linell, P
    (1998) Approaching dialogue: Talk, interaction and contexts in dialogical perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/impact.3
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/impact.3 [Google Scholar]
  39. Linell, P. , and L. Gustavsson
    (1987) Initiativ och respons. Om dialogens dynamik, dominans och koherens. SIC 15. University of Linköping. Studies in Communication.
  40. Levinson, S.C
    (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Mac Whinney
    (1991) The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Rosaldo, M.Z
    (1982) The things we do with words: Ilongot speech acts and speech act theory in philosophy. Language in Society11: 203-237. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500009209
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500009209 [Google Scholar]
  43. Sacks, H. , E. Schegloff , and G. Jefferson
    (1974) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking in conversation. Language50: 696-735. doi: 10.2307/412243
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/412243 [Google Scholar]
  44. Searle, J.R
    (1969) Speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139173438
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173438 [Google Scholar]
  45. (1975) Indirect Speech Acts. In P. Cole and J. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech acts. New York: Academic Press, pp. 59-82.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Scollon, R. , and S.B. Scollon
    (1981) Narrative, Literacy and Face in Interethnic Communication. Norwood, N. J.: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Sinclair, J. , and R.M. Coulthard
    (1974) Towards an analysis of Discourse. London: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Snow, C.E. , R.Y. Perlmann , J.B. Gleason , and N. Hooshyar
    (1990) Developmental perspectives on politeness: Sources of children´s knowledge. Journal of Pragmatics14: 289-305. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(90)90084‑Q
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(90)90084-Q [Google Scholar]
  49. Tannen, D
    (1981) Indirectness in discourse: Ethnicity as conversational style. Discourse Processes4: 221-238. doi: 10.1080/01638538109544517
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638538109544517 [Google Scholar]
  50. Tryggvasson, M-T. , and B. De Geer
    (2002) Eliciting talk as language socialization in Finnish, SwedishFinnish and Swedish families: A look at syntactic structures. Multilingua21: 345-369. doi: 10.1515/mult.2002.015
    https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.2002.015 [Google Scholar]
  51. Van Dijk
    T (1981) Studies in pragmatic discourse. The Hague: Mouton. doi: 10.1515/9783110826142
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110826142 [Google Scholar]
  52. Van der Wijst
    P (1996) Politeness in requests and negotiations. Ph.D. thesis. Tilburg: Katholieke Universiteit van Brabant.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Watts, R.J
    (1991) Power in family discourse. New York: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110854787
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110854787 [Google Scholar]
  54. Wierzbicka, A
    (1985) Different cultures, different language, different speech acts: Polish vs. English. Journal of Pragmatics9.2/3: 145-78. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(85)90023‑2
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(85)90023-2 [Google Scholar]
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