1887
Volume 20, Issue 3
  • ISSN 1018-2101
  • E-ISSN: 2406-4238

Abstract

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.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/prag.20.3.05pet
2010-01-01
2019-12-11
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. 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 Linguistics3: 29-59. doi: 10.1093/applin/3.1.29
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/3.1.29 [Google Scholar]
  2. (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]
  3. Blum-Kulka, Shoshana , Juliane House , and Gabriele Kasper
    (eds.) (1989) Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 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]
  5. 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]
  6. (1987) Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Byon, Andrew Sangpil
    (2006) The role of linguistic indirectness and honorifics in achieving linguistic politeness in Korean requests. Journal of Politeness Research2: 247–276.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Cedergren, Henrietta , and David Sankoff
    (1974) Variable rules: Performance as a statistical reflection of competence. Language50: 333–355. doi: 10.2307/412441
    https://doi.org/10.2307/412441 [Google Scholar]
  9. Churchill, E
    (1999, September). Pragmatic development in L2 request strategies by lower level learners. Presented atSecond Language Research Forum, University of Minnesota.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Clyne, Michael , Heinz-Leo Kretzenbacher , Catrin Norrby , and Doris Schüpbach
    (2006) Perceptions of variation and change in German and Swedish address. Journal of Sociolinguistics10/3: 287-319. doi: 10.1111/j.1360‑6441.2006.00329.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-6441.2006.00329.x [Google Scholar]
  11. Dines, Elizabeth R
    (1980) Variation in discourse – “and stuff like that.”Language in Society 9.1: 13–31. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500007764
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500007764 [Google Scholar]
  12. Eelen, Gino
    (2001) A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Goffman, Erving
    (1967) Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. Garden City, New York: Doubleday, Anchor Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Harris, Sandra
    (2003) Politeness and power: Making and responding to ’requests’ in institutional settings. Text23: 27–52.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 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]
  16. 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. doi: 10.1075/cilt.277
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/cilt.277 [Google Scholar]
  17. Lakoff, Robin
    (1973) The logic of politeness; or minding your p’s and q’s. In Papers from theninth regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society. University of Chicago, pp. 292-305.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. (1975) Language and women’s place. New York: Harper and Row.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. 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]
  20. (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]
  21. (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]
  22. (2008) Kelan virkailijoiden henkilötunnuspyynnöt Tutkimus rutiininomaisista [Asking for clients’ identity number or identity card at Finnish Social Security offices: A study of routinized activities]. Virittäjä4: 483–517.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Lavandera, Beatriz
    (1978) Where does the sociolinguistic variable stop?Language in society7.2: 171–182. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500005510
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500005510 [Google Scholar]
  24. Leech, Geoffrey
    (1983) Principles of pragmatics. London and New York: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Locher, Miriam
    (2004) Power and Politeness in Action: Disagreemetns in Oral Communication. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110926552
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110926552 [Google Scholar]
  26. Meier, A.J
    (1995a) Defining politeness: Universality in appropriateness. Language Sciences 17.4: 345–356. doi: 10.1016/0388‑0001(95)00019‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0388-0001(95)00019-4 [Google Scholar]
  27. (1995b) Passages of politeness. Journal of Pragmatics4: 381–392. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(94)00053‑H
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)00053-H [Google Scholar]
  28. Milroy, Lesley
    (1980) Language and social networks. Oxford, UK; New York: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Muikku-Werner, Pirkko
    (1993) Impositiivus ja kielellinen variaatio. Julkisten keskustelujen käskyt ja kysymykset kelenopetuksen näkökulmasta. Joensuun yliopiston humanistisia julkaisuja 14. Joensuu.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. 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.
  31. Nuolijärvi, Pirkko , and Liisa Tiittula
    (2001)  Rakas Tarja ja hyvä ystävä. Puhuttelu minän ja sosiaalisten suhteiden esittämisen keinoina televisiokeskustelussa. Virittäjä4: 580–601.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Paolillo, John
    (2002) Analyzing linguistic variation: Statistical models and methods. Stanford,CA: CSLI Publications, Center for the Study of Language and Information.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Paunonen, Heikki
    (1995) Morphological changes in spoken Finnish possessive forms. Virittäjä 99.4: 501-531.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Peterson, Elizabeth
    (2004) Social appropriateness and language variation: A study of Finnish requests. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of General Linguistics, Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 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]
  36. 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]
  37. 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]
  38. Sorjonen, Marja-Leena
    (2001) Responding in conversation: A study of response particles in Finnish. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/pbns.70
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/pbns.70 [Google Scholar]
  39. Statistics Finland
    (2010)  Finland in figures . Retrieved March 15, 2010fromwww.stat.fi/index_en.html.
  40. Tagliamonte, Sally
    (2006) Analysing Sociolinguistic Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511801624
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511801624 [Google Scholar]
  41. Varghese, Manke , and Kristine Billmyer
    (1996) Investigating the structure of discourse completion tests. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics12.1: 39–58.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. 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 atscripta.kotus.fi/viskURN:ISBN:978-952-5446-35-7
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Watts, Richard J. , Sachiko Ide , and Konrad Ehlich
    (eds.) (1992) Politeness in language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. 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.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/prag.20.3.05pet
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Finnish , Forms of address , Perspective , Pragmatic variation , Requests and Speech acts
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