Cover not available
Article published In:
On mood and speech function and the ‘why’ of text analysis: In honour of Margaret Berry
Edited by Lise Fontaine, Miriam Taverniers and Kristin Davidse
[Functions of Language 26:1] 2019
► pp. 86–111

English tag questions eliciting knowledge or action

A comparison of the speech function and exchange structure models

| KU Leuven
| KU Leuven
| Cardiff University
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Data and data analysis
  • 3.The speech function model: TQs demanding information or goods-and-services
    • 3.1The speech function model
    • 3.2Demanding of information or goods-and-services
    • 3.3Initiating move
    • 3.4Type of responses
    • 3.5Mood type of anchor
    • 3.6Modality in anchor and tag
    • 3.7Constant versus reversed polarity
    • 3.8Prosody
    • 3.9Interim conclusion
  • 4.Exchange structure: TQs eliciting knowledge or action
    • 4.1The smoothly unfolding exchange
      • 4.1.1Berry’s model
      • 4.1.2Some suggested modifications and extensions
    • 4.2Primary versus secondary knower/actor
    • 4.3TQs eliciting knowledge or action: Classifications and predictions of the exchange model
      • 4.3.1Offering TQs: da1
      • 4.3.2Directive and questioning TQs: a2 and k2
    • 4.4Queries and challenges
  • 5.Concluding discussion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 27 May 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.18019.kim
References (40)
References
Athanasiadou, Angeliki. 1991. The discourse function of questions. Pragmatics 11. 107–122. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Axelsson, Karin. 2011. Tag questions in fiction dialogue. Göteborg: University of Gothenburg PhD thesis. Available online at [URL]
Bald, Wolf-Dietrich. 1979. English tag questions and intonation. In Kuno Schumann (ed.), Anglistentag, 263–292. Berlin: Technische Universität.Google Scholar
Beckman, Mary E. & Gayle Elam Ayers. 1993. Guidelines for ToBI labelling: The Ohio State University Research Foundation. Available online at [URL]
Berry, Margaret. 1981a. Systemic linguistics and discourse analysis: A multi-layered approach to exchange structure. In Malcolm Coulthard & Martin Montgomery (eds.), Studies in discourse analysis, 120–145. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
. 1981b. Towards layers of exchange structure for directive exchanges. Network 21. 23–32.Google Scholar
. 1981c. Polarity, ellipticity and propositional development: Their relevance to the well-formedness of an exchange. (A discussion of Coulthard and Brazil’s classes of move.) Nottingham Linguistic Circular 101. 36–63.Google Scholar
. 2016. Dynamism in exchange structure. English Text Construction 91. 33–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boersma, Paul & David Weenink. 2015. Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. Version 5.3.04. [URL]
Burton, Deirdre. 1980. Dialogue and discourse. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Coulthard, Malcolm & David Brazil. 1979. Exchange structure. Discourse Analysis Monographs 6. Birmingham: University of Birmingham.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth, Margaret Seltink & Paul Drew. 1996. Prosody in conversation: Interactional studies. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kimps, Ditte. 2007. Declarative constant polarity tag questions: A data-driven analysis of their form, meaning and attitudinal uses. Journal of Pragmatics 391. 270–291. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kimps, Ditte, Kristin Davidse & Bert Cornillie. 2014. A speech function analysis of tag questions in British English spontaneous dialogue. Journal of Pragmatics 661. 64–85. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davies, Eirian. 2001. Propositional attitudes. Functions of Language 81. 217–251. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul. 2012. What drives sequences? Research of Language and Social Interaction 451. 61–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eggins, Suzanne & Diana Slade. 1997. Analysing casual conversation. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1964. English system networks. In Gunther Kress (ed.), Halliday: System and function in language. Selected papers. (1976), 101–135. London: OUP.Google Scholar
1970. Functional diversity in language as seen from a consideration of modality and mood in English. Foundations of Language 61. 322–361.Google Scholar
1985. An introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2004. An introduction to Functional Grammar, 3rd edn. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Heritage, John & Geoffrey Raymond. 2005. The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly 681. 15–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levshina, Natalia. 2015. How to do Linguistics with R: Data exploration and statistical analysis. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martin, James. 1981. How many speech acts? In Wang Zhenhua (ed.), Discourse Semantics: Collected Works of J. R. Martin. Vol. 21. (2010), 35–57. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiao Tong University Press.Google Scholar
. 1992. English text: System and structure. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Donnell, Michael. 1990. A dynamic model of exchange. WORD 411. 293–327. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Grady, Gerard. 2010. A grammar of spoken English discourse. The intonation of increments. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
. 2013. Key concepts in phonetics and phonology. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
. 2016. Given/New: What do the terms refer to? A first (small) step. English Text Construction 91. 7–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Rose, David. 2014. Analysing pedagogic discourse: An approach from genre and register. Functional Linguistics 11. 1–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emmanuel & Harvey Sacks. 1973. Opening up Closings. Semiotica 71. 289–327.Google Scholar
Sinclair, John & Malcolm Coulthard. 1975. Towards an analysis of discourse. London: OUP.Google Scholar
Stenström, Anna-Brita. 1984. Questions and responses in English conversation. Lund Studies in English 68. Lund: Liber/Gleerups.Google Scholar
Tomasello, Michael. 2014. A natural history of human thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsui, Amy. 1994. English conversation. London: OUP.Google Scholar
Ventola, Eija. 1987. The structure of social interaction: A systemic approach to the semiotics of service encounters. London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar
Verstraete, Jean-Christophe. 2007. Rethinking the coordinate-subordinate dichotomy. Interpersonal grammar and the analysis of adverbial clauses in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Beauchamp, David & Sheena Gardner
2023. A trinocular view of the auxiliary verb will in COVID-19 briefings from Westminster and Holyrood. Language, Context and Text. The Social Semiotics Forum 5:1 ► pp. 124 ff. DOI logo
Cheng, Shi
2023. A review of interpersonal metafunction studies in systemic functional linguistics (2012–2022). Journal of World Languages 0:0 DOI logo
Berry, Margaret & Sarah Jane Mukherjee
2022. Exchange Structure: Refinements to the model through a study of multiparty discourse of 4 to 5 year-old children. Functions of Language 29:3 ► pp. 253 ff. DOI logo
Forey, Gail
2022. Margaret Berry. Language, Context and Text. The Social Semiotics Forum 4:1 ► pp. 146 ff. DOI logo
Berry, Margaret
2021. Inequalities in status: How do they show in discourse and what can be done about them?. Lingua 261 ► pp. 102924 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.