Cover not available
Part of
The Construction of Discourse as Verbal Interaction
Edited by María de los Ángeles Gómez González and J. Lachlan Mackenzie
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 296] 2018
► pp. 145–170

The use of tag questions in the oral production of L2 English learners

| University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain
| University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain
Although tag questions (TQs) are a conspicuous and frequently discussed phenomenon of spoken English, little is known about their acquisition by L2 learners. Drawing on two spoken comparable corpora, this study discusses differences between Spanish learners’ and native speakers’ (NS) use of canonical tag questions (CTQs). Our results reveal that CTQs are significantly underused by Spanish learners as compared to their native counterparts. The reasons cannot be found in the learners’ L1, since underuse is pervasive in the 11 subcomponents of the Louvain International Database of Spoken English Interlanguage and CTQs are known to be more frequent in Spanish than in English. The rather low frequency of English CTQs in the Louvain Corpus of Native English Conversation as compared with a reference corpus (ICE-GB) points to context-related factors.
Keywords: canonical tag questions, spoken language, discourse markers, pragmatic functions, pragmatic competence, English L2, contrastive interlanguage analysis
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.English canonical tag questions: A description
  • 3.ECTQs in L1 and L2 research
  • 4.Methodology
  • 5.Results
    • 5.1Overall frequency of ECTQ
    • 5.2Formal properties
    • 5.3Functional properties
    • 5.4Task and frequency of function
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 20 September 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.296.06dov
References (63)
References
Ai-li, C. Hsin. 2016. “An Analysis of Chinese Tag Questions with a Cross-Linguistic Comparison to English Tags.” Taiwan Journal of Linguistics 14 (1): 69–119.Google Scholar
Algeo, John. 1988. “The Tag Question in British English: It’s Different i’n’it?” English Worldwide 9: 171–191.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. British or American English? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Allerton, David J. 2009. “Tag Questions.” In One Language, Two Grammars? Differences between British and American English, ed. by Gunter Rohdenburg, and Julia Schlüter, 306–323. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Axelsson, Karin. 2011a. Tag Questions in Fiction Dialogue. PhD dissertation, University of Gothenburg.Google Scholar
. 2011b. “A Cross-Linguistic Study of Grammatically Dependent Question Tags. Data and Theoretical Implications.” Studies in Language 35 (4): 793–851.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 1996. Pragmatic Markers in English: Grammaticalization and Discourse Function. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Roger, and Camille Hanlon. 1970. “Derivational Complexity and Order of Acquisition in Child Speech.” In Cognition and the Development of Language, ed. by John R. Hayes, 11–53. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Callies, Marcus. 2015. “Learner Corpus Methodology.” In Cambridge Handbook of Learner Corpus Research, ed. by Sylviane Grancer, Fanny Meunier, and Gaëtanelle Gilquin, 35–55. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cameron, Deborah, Fiona McAlinden, and Kathy O’Leary. 1989. “Lakoff in Context: The Social and Linguistic Functions of Tag Questions.” In Women in their Speech Communities: New Perspectives on Language and Sex, ed. by Jennifer Coates, and Deborah Cameron, 74–93. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Cheng, Winnie, and Martin Warren. 2001. “She Knows More about Hong Kong Than You Do Isn’t It’: Tags in Hong Kong Conversational English.” Journal of Pragmatics 33 (9): 1419–1439.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Columbus, Georgie. 2009. “A Corpus-Based Analysis of Invariant Tags in Five Varieties of English.” Language and Computers 69: 401–414.Google Scholar
Council of Europe. 2001. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cuenca, Maria Josep. 1997. “Form-use Mappings for Tag Questions.” In Discourse and Perspective in Cognitive Linguistics, ed. by Wolf-Andreas Liebert, Gisela Redeker, and Linda Waugh, 3–19. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culicover, Peter W. 1992. “English Tag Questions in Universal Grammar.” Lingua 88: 193–226.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dailey-O’Cain, Jennifer. 2000. “The Sociolinguistic Distribution of and Attitudes toward Focuser like and Quotative like .” Journal of Sociolinguistics 4 (1): 60–80.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Cock, Sylvie. 2010. “Spoken Learner Corpora and EFL Teaching.” In Corpus-Based Applications to English Language Teaching, ed. Mari Carmen Campoy, Begoña Bellés-Fortuno, and M. Lluïsa Gea-Valor, 123–137. London and New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Dennis, Maureen, Judith Sugar, and Harry A. Whitaker. 1982. “The Acquisition of Tag Questions.” Child Development 53 (5): 1254–1257.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dubois, Betty L., and Isabel Crouch. 1975. “The Question of Tag Questions in Women’s Speech: They Don’t Really Use More of Them, Do They?” Language in Society 4: 289–294.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Estling Hellberg, Sanna. 2013. Translating Pragmatic Markers – or Whatever you Want to Call Them. Master’s Thesis. Linnaeus University.Google Scholar
Fraser, Bruce. 1996. “Pragmatic Markers.” Pragmatics 6 (2): 167–190.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fung, Loretta, and Ronald Carter. 2007. “Discourse Markers and Spoken English: Native and Learner Use in Pedagogic Settings.” Applied Linguistics 28 (3): 410–439.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gilquin, Gaëtanelle. 2008. “Hesitation Markers among EFL learners: Pragmatic Deficiency or Difference?” In Corpus and Pragmatics: A Mutualistic Entente, ed. by Jesús Romero-Trillo, 119–149. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Gilquin, Gaëtanelle, and Sylvie De Cock. 2013. Errors and Disfluencies in Spoken Corpora. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gilquin, Gaëtanelle, Sylvie De Cock, and Sylviane Granger. 2010. Louvain International Database of Spoken English Interlanguage. Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses Universitaires de Louvain.Google Scholar
Gómez-González, María de los Ángeles. 2014. “Canonical Tag Questions in English, Spanish and Portuguese.” Languages in Contrast 14 (1): 93–126.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Granger, Sylviane. 2002. “A Bird’s-Eye View of Computer Learner Corpus Research.” In Computer Learner Corpora, Second Language Acquisition and Foreign Language Teaching, ed. by Sylviane Granger, Joseph Hung, and Stephanie Petch-Tyson, 3–33. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Granger Sylviane, John Hung, and Stephanie Petch-Tyson (eds.) 2002. Computer Learner Corpora, Second Language Acquisition and Foreign Language Teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hannay, Mike, and Elena Martínez Caro. 2008. “Thematic Choice in the Written English of Advanced Spanish and Dutch Learners.” In Linking up Contrastive and Learner Corpus Research, ed. by Gaëtanelle Gilquin, Szilvia Papp, and Belén Díez-Bedmar, 227–253. Amsterdam: Rodopi.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hellermann, John, and Andrea Vergun. 2007. “Language Which is Not Taught: The Discourse Marker Use of Beginning Adult Learners of English.” Journal of Pragmatics 39: 157–179.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holmes, Janet. 1982. “The Functions of Tag Questions.” English Language Research Journal 3: 40–65.Google Scholar
. 1995. Women, Men and Politeness. White Plains, NY: Longman.Google Scholar
Hosman, Lawrence A., and Susan Siltanen. 2011. “Hedges, Tag Questions, Message Processing, and Persuasion.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 30: 341–349.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney, and Geoffrey K. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jovanović, Vladimir Ž. 2015. “The Role of Tag Questions in English and Serbian Interview Discourse.” In Jezik, Književnost, Diskurs, ed. by Biljana Mišić-Ilić, and Vesna Lopičić, 405–422. Niš: Filozofski fakultet Univerzitet u Nišu.Google Scholar
Kimps, Ditte, Kristin Davidse, and Bert Cornillie. 2014. “A Speech Function Analysis of Tag Questions in British English Spontaneous Dialogue.” Journal of Pragmatics 66: 64–85.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, Robert. 1975. Language and Woman’s Place. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 1998. “Preface.” In Learner English on Computer, ed. by Sylviane Granger, and Geoffrey Leech, xiv–xxx. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M. 2004. “Descriptive Motifs and Generalizations.” In Language Typology: A Functional Perspective, ed. by Alice Caffarel, J. R. Martin, and Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen, 573–673. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matsuda, Aya. 2003. “Incorporating World Englishes in Teaching English as an International Language.” TESOL Quarterly 37 (4): 719–729.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moore, Emma. 2009. “Style, Indexicality, and the Social Meaning of Tag Questions.” Language in Society 38: 447–485.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Müller, Simone. 2005. Discourse Markers in Native and Non-Native English Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nava, Andrea. 2005. “Comparing Tails. An Exploratory Study of Tails in Native Spoken English and in Italian EFL learners’ Interlanguage.” Mots, Palabras, Words 6: 71–92.Google Scholar
Nava, Andrea, and Luciana Pedrazzini. 2011. “Investigating L2 Spoken English through the Role Play Corpus.” Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 1 (1): 37–56.Google Scholar
O’Keeffe, Anne, Michael McCarthy, and Ronald Carter. 2007. From Corpus to Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Ramírez-Verdugo, Dolores, and Jesús Romero-Trillo. 2005. “The Pragmatic Function of Intonation in L2 Discourse: English Tag Questions Used by Spanish Speakers.” Intercultural Pragmatics 2: 151–168.Google Scholar
Romero-Trillo, Jesús. 2002. “The Pragmatic Fossilization of Discourse Markers in Non-Native Speakers of English.” Journal of Pragmatics 34: 769–784.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scott, Mike. 2008. WordSmith Tools Version 5.0. Liverpool: Lexical Analysis Software.Google Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah. 1987. Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schourup, Lawrence. 1999. “Discourse Markers.” Lingua 107: 227–265.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seidlhofer, Barbara. 2001. “Closing a Conceptual Gap: The Case for a Description of English as a Lingua Franca.” International Journal of Applied Linguistics 11 (2): 133–158.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stenström, Anna-Britta, Gisle Andersen, and Ingrid K. Hasund. 2002. Trends in Teenage Talk: Corpus Compilation, Analysis and Findings. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taboada, Maite. 2006. “Discourse Markers as Signals (or not) of Rhetorical Relations.” Journal of Pragmatics 38: 567–592.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Takahashi, Mariko. 2014. “A Comparative Study of Tag Questions in Four Asian Englishes from a Corpus-Based Approach.” Asian Englishes 16 (2): 101–124.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Timmis, Ivor. 2002. “Native-Speaker Norms and International English: A Classroom View.” ELT Journal 56 (3): 240–249.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomaselli, Maria Vittoria, and Albert Gatt. 2015. “Italian Tag Questions and Their Conversational Functions.” Journal of Pragmatics 84: 54–82.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tottie, Gunnel, and Sebastian Hoffmann. 2006. “Tag Questions in British and American English.” Journal of English Linguistics 34 (4): 283–311.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Widdowson, Henry G. 1997. “EIL, ESL, EFL: Global Issues and Local Interests.” World Englishes 16 (1): 135–146.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1991. Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: The Semantics of Human Interaction. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Williams, Jessica. 1992. “Planning, Discourse Marking, and the Comprehensibility of International Teaching Assistants.” TESOL Quarterly 26: 693–711.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wong, Jock. 2004. “The Particles of Singapore English: A Semantic and Cultural Interpretation.” Journal of Pragmatics: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language Studies 36 (4): 739–793.DOI logoGoogle Scholar