Urbanik2019

From emcawiki
Revision as of 14:26, 22 November 2018 by Clair-AntoineVeyrier (talk | contribs) (BibTeX auto import 2018-11-22 02:26:26)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
Urbanik2019
BibType ARTICLE
Key Urbanik2019
Author(s) Paweł Urbanik, Jan Svennevig
Title Managing contingencies in requests: The role of negation in Norwegian interrogative directives
Editor(s)
Tag(s) Contingency, EMCA, Entitlement, Interrogative, Negation, Norwegian, Request
Publisher
Year 2019
Language
City
Month jan
Journal Journal of Pragmatics
Volume 139
Number
Pages 109–125
URL Link
DOI 10.1016/j.pragma.2018.10.014
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

In Norwegian, unlike English, negative interrogatives are commonly used as requests for action. In addition, the negation adverb ikke can be placed either before or after a pronominal subject. The study explores pragmatic differences between these two request formats, using everyday conversations from the TV series Big Brother as corpus data. We argue that the difference concerns the contingencies faced by the speaker in gaining compliance. The format with preposed negation (Kan ikke jeg/du X? - ‘Can't I/you X?') requests confirmation of the assumption that the interlocutor can and will do the requested action and that any obstacles to gaining compliance are merely hypothetical. The format with postposed negation (Kan jeg/du ikke X? - ‘Can I/you not X?'), on the other hand, is used when there are contextually manifest obstacles and the speaker seeks to gain compliance in spite of them. Interrogatives with preposed negation take advantage of premises conducive to having action performed and are used to prevent refusal, while those with postposed negation are employed to combat the obstacles and win compliance.

Notes