Difference between revisions of "Rossi2012"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Giovanni Rossi; |Title=Bilateral and unilateral requests: the use of imperatives and mi X? Interrogatives in Italian |Tag(s)=EMCA; Reque...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
|Volume=49 | |Volume=49 | ||
|Number=5 | |Number=5 | ||
| − | |Pages= | + | |Pages=426–458 |
| − | | | + | |URL=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0163853X.2012.684136 |
| + | |DOI=10.1080/0163853X.2012.684136 | ||
|Abstract=When making requests, speakers need to select from a range of alternative forms available to them. In a corpus of naturally occurring Italian interaction, the two most common formats chosen are imperatives and interrogative constructions that include a turn-initial dative pronoun mi ‘to/for me’, which is referred to as the Mi X? format in this article. In informal contexts, both forms are used to request low-cost actions for here-and-now purposes. Building on this premise, this article argues for a functional distinction between them. The imperative format is selected to implement bilateral requests—that is, to request actions that are integral to an already established joint project between requester and recipient. On the other hand, the Mi X? format is a vehicle for unilateral requests, which means that it is used for enlisting help in new, self-contained projects that are launched in the interest of the speaker as an individual. | |Abstract=When making requests, speakers need to select from a range of alternative forms available to them. In a corpus of naturally occurring Italian interaction, the two most common formats chosen are imperatives and interrogative constructions that include a turn-initial dative pronoun mi ‘to/for me’, which is referred to as the Mi X? format in this article. In informal contexts, both forms are used to request low-cost actions for here-and-now purposes. Building on this premise, this article argues for a functional distinction between them. The imperative format is selected to implement bilateral requests—that is, to request actions that are integral to an already established joint project between requester and recipient. On the other hand, the Mi X? format is a vehicle for unilateral requests, which means that it is used for enlisting help in new, self-contained projects that are launched in the interest of the speaker as an individual. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 05:27, 30 November 2019
| Rossi2012 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Rossi2012 |
| Author(s) | Giovanni Rossi |
| Title | Bilateral and unilateral requests: the use of imperatives and mi X? Interrogatives in Italian |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Requests, Italian |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2012 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Discourse Processes |
| Volume | 49 |
| Number | 5 |
| Pages | 426–458 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1080/0163853X.2012.684136 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
When making requests, speakers need to select from a range of alternative forms available to them. In a corpus of naturally occurring Italian interaction, the two most common formats chosen are imperatives and interrogative constructions that include a turn-initial dative pronoun mi ‘to/for me’, which is referred to as the Mi X? format in this article. In informal contexts, both forms are used to request low-cost actions for here-and-now purposes. Building on this premise, this article argues for a functional distinction between them. The imperative format is selected to implement bilateral requests—that is, to request actions that are integral to an already established joint project between requester and recipient. On the other hand, the Mi X? format is a vehicle for unilateral requests, which means that it is used for enlisting help in new, self-contained projects that are launched in the interest of the speaker as an individual.
Notes
