Abstract
On the basis of a set of discourse completion tasks, forms of making requests and asking for information in various contexts in five languages with various mutual contacts and areal affiliations are investigated. The study shows what young Estonian, Finnish, French, Lithuanian and Russian speakers consider to be appropriate forms of making requests in various contexts. Many similarities among these languages were found, but also some systematic cross-cultural and cross-linguistic differences. The effects of language contacts can be seen most clearly in the “intermediate” positioning of Estonian and Lithuanian, between French and Finnish on one side and Russian on the other, along many of the parameters investigated.
Funding statement: The study was partly supported by the European Union through the European Regional Development Fund (Centre of Excellence in Estonian Studies), and by the Estonian Research Council (PUT 701 “Referential devices in Estonian and adjacent languages: experimental approach”).
References
Ajanki, Rigina. 2014. How to be polite in Finnish? L2-learners’ strategies in formal e-mail messages. In Hartmut E. H. Lenk & Elina Suomela-Härmä (eds.), Höflichkeit in Textsorten, 115–126. Landau in der Pfalz: Verlag Empirische Pädagogik.Search in Google Scholar
Béal, Christine. 2010. Les interactions quotidiennes en français et en anglais: De l’approche comparative à l’analyse des situations interculturelles. Bern: Peter Lang.10.3726/978-3-0351-0000-6Search in Google Scholar
Bednarek, Monika. 2011. Approaching the data of pragmatics. In Wolfram Bublitz & Neal R. Norrick (eds.), Foundations of pragmatics, 537–560. Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110214260.537Search in Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shosana. 1989. Playing it safe: The role of conventionality in indirectness. In Shosana Blum-Kulka, Juliana House & Gabriele Kasper (eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies, 37–70. Norwood/New Jersey: Ablex.Search in Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shosana, Juliana House & Gabriele Kasper (eds.). 1989. Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood/New Jersey: Ablex.Search in Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope & Stephen C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness. Some universals in language usage. (Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics 4). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511813085Search in Google Scholar
Čepaitienė, Giedrė. 2007. Lietuvių kalbos etiketas: Semantika ir pragmatika. Šiauliai: Siauliu universiteto leidykla.Search in Google Scholar
Cohen, Andrew D. 2006. Interlanguage pragmatics: A reply to Pilar Garces-Conejos Blitvich. Intercultural Pragmatics 3(3). 359–364.10.1515/IP.2006.021Search in Google Scholar
Curl, Traci S. & Paul Drew. 2008. Contingency and action: A comparison of two forms of requesting. Research on Language and Social Interaction 41. 1–25.10.1080/08351810802028613Search in Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 1984. The speech act continuum. In William Chisholm, Louis T. Milic & John A. C. Greppin (eds.), Interrogativity: A colloquium on the grammar, typology and pragmatics of questions in seven diverse languages, 247–254. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Search in Google Scholar
Havu, Eva. 2006. L’emploi des pronoms d’adresse en français: étude sociolinguistique et comparaison avec le finnois. In Irma Taavitsainen, Juhani Härmä & Jarmo Korhonen (eds.), Dialogic language use – Dimensions du dialogisme – Dialogischer Sprachgebrauch, 225–240. Helsinki: University of Helsinki.Search in Google Scholar
Hilbig, Inga. 2009. Lietuvių ir anglų lingvistinis mandagumas: Prašymai, Daktaro disertacija. Vilnius: Vilnius University.Search in Google Scholar
Jalli, Ninni & Renate Pajusalu. 2015. Sa uss ära sinata mind siin midagi, ega me koos seakarjas pole käind. Puhuttelu Virossa. In Hanna Lappalainen & Johanna Isosävi (eds.), Saako sinutella vai täytyykö teititellä? Tutkimuksia eurooppalaisten kielten puhuttelukäytännöistä, 105–134. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.Search in Google Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H. 2009. Speech act research between armchair, field and laboratory. The case of compliments. Journal of Pragmatics 41. 1611–1635.10.1016/j.pragma.2009.02.004Search in Google Scholar
Kauppinen, Anneli. 1999. Puhekuviot: Tilanteen ja rakenteen liitto. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.Search in Google Scholar
Keevallik, Leelo. 1999. The use and abuse of singular and plural address forms in Estonian. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 139. 125–144.10.1515/ijsl.1999.139.125Search in Google Scholar
Keevallik, Leelo. 2004. Politeness in Estonia: As a matter of fact style. In Leo Hickey & Miranda Stewart (eds.), Politeness in Europe, 203–217. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781853597398-016Search in Google Scholar
Keevallik, Leelo. 2006. Keelekontakt ja pragmaatika. In Ilona Tragel & Haldur Õim (eds.), Teoreetiline keeleteadus Eestis II, 83–96. Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.Search in Google Scholar
Keevallik, Leelo. 2012. Pragmatics of the Estonian heritage speakers in Sweden. Finnisch-Ugrische Mitteilungen 35. 1–22.Search in Google Scholar
Kendrick, Kobin H. & Paul Drew. 2014. The putative preference of offers over requests. In Paul Drew & Elisabeth Couper-Kuhlen (eds.), Requesting in social interaction, 87–114. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/slsi.26.04kenSearch in Google Scholar
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine. 2001. Les actes de langage dans le discours. Paris: Nathan.Search in Google Scholar
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine. 2005. Politeness in France: How to buy bread politely. In Leo Hickey & Miranda Stewart (eds.), Politeness in Europe, 29–44. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781853597398-004Search in Google Scholar
Lappalainen, Hanna. 2006. Mie vai mää, sinä vai te. Virkailijoiden kielelliset valinnat itseen ja vastaanottajaan viitattaessa. In Marja-Leena Sorjonen & Liisa Raevaara (eds.), Arjen asiointia. Keskusteluja Kelan tiskin äärellä, 241–284. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.Search in Google Scholar
Lappalainen, Hanna. 2015. Sinä vai te vai sekä että. In Hanna Lappalainen & Johanna Isosävi (eds.), Saako sinutella vai täytyykö teititellä? Tutkimuksia eurooppalaisten kielten puhuttelukäytännöistä, 72–104. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.Search in Google Scholar
Larina, Tatjana V. 2009. Kategorija vežlivosti i stil’ kommunikacii. Moskva: Jazyki slavjanskih kul’tur.Search in Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511813313Search in Google Scholar
Lindström, Liina. 2010. Kõnelejale ja kuulajale viitamise vältimise strateegiaid eesti keeles. Emakeele Seltsi aastaraamat 55. 88–118.Search in Google Scholar
Metslang, Helle. 1999. Is the Estonian and Finnish conditional actually a conditional? In Mati Erelt (ed.), Estonian typological studies III, 97–127. Tartu: Tartu University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Metslang, Helle. 2004. Imperative and related matters in everyday Estonian. Linguistica Uralica 40(4). 243–256.10.3176/lu.2004.4.02Search in Google Scholar
Mills, Margaret H. 1992. Conventionalized politeness in Russian requests: A pragmatic view of indirectness. Russian Linguistics 16. 65–78.10.1007/BF02529539Search in Google Scholar
Mills, Sara. 2003. Gender and politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511615238Search in Google Scholar
Nyblom, Heidi. 2006. The use of address pronouns among Finnish and Finland-Swedish students. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 29(2). http://www.nla.gov.au/openpublish/index.php/aral/article/viewFile/1927/2310 (accessed 27 June 2015).10.2104/aral0619Search in Google Scholar
Ogiermann, Eva. 2009. Politeness and in-directness across cultures: A comparison of English, German, Polish and Russian requests. Journal of Politeness Research: Language, Behavior, Culture 5(2). 189–216.10.1515/JPLR.2009.011Search in Google Scholar
Pajusalu, Renate & Karl Pajusalu. 2004. The conditional in everyday Estonian: Its form and functions. Linguistica Uralica 40(4). 257–269.10.3176/lu.2004.4.03Search in Google Scholar
Pajusalu, Renate, Virve Vihman, Birute Klaas & Karl Pajusalu. 2010. Forms of address across languages: Formal and informal second person pronoun usage among Estonia’s linguistic communities. Intercultural Pragmatics 7(1). 75–101.10.1515/iprg.2010.004Search in Google Scholar
Paunonen, Heikki. 2010. Kun Suomi siirtyi sinutteluun. Suomalaisten puhuttelutapojen murroksesta 1970-luvulla. In Hanna Lappalainen, Marja-Leena Sorjonen & Maria Vilkuna (eds.), Kielellä on merkitystä. Näkökulmia kielipolitiikkaan, 325–368. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.Search in Google Scholar
Peterson, Elizabet. 2010. Perspective and politeness in Finnish requests. Pragmatics 20(3). 401–423.10.1075/prag.20.3.05petSearch in Google Scholar
Rathmayer, Renate. 2003. Pragmatika izvinenija. Moskva: Jazyki slavjanskoi kul’tury.Search in Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emmanueal A. 1988. Presequence and indirection. Applying speech act theory to ordinary conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 12. 55–62.10.1016/0378-2166(88)90019-7Search in Google Scholar
Searle, John. 1969. Speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139173438Search in Google Scholar
Sorjonen, Marja-Liisa, Liisa Raevaara & Hanna Lappalainen. 2009. Mä otan tän. Käynnin syyn esittämisen tavat R-kioskilla. In Hanna Lappalainen & Liisa Raevaara (eds.), Kieli kioskilla. Tutkimuksia kioskiasioinnin rutiineista, 90–119. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.Search in Google Scholar
Taleghani-Nikazm, Carmen. 2006. Request sequences: The intersection of grammar, interaction and social context. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/sidag.19Search in Google Scholar
Tanner, Johanna. 2012. Rakenne, tilanne ja kohteliasuus. Pyynnöt S2 oppikirjoissa ja autenttisissa keskusteluissa [Linguistic structures, situations and politeness: Requests in Finnish as second language textbooks and in authentic service encounters]. University of Helsinki PhD dissertation. https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/32474/rakennet.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed 27 June 2015).Search in Google Scholar
Tragel, Ilona. 2001. Eesti saama ja võima ning soome saada ja voida. Tähendused ja vastavused kognitiivse grammatika vaatenurgast. Keel ja Kirjandus 2. 99–110.Search in Google Scholar
VISK 2008=Auli Hakulinen, Maria Vilkuna, Riitta Korhonen, Vesa Koivisto, Tarja Riitta Heinonen & Irja Alho. 2004. Iso suomen kielioppi. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura. Verkkoversio. http://scripta.kotus.fi/visk (accessed 11 June 2015).Search in Google Scholar
Vogelberg, Krista. 2002. The politeness debate continued: Notes on some key controversial issues in Brown and Levinson’s theory. In Renate Pajusalu & Tiit Hennoste (eds.), Catcher of the meaning, 340–354. Tartu: Tartu Ülikool.Search in Google Scholar
Warga, Muriel. 2005. ‘Est-ce que tu pourrais m’aider?’ vs. ‘Je voudrais demander si tu pourrais m’aider’. Les requêtes en français natif et en interlangue. Vox Romanica: Annales Helvetici Explorandis Linguis Romanicis Destinati 64. 141–159.Search in Google Scholar
Watts, Richard J. 2003. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511615184Search in Google Scholar
Yuan, Yi. 2001. An inquiry into empirical pragmatics data-gathering methods: Written DCTs, oral DCTs, field notes, and natural conversations. Journal of Pragmatics 33(2). 271–292.10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00031-XSearch in Google Scholar
Appendix
Data elicitation questionnaire: English translation of the questionnaire with each scenario, as presented to participants in the Discourse Completion Task
Dear respondent! Below you will find some everyday situations. Try to imagine these and write what you would say/write in such a situation. Your answers are needed for a contrastive linguistic study.
| Age: | Male/female: |
You overslept on exam day. Still you hope that the teacher will allow you to take the exam at another time. You write the teacher an e-mail. How do you express your wish?
You cannot find the book you need at the library. You go to the desk where the librarian is sitting and typing something at the computer. How do you ask the librarian to help you?
You are late for your flight. You cannot get a taxi. Your neighbor has a car and you just saw from your window that (s)he came home. You get an idea that (s)he could give you a lift to the airport. You do not know your neighbor well, you have only exchanged greetings, but (s)he is young and seems very kind. You go next door and ring the doorbell. The neighbor opens the door. What do you say?
You would like to read a book that your friend has. You will meet with your friend the next day anyway. You call your friend and ask him/her to bring the book. What do you say?
You want to buy three grilled chicken legs from the store. What do you say to the shop assistant behind the counter?
You need to send an abstract of your paper to a graduate conference. The deadline is tonight, the abstract should be in English. You doubt your language skills and want to ask a good friend who speaks English well to check your abstract. But you know that your friend has an important test tomorrow and is probably very busy. You call your friend anyway. What do you say?
You are lost in a strange city. You want to ask the first person you meet where the bus station is. You see an older woman approaching. How do you ask her for information?
You talked with your friend about a book earlier today. Somehow you have forgotten the title of the book. You send your friend an SMS to ask her/him to remind you what the title was. What will you write?
You need to have a name engraved on a spoon you bought for someone’s birthday. There is a watchmaker’s shop nearby but you do not know whether they provide this service or not. You decide to stop by and ask. What will you say?
You need to get a document from your insurance company for the bank to prove that your apartment is insured (everything is in order and the apartment is indeed insured but the bank is worried about loan security). You find the name and e-mail address of your insurance company’s employee on the internet. What will you write?
© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
