Abstract
Regarding the Japanese utterance-final construction tari site as a general extender, this paper discusses the innovative function of this formulaic expression, the non-final form of tari suru ‘and/or do’, to mark play stance. I argue that the sequential and interactional context where it is used provides the grounds for this construction to function as such, which contributes to building a play frame intersubjectively. General extenders such as English or something are highly pragmatic because, by offering a prototypical exemplar that precedes, the speaker invites the listener to infer the implied vague category. My analysis of tari site in naturally occurring Japanese conversations adds to the existing claim that English fixed expressions are employed to express stances in everyday conversation. Moreover, I found that the play stance marker tari site expresses the speaker’s positive self-presentation, in contrast to one of the previously claimed general extenders’ functions to convey hedges.
Acknowledgments
This study is part of the KAKENHI project supported by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (project number 17KT0061), in which I participate as a research collaborator. I am indebted to the project members for invaluable comments on an earlier version of this study. All shortcomings are mine.
Appendix
The transcription symbols follow the conventions devised by Du Bois et al. (1993). Below is the list of the symbols used in this article.
| Intonation unit | {carriage return} | Laughter (one pulse) | @ |
| Truncated intonation unit | — | Laugh quality of speech | <@> words </@> |
| Truncated word | – | Smile quality of speech | < > words </ > |
| Continuing contour | , | Quotation quality of speech | <Q> words </Q> |
| Final contour | . | Whisper quality of speech | <WH> words </WH> |
| Appealing contour | ? | Uncertain hearing of speech | <#> words </#> |
| Lengthening | = | Indecipherable syllable | # |
| Speech overlap | [words] | Pseudonym | ∼name |
References
Bakhtin, Mikhail M. 1981. The dialogic imagination: Four essays (edited by Michael Holquist, translated by Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist). Austin: University of Texas Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Barotto, Alessandra. 2018. The hedging function of exemplification: Evidence from Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics 123. 24–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.09.007.Suche in Google Scholar
Bateson, Gregory. 1972. Steps to an ecology of mind: Collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution, and epistemology. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Company.Suche in Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 2006. From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language 82(4). 711–733. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0186.Suche in Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 2009. Language universals and usage-based theory. In Morten H. Christiansen, Christopher Collins & Shimon Edelman (eds.), Language universals, 17–40. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195305432.003.0002Suche in Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan & Joanne Scheibman. 1999. The effect of usage on degrees of constituency: The reduction of don’t in English. Linguistics 37(4). 575–596. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.37.4.575.Suche in Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace. 1994. Discourse, consciousness, and time: The flow and displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace. 2007. The importance of not being earnest: The feeling behind laughter and humor. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/ceb.3Suche in Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W. 2007. The stance triangle. In Robert Englebretson (ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction, 139–182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.164.07duSuche in Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W. 2014. Towards a dialogic syntax. Cognitive Linguistics 25(3). 359–410. https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2014-0024.Suche in Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W. & Elise Kärkkäinen. 2012. Taking a stance on emotion: Affect, sequence, and intersubjectivity in dialogic interaction. Text & Talk 32(4). 433–451. https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2012-0021.Suche in Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W., Stephan Schuetze-Coburn, Susanna Cumming & Danae Paolino. 1993. Outline of discourse transcription. In Jane A. Edwards & Martin D. Lampert (eds.), Talking data: Transcription and coding in discourse research, 45–89. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Suche in Google Scholar
Fujii, Seiko. 2006. Quoted thought and speech using the mitai-na ‘be like’ noun-modifying construction. In Satoko Suzuki (ed.), Emotive communication in Japanese, 53–95. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.151.05fujSuche in Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1974. Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper & Row.Suche in Google Scholar
Goodwin, Charles. 2007. Participation, stance and affect in the organization of activities. Discourse & Society 18(1). 53–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926507069457.Suche in Google Scholar
Goodwin, Marjorie Harness, Asta Cekaite & Charles Goodwin. 2012. Emotion as stance. In Anssi Peräkylä & Marja-Leena Sorjonen (eds.), Emotion in interaction, 16–41. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199730735.003.0002Suche in Google Scholar
Grice, H. Paul. 1975 [1967]. Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole & Jerry L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.10.1163/9789004368811_003Suche in Google Scholar
Haiman, John. 1998. Talk is cheap: Sarcasm, alienation, and the evolution of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780195115246.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. 1998. Emergent grammar. In Michael Tomasello (ed.), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, 155–175. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.10.4324/9781315085678-6Suche in Google Scholar
Horie, Kaoru. 2015. The pragmatic effect of attributive-final predicate forms: Japanese vs. Korean. Paper presented at the Fourteenth International Pragmatics Conference, University of Antwerp, 31 July.Suche in Google Scholar
Kärkkäinen, Elise. 2012. I thought it was very interesting: Conversational formats for taking a stance. Journal of Pragmatics 44. 2194–2210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.09.005.Suche in Google Scholar
Kim, Minju. 2020. Korean general extenders tunci ha and kena ha ‘or something’: Approximation, hedging, and pejorative stance in cross-linguistic comparison. Pragmatics 30(4). 560–588. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.18035.kim.Suche in Google Scholar
Laury, Ritva & Tsuyoshi Ono. 2020. Introduction. In Ritva Laury & Tsuyoshi Ono (eds.), Fixed expressions: Building language structure and social action, 1–10. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.315.01lauSuche in Google Scholar
Moriyama, Takurō. 1997. Udon ni mayoneezu kaketari site: Heiretu no imi [Put mayonnaise on udon or something: Juxtaposed meanings]. Gengo 26(2). 56–61.Suche in Google Scholar
Ochs, Elinor. 1996. Linguistic resources for socializing humanity. In John J. Gumperz & Stephen C. Levinson (eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity, 407–437. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Onodera, Noriko (ed.). 2017. Periphery: Where pragmatic meaning is negotiated. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.Suche in Google Scholar
Overstreet, Maryann. 1999. Whales, candlelight, and stuff like that: General extenders in English discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780195125740.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Overstreet, Maryann & George Yule. 2021. General extenders: The forms and functions of a new linguistic category. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108938655Suche in Google Scholar
Shinzato, Rumiko. 2005. Perfective auxiliary to discourse markers: A case of Old Japanese tari. Paper presented at FITIGRA (From Ideational to Interpersonal: Perspectives from Grammaticalization) conference, Leuven, Belgium, 12 February.Suche in Google Scholar
Suzuki, Ryoko & Tsuyoshi Ono. 2019. Ninti-keitai-ron [Cognitive morphology]. In Yukio Tsuji, Takashi Kusumi, Kazumi Sugai, Masuhiro Nomura, Kaoru Horie & Kimihiro Yoshimura (eds.), Ninti-gengogaku daiziten [Encyclopedia of cognitive linguistics]. Tokyo: Asakura.Suche in Google Scholar
Suzuki, Satoko. 1995. A study of the sentence-final mitai na. Journal of the Association of Teachers of Japanese 29(2). 55–78. https://doi.org/10.2307/489589.Suche in Google Scholar
Suzuki, Satoko. 1998. Pejorative connotation: A case of Japanese. In Andreas H. Jucker & Yael Ziv (eds.), Discourse markers: Descriptions and theory, 261–276. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.57.13suzSuche in Google Scholar
Suzuki, Satoko. 2001. Self-mockery in Japanese. Linguistics 40(1). 163–189. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2002.002.Suche in Google Scholar
Suzuki, Satoko. 2008. Expressivity of vagueness: Alienation in the verb-tari suru construction. Japanese Language and Literature 42(1). 157–169.Suche in Google Scholar
Takanashi, Hiroko. 2004. The interactional co-construction of play in Japanese conversation. Santa Barbara, CA: University of California at Santa Barbara dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar
Takanashi, Hiroko. 2011. Complementary stylistic resonance in Japanese play framing. Pragmatics 21(2). 231–264. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.21.2.04tak.Suche in Google Scholar
Takanashi, Hiroko. 2016. Asobigokoro de no sokkyoogeki kyooen no dainamizumu: Supiiti sutairu no kyoomei to sono mekanizumu no bunseki [The dynamics of extemporaneous co-acting of play: Dialogic resonance in speech style]. In Yōko Fujii & Hiroko Takanashi (eds.), Komyunikeesyon no dainamizumu: Sizen hatuwa deeta kara [The dynamics of communication: Analyses of natural discourse], 105–137. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.Suche in Google Scholar
Takanashi, Hiroko. 2018. Stance. In Jan-Ola Östman & Jef Verschueren (eds.), Handbook of pragmatics: 21st annual installment, 173–199. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/hop.21.sta2Suche in Google Scholar
Takanashi, Hiroko. 2020. Playful naming in playful framing: The intertextual emergence of neologism. In Risako Ide & Kaori Hata (eds.), Bonding through context: Language and interactional alignment in Japanese situated discourse, 239–264. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.314.11takSuche in Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah (ed.). 1993. Framing in discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah. 1995. Waiting for the mouse: Constructed dialogue in conversation. In Dennis Tedlock & Bruce Mannheim (eds.), The dialogic emergence of culture, 198–217. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Taylor, Yuki. 2010. Functions of Japanese exemplifying particles in spoken and written discourse. Los Angeles, CA: University of California at Los Angeles dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar
Taylor, Yuki. 2015. The evolution of Japanese toka in utterance-final position. In Sylvie Hancil, Alexander Haselow & Margje Post (eds.), Final particles, 141–156. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110375572-006Suche in Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C. 2010. Revisiting subjectification and intersubjectification. In Kristin Davidse, Lieven Vandelanotte & Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), Subjectification, intersubjectification and grammaticalization, 29–70. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Suche in Google Scholar
Wray, Alison. 2002. Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511519772Suche in Google Scholar
© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Editorial
- Editors’ Notes
- Guest Editor’s notes
- Articles
- Formulaicity and formulaic expressions in Japanese: an introduction
- Formulaicity and contexts: a multimodal analysis of the Japanese utterance-final tteyuu
- Sequential positions and interactional functions of negative epistemic constructions in Japanese conversation
- Kedo-ending turn format as a formula for a problem statement with a deontic implication
- The utterance-final tari site construction in interaction: a general extender as a play stance marker
- Verb repetition as a template for reactive tokens in Japanese everyday talk
- Formulaicity of fictional quotative ga itteta and its functions in Japanese social media posts
- Commas as a constructional resource: the use of a comma in a formulaic expression in Japanese social media texts
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Editorial
- Editors’ Notes
- Guest Editor’s notes
- Articles
- Formulaicity and formulaic expressions in Japanese: an introduction
- Formulaicity and contexts: a multimodal analysis of the Japanese utterance-final tteyuu
- Sequential positions and interactional functions of negative epistemic constructions in Japanese conversation
- Kedo-ending turn format as a formula for a problem statement with a deontic implication
- The utterance-final tari site construction in interaction: a general extender as a play stance marker
- Verb repetition as a template for reactive tokens in Japanese everyday talk
- Formulaicity of fictional quotative ga itteta and its functions in Japanese social media posts
- Commas as a constructional resource: the use of a comma in a formulaic expression in Japanese social media texts
> words </
>