Difference between revisions of "Raymond2018b"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) m |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
|Tag(s)=EMCA; particle pues; particle bueno; Spanish; answers; discourse marker; conversation analysis/CA; responses | |Tag(s)=EMCA; particle pues; particle bueno; Spanish; answers; discourse marker; conversation analysis/CA; responses | ||
|Key=Raymond2018b | |Key=Raymond2018b | ||
| − | |Publisher=John Benjamins | + | |Publisher=John Benjamins |
|Year=2018 | |Year=2018 | ||
|Language=English | |Language=English | ||
|Chapter=3 | |Chapter=3 | ||
|Address=Amsterdam / Philadelphia | |Address=Amsterdam / Philadelphia | ||
| − | |Booktitle=Between Turn and Sequence: Turn- | + | |Booktitle=Between Turn and Sequence: Turn-Initial Particles Across Languages |
|Pages=59–96 | |Pages=59–96 | ||
|URL=https://benjamins.com/catalog/slsi.31.03ray | |URL=https://benjamins.com/catalog/slsi.31.03ray | ||
| − | |DOI= | + | |DOI=10.1075/slsi.31.03ray |
|Abstract=This chapter reports on two turn-initial particles in Spanish: bueno and pues. While previous research has equated both of these to well-prefacing in English in that they project “unexpectedness”, here the aim is to explicate the distinct interactional work that each particle performs. Focusing on responses to questions, I show that bueno-prefaced responses do not overtly problematize the prior utterance, but rather accept its terms before departing from them, and thereby acquiesce to the prior turn’s design. Pues-prefaced responses, by contrast, are directly addressed to the prior turn, but they cast that prior turn’s action or design as problematic in some way. I conclude by illustrating how these two uses are not mutually exclusive by examining the compound preface bueno-pues. | |Abstract=This chapter reports on two turn-initial particles in Spanish: bueno and pues. While previous research has equated both of these to well-prefacing in English in that they project “unexpectedness”, here the aim is to explicate the distinct interactional work that each particle performs. Focusing on responses to questions, I show that bueno-prefaced responses do not overtly problematize the prior utterance, but rather accept its terms before departing from them, and thereby acquiesce to the prior turn’s design. Pues-prefaced responses, by contrast, are directly addressed to the prior turn, but they cast that prior turn’s action or design as problematic in some way. I conclude by illustrating how these two uses are not mutually exclusive by examining the compound preface bueno-pues. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 02:18, 12 January 2020
| Raymond2018b | |
|---|---|
| BibType | INCOLLECTION |
| Key | Raymond2018b |
| Author(s) | Chase Wesley Raymond |
| Title | Bueno-, pues-, and bueno-pues-prefacing in Spanish conversation |
| Editor(s) | John Heritage, Marja-Leena Sorjonen |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, particle pues, particle bueno, Spanish, answers, discourse marker, conversation analysis/CA, responses |
| Publisher | John Benjamins |
| Year | 2018 |
| Language | English |
| City | Amsterdam / Philadelphia |
| Month | |
| Journal | |
| Volume | |
| Number | |
| Pages | 59–96 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1075/slsi.31.03ray |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | Between Turn and Sequence: Turn-Initial Particles Across Languages |
| Chapter | 3 |
Abstract
This chapter reports on two turn-initial particles in Spanish: bueno and pues. While previous research has equated both of these to well-prefacing in English in that they project “unexpectedness”, here the aim is to explicate the distinct interactional work that each particle performs. Focusing on responses to questions, I show that bueno-prefaced responses do not overtly problematize the prior utterance, but rather accept its terms before departing from them, and thereby acquiesce to the prior turn’s design. Pues-prefaced responses, by contrast, are directly addressed to the prior turn, but they cast that prior turn’s action or design as problematic in some way. I conclude by illustrating how these two uses are not mutually exclusive by examining the compound preface bueno-pues.
Notes
