Difference between revisions of "Steensig-Heinemann2013"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m (remove wrong ‘ from title)
 
Line 2: Line 2:
 
|BibType=INCOLLECTION
 
|BibType=INCOLLECTION
 
|Author(s)=Jakob Steensig; Trine Heinemann;
 
|Author(s)=Jakob Steensig; Trine Heinemann;
|Title=‘When “yes” is not enough – as an answer to a yes/no question
+
|Title=When “yes” is not enough – as an answer to a yes/no question
 
|Editor(s)=Beatrice Szczepek Reed; Geoffrey Raymond;
 
|Editor(s)=Beatrice Szczepek Reed; Geoffrey Raymond;
 
|Tag(s)=IL; Answers; Yes/no; Danish; responses; confirmations; elaborations;
 
|Tag(s)=IL; Answers; Yes/no; Danish; responses; confirmations; elaborations;

Latest revision as of 08:57, 26 February 2025

Steensig-Heinemann2013
BibType INCOLLECTION
Key Steensig-Heinemann2013
Author(s) Jakob Steensig, Trine Heinemann
Title When “yes” is not enough – as an answer to a yes/no question
Editor(s) Beatrice Szczepek Reed, Geoffrey Raymond
Tag(s) IL, Answers, Yes/no, Danish, responses, confirmations, elaborations
Publisher John Benjamins
Year 2013
Language
City Amsterdam / Philadelphia
Month
Journal
Volume
Number
Pages 207–242
URL Link
DOI 10.1075/slsi.25.07ste
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title Units of Talk – Units of Action
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

This article investigates confirming answers to yes/no questions that consist of more than the type-conforming ‘yes’ token. The study is based on 160 cases of question-answer sequences with confirming answers, taken from a corpus of Danish interactions. The authors claim that certain actions, which are carried out as yes/no questions, demand a response unit that consists of ‘yes’ plus an elaboration. The actions that have this far-reaching projection are: (1) expansion-eliciting questions, (2) knowledge discrepancy questions, and (3) specification requests. The authors found no simple relationship between syntax and action. Some of the actions that demand more than a ‘yes’ can be carried out with both interrogative and declarative syntax, whereas others are done only interrogatively.

Notes