Enacting surprise with ani ‘no’-prefaced questions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/eap.34617Keywords:
turn-initial particle, question, ani, surprise, turn-initial particle, question, ani, surprise, Korean, conversationAbstract
This study focuses on the use of the particle ani ‘no’ as a preface to questions in Korean conversation. Using ordinary telephone conversations as data, the study examines the practice of ani prefacing in a previously unexplored position: questions that begin with ani. The cases show that ani-prefaced questions display the speaker’s surprise at some content of the recipient’s prior talk and sometimes even serve to challenge the truthfulness of the surprise source. In this context, the ani preface serves as an alert that these actions should be understood as a departure from the ongoing course of action and as a distinct issue to be addressed. The article also discusses ani’s uses in turn-initial position in relation to its use in other positions.
References
Bolden, G. B. (2008). ‘So what’s up?’: Using the discourse marker so to launch conversational business. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41(3), 302–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810802237909
Bolden, G. B. (2009). Implementing incipient actions: The discourse marker ‘so’ in English conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(5), 974–998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.10.004
Heritage, J. (1984). A change of state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J. Max Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action (pp. 299–345). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heritage, J. (1988). Explanation as accounts: A conversation analytic perspective. In C. Antaki (Ed.), Analyzing everyday explanation (pp. 127–144). London: Sage.
Heritage, J. (1998). Oh-prefaced responses to inquiry. Language in Society, 27(3), 291–334. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500019990
Heritage, J. (2002). Oh-prefaced responses to assessments: A method of modifying and agreement/disagreement. In C. Ford, B. Fox, & S. Thompson (Eds.), The Language of turn and sequence (pp. 196–224). New York: Oxford University Press.
Heritage, J. (2011). Territories of knowledge, territories of experience: Empathic moments in interaction. In T. Stivers, L. Mondada, & J. Steensig (Eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation (pp. 159–183). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921674.008
Heritage, J., & Sorjonen, M.-L. (1994). Constituting and maintaining activities across sequences: And-prefacing as a feature of question design. Language in Society, 23(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500017656
Heritage, J., & Sorjonen, M-L. (in press). Introduction. In J. Heritage & M.-L. Sorjonen (Eds.), Turn initial particles across languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Jefferson, G. (1981). The abominable ‘ne’? A working paper exploring the phenomenon of post-response pursuit of response. Occasional Paper, 6, Department of Sociology, University of Manchester.
Keevallik, L. (2012). Compromising progressivity: ‘No’-prefacing in Estonian. Pragmatics, 22(1), 119–146. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.22.1.05kee
Kim, H. R. S., & Kuroshima, S. (2013). Turn beginnings in interaction: An introduction. Journal of Pragmatics, 57, 267–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.08.026
Kim, M.-S. (1997). Tayhwakwucho-lo pon ‘ani’-ui kinung (Some functions of ‘ani’ in a conversational structure of Korean). Discourse and Cognition, 4(2), 77–101.
Kim, M. S., & Kim, S. H. (2014). Initiating repair with and without particles: Alternative formats of other-initiation of repair in Korean conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 47(4), 331-352. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2014.958277
Kim, S. H. (2015). Resisting the terms of polar questions through ani (‘no’)-prefacing in Korean conversation. Discourse Processes, 52(4), 311–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2014.954950
Kim, S. H. (2016). When speakers account for their questions: Ani-prefaced accounts in Korean conversation. In J. Robinson (Ed.), Accountability in social interaction (pp. 294–320). New York: Oxford.
Koo, H. J. (2008). Grammaticalization of negation markers in Korean. Discourse and Cognition, 15(3), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.15718/discog.2008.15.3.1
Koshik, I. (2003). Wh-questions used as challenges. Discourse Studies, 5, 51-77. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614456030050010301
Maynard, D. W. (1997). The news delivery sequence: Bad news and good news in conversational interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 30(2), 93–130. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi3002_1
Schegloff, E. (1984). On some questions and ambiguities in conversation. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 28-52). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schegloff, E. (1987). Recycled turn beginnings: A precise repair mechanism in conversation’s turn-taking organization. In G. Button & J. R. E. Lee (Eds.), Talk and social organization (pp. 70–85). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Schegloff, E. A. (1996). Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp. 52–133). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620874.002
Schegloff, E. A. (2007). A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Selting, M. (1996). Prosody as an activity-type distinctive cue in conversation: The case of so-called ‘astonished’ questions in repair initiation. In E. Couper-Kuhlen & M. Selting (Eds.), Prosody in conversation (pp. 231–270). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511597862.008
Sohn, H.-M., (1999). The Korean language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Steensig, J., & Drew, P. (2008). Introduction: Questioning and affiliation/disaffiliation in interaction. Discourse Studies, 10(1), 5–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445607085581
Stivers, T., & Hayashi, M. (2010). Transformative answers: One way to resist a question’s constraints. Language in Society, 39(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404509990637
Wilkinson, S., & Kitzinger, C. (2006). Surprise as an interactional achievement: Reaction tokens in conversation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 69(2), 150–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250606900203
Yang, C. (2002). Ani ‘no’: It doesn’t always mean ‘no’ in Korean. Discourse and Cognition, 9(2), 101–119.
Yoon, K.-E. (2010). Questions and responses in Korean conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(10), 2782–2798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.04.012
Bolden, G. B. (2009). Implementing incipient actions: The discourse marker ‘so’ in English conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(5), 974–998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.10.004
Heritage, J. (1984). A change of state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J. Max Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action (pp. 299–345). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heritage, J. (1988). Explanation as accounts: A conversation analytic perspective. In C. Antaki (Ed.), Analyzing everyday explanation (pp. 127–144). London: Sage.
Heritage, J. (1998). Oh-prefaced responses to inquiry. Language in Society, 27(3), 291–334. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500019990
Heritage, J. (2002). Oh-prefaced responses to assessments: A method of modifying and agreement/disagreement. In C. Ford, B. Fox, & S. Thompson (Eds.), The Language of turn and sequence (pp. 196–224). New York: Oxford University Press.
Heritage, J. (2011). Territories of knowledge, territories of experience: Empathic moments in interaction. In T. Stivers, L. Mondada, & J. Steensig (Eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation (pp. 159–183). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921674.008
Heritage, J., & Sorjonen, M.-L. (1994). Constituting and maintaining activities across sequences: And-prefacing as a feature of question design. Language in Society, 23(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500017656
Heritage, J., & Sorjonen, M-L. (in press). Introduction. In J. Heritage & M.-L. Sorjonen (Eds.), Turn initial particles across languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Jefferson, G. (1981). The abominable ‘ne’? A working paper exploring the phenomenon of post-response pursuit of response. Occasional Paper, 6, Department of Sociology, University of Manchester.
Keevallik, L. (2012). Compromising progressivity: ‘No’-prefacing in Estonian. Pragmatics, 22(1), 119–146. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.22.1.05kee
Kim, H. R. S., & Kuroshima, S. (2013). Turn beginnings in interaction: An introduction. Journal of Pragmatics, 57, 267–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.08.026
Kim, M.-S. (1997). Tayhwakwucho-lo pon ‘ani’-ui kinung (Some functions of ‘ani’ in a conversational structure of Korean). Discourse and Cognition, 4(2), 77–101.
Kim, M. S., & Kim, S. H. (2014). Initiating repair with and without particles: Alternative formats of other-initiation of repair in Korean conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 47(4), 331-352. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2014.958277
Kim, S. H. (2015). Resisting the terms of polar questions through ani (‘no’)-prefacing in Korean conversation. Discourse Processes, 52(4), 311–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2014.954950
Kim, S. H. (2016). When speakers account for their questions: Ani-prefaced accounts in Korean conversation. In J. Robinson (Ed.), Accountability in social interaction (pp. 294–320). New York: Oxford.
Koo, H. J. (2008). Grammaticalization of negation markers in Korean. Discourse and Cognition, 15(3), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.15718/discog.2008.15.3.1
Koshik, I. (2003). Wh-questions used as challenges. Discourse Studies, 5, 51-77. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614456030050010301
Maynard, D. W. (1997). The news delivery sequence: Bad news and good news in conversational interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 30(2), 93–130. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi3002_1
Schegloff, E. (1984). On some questions and ambiguities in conversation. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 28-52). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schegloff, E. (1987). Recycled turn beginnings: A precise repair mechanism in conversation’s turn-taking organization. In G. Button & J. R. E. Lee (Eds.), Talk and social organization (pp. 70–85). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Schegloff, E. A. (1996). Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp. 52–133). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620874.002
Schegloff, E. A. (2007). A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Selting, M. (1996). Prosody as an activity-type distinctive cue in conversation: The case of so-called ‘astonished’ questions in repair initiation. In E. Couper-Kuhlen & M. Selting (Eds.), Prosody in conversation (pp. 231–270). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511597862.008
Sohn, H.-M., (1999). The Korean language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Steensig, J., & Drew, P. (2008). Introduction: Questioning and affiliation/disaffiliation in interaction. Discourse Studies, 10(1), 5–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445607085581
Stivers, T., & Hayashi, M. (2010). Transformative answers: One way to resist a question’s constraints. Language in Society, 39(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404509990637
Wilkinson, S., & Kitzinger, C. (2006). Surprise as an interactional achievement: Reaction tokens in conversation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 69(2), 150–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250606900203
Yang, C. (2002). Ani ‘no’: It doesn’t always mean ‘no’ in Korean. Discourse and Cognition, 9(2), 101–119.
Yoon, K.-E. (2010). Questions and responses in Korean conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(10), 2782–2798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.04.012
Published
2017-11-29
Issue
Section
Articles
How to Cite
Kim, S. H. (2017). Enacting surprise with ani ‘no’-prefaced questions. East Asian Pragmatics, 2(2), 141-162. https://doi.org/10.1558/eap.34617
