Advertisement

Russian Linguistics

, Volume 43, Issue 2, pp 127–142 | Cite as

How Russians pre-request and seek assistance: a study of interaction in two communities of practice

  • Ekaterina RudnevaEmail author
Article

Abstract

Before asking another person to do something, it is common to check whether they are available by asking preliminary questions, or pre-request. Pre-requesting is considered a politeness strategy used to mitigate face threat or avoid committing a request proper at all. This article focuses on analyzing Russian pre-request sequences and demonstrates how they are organized and expanded in particular communities of practice. The examples have been taken from a corpus of naturally-occurring data with recordings made of two communities of practice, a workplace and an extended family. In the workplace a common respond to a pre-request is teasing, which can also lead to a sequence expansion. In the second community of practice, family, it is common for some members to avoid a request proper through initiating a series of pre-requests and hints.

Предварение просьбы и обращение за помощью на русском языке: исследование взаимодействия в двух группах

Аннотация

Вместо того чтобы сразу обратиться с просьбой, люди часто задают вопросы с целью уточнить возможность выполнения действия, формулируя так называемые предварительные просьбы. Предварение просьбы вопросами и намеками рассматривается как стратегия вежливости, позволяющая смягчить опасный речевой акт или избежать его. В статье анализируются русскоязычные диалоги, содержащие предварительные просьбы (pre-requests), и показывается, как последовательности с ними могут быть устроены в конкретных сообществах. Примеры взяты из корпуса диалогов, записанных в двух сплоченных группах—в рабочем коллективе и в расширенной семье исследователя. В рабочем коллективе ответом на предварение просьбы становится подтрунивание, которое может привести к расширению последовательности. Внутри описанной семьи последовательности с вопросами и намеками могут быть достаточно продолжительными: участник делает все возможное, чтобы избежать просьбы как таковой.

Notes

References

  1. Baranova, J., & Dingemanse, M. (2016). Reasons for requests. Discourse Studies, 18(6), 641–675.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445616667154. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blum-Kulka, S., & Olshtain, E. (1984). Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns (CCSARP). Applied Linguistics, 5(3), 196–213. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bolden, G. (2017). Requests for here-and-now actions in Russian conversation. In M.-L. Sorjonen, L. Raevaara, & E. Couper-Kuhlen (Eds.), Imperative turns at talk. The design of directives in action (Studies in Language and Social Interaction, 30, pp. 175–211). Amsterdam. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Van der Bom, I., & Mills, S. (2015). A discursive approach to the analysis of politeness data. Journal of Politeness Research, 11(2), 179–206.  https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2015-0008. Google Scholar
  5. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: some universals in language usage. Cambridge. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clark, J. (2011). “No, like proper north”: Re-drawing boundaries in an emergent community of practice. In Linguistic Politeness Research Group (Ed.), Discursive approaches to politeness (Mouton Series in Pragmatics, 8, pp. 109–132). Berlin, Boston. Google Scholar
  7. Curl, T. S., & Drew, P. (2008). Contingency and action: A comparison of two forms of requesting. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41(2), 129–153.  https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810802028613. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Drew, P., & Couper-Kuhlen, E. (Eds.) (2014). Requesting in social interaction (Studies in Language and Social Interaction, 26). Amsterdam, Philadelphia. Google Scholar
  9. Duranti, A. (1997). Linguistic anthropology. Cambridge. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eckert, P., & McConnell-Ginet, S. (1992). Communities of practice: Where language, gender, and power all live. In K. Hall, M. Bucholtz, & B. Moonwomon (Eds.), Locating power. Proceedings of the Second Berkeley Women and Language Conference (pp. 89–99). Berkeley. Google Scholar
  11. Eelen, G. (2001). A critique of politeness theories. Manchester. Google Scholar
  12. Fukushima, S. (2003). Requests and culture. Politeness in British English and Japanese. Berlin. Google Scholar
  13. Geyer, N. (2008). Discourse and politeness. Ambivalent cace in Japanese. London. Google Scholar
  14. Grainger, K. (2011). ‘First order’ and ‘second order’ politeness: Institutional and intercultural contexts. In Linguistic Politeness Research Group (Ed.), Discursive approaches to politeness (Mouton Series in Pragmatics, 8, pp. 167–188). Berlin, Boston. Google Scholar
  15. Haugh, M. (2007). The discursive challenge to politeness research: An interactional alternative. Journal of Politeness Research, 3(2), 295–317.  https://doi.org/10.1515/PR.2007.013. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Haugh, M. (2017a). Prompting offers of assistance in interaction. Pragmatics and Society, 8(2), 183–207. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Haugh, M. (2017b). Teasing. In S. Attardo (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of language and humor (pp. 204–218). New York, London. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Haugh, M., & Watanabe, Y. (2017). (Im)politeness theory. In B. Vine (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of language in the workplace (pp. 65–76). New York, London. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Holmes, J. (2006). Gendered talk at work (Language and Social Change, 2). Oxford. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hymes, D. (1974). Foundations in sociolinguistics. An ethnographic approach. Philadelphia. Google Scholar
  21. Kádár, D., & Haugh, M. (2013). Understanding politeness. Cambridge. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kecskes, I. (2014). Intercultural pragmatics. Oxford. Google Scholar
  23. Kendrick, K. H., & Drew, P. (2014). The putative preference for offers over requests. In P. Drew & E. Couper-Kuhlen (Eds.), Requesting in social interaction (Studies in Language and Social Interaction, 26, pp. 87–113). Amsterdam, Philadelphia. Google Scholar
  24. Lakoff, R. T. (1973). The logic of politeness: Or minding your P’s and Q’s. In C. Corum, T. Cedric Smith-Stark, & A. Weiser (Eds.), Papers from the Ninth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, April 13–15 (pp. 292–305). Chicago. Google Scholar
  25. Langlotz, A. (2010). Social cognition. In M. A. Locher & S. L. Graham (Eds.), Interpersonal pragmatics (Handbooks of Pragmatics, 6, pp. 167–202). Berlin, New York. Google Scholar
  26. Langlotz, A., & Locher, M. A. (2013). The role of emotions in relational work. In M. Haugh, D. Z. Kádár, & S. Mills (Eds.), Interpersonal pragmatics [Special issue]. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 87–107. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Larina, T. V. (2009). Kategorija vežlivosti i stil’ kommunikacii. Sopostavlenie anglijskix i russkix lingvokul’turnyx tradicii. Moskva. Google Scholar
  28. Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London, New York. Google Scholar
  29. Leech, G. (2007). Politeness: Is there an East-West divide? Journal of Politeness Research, 3(2), 167–206.  https://doi.org/10.1515/PR.2007.009. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Leech, G. (2014). The pragmatics of politeness. Oxford. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Linguistic Politeness Research Group (Ed.) (2011). Discursive approaches to politeness (Mouton Series in Pragmatics, 8). Berlin, Boston. Google Scholar
  33. Lindström, A. (2005). Language as social action. A study of how senior citizens request assistance with practical tasks in the Swedish home help service. In A. Hakulinen & M. Selting (Eds.), Syntax and lexis in conversation. Studies on the use of linguistic resources in tak-in-interaction (Studies in Discourse and Grammar, 17, pp. 209–230). Amsterdam, Philadelphia. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Locher, M. A. (2013). Relational work and interpersonal pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 138–151. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Locher, M. A. (2015). Interpersonal pragmatics and its link to (im)politeness research. Journal of Pragmatics, 86, 5–10. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Locher, M. A., & Watts, R. J. (2005). Politeness theory and relational work. Journal of Politeness Research, 1(1), 9–33. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mills, S. (2003). Gender and politeness. Cambridge. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ogiermann, E. (2009a). On apologising in negative and positive politeness cultures (Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 191). Amsterdam, Philadelphia. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ogiermann, E. (2009b). Politeness and in-directness across cultures: A comparison of English, German, Polish and Russian requests. Journal of Politeness Research, 5(2), 189–216.  https://doi.org/10.1515/JPLR.2009.011. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ogiermann, E. (2015). Object requests: Rights and obligations surrounding object possession and object transfer. Journal of Pragmatics, 82, 1–4. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rathmayr, R. (1996). Pragmatik der Entschuldigungen. Vergleichende Untersuchung am Beispiel der russischen Sprache und Kultur. Köln. Google Scholar
  42. Rossi, G. (2015a). The request system in Italian interaction (Ph.D. dissertation, Radboud University Nijmegen). Nijmegen. Google Scholar
  43. Rossi, G. (2015b). Responding to pre-requests: The organization of hai x ‘do you have x’ sequences in Italian. Journal of Pragmatics, 82, 5–22.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.008. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rudneva, E. (2010). Cross-cultural study of politeness: Lexical and grammatical means of requesting and differences in their usage (Master’s thesis). St. Petersburg. Google Scholar
  45. Sacks, H., Schegloff, E., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organisation of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Salgado, E. F. (2011). The pragmatics of requests and apologies: Developmental patterns of Mexican students. (Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 212). Amsterdam, Philadelphia. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schegloff, E. A. (1980). Preliminaries to preliminaries: “Can I Ask You a Question?”. Sociological Inquiry, 50(3–4), 104–152.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1980.tb00018.x. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Pre-expansion. In Schegloff, E. A. (Ed.), Sequence organization in interaction. A primer in conversation analysis (pp. 28–57). Cambridge. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schegloff, E. A., & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, 8(4), 289–327. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Spencer-Oatey, H. (2005). Rapport management theory and culture. Intercultural Pragmatics, 2(3), 335–346. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Watts, R. J. (2003). Politeness. Cambridge. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of AnthropologyEuropean University at St. PetersburgSt. PetersburgRussia
  2. 2.Antropological LinguisticsInstitute for Linguistic Studies, Russian Academy of ScienceMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations