Function of rising tag (question)s

<b>Forum for the discussion of Applied Linguistics </b>

Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2

fluffyhamster
Posts: 3031
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again

Post by fluffyhamster » Tue Mar 08, 2005 8:31 am

Lorikeet wrote:By the way, I think this is also something I have heard mentioned as a difference between men's and women's usage in English, in that women (as far as I can recall) seem to use them more than men. Is that something you have noted?
Duncan Powrie wrote:Lorikeet, I haven't thought much about gender re. tags, but then, there isn't much in the literature to prompt such speculation, is there(?)! (=I don't think so, and I am sure you will agree with me; falling intonation there, despite the "intensity", although I suppose I could also use a steep rise, but I am UNSURE AS TO WHAT THE FUNCTION WOULD BE IF I DID SO). Where did you get the notion regarding gender differences?
Thought you guys would find this interesting (just spotted it on The Language Log):

http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/language ... 00873.html

User avatar
Lorikeet
Posts: 1374
Joined: Sun May 18, 2003 4:14 am
Location: San Francisco, California
Contact:

Post by Lorikeet » Tue Mar 08, 2005 4:03 pm

Thanks Fluffy. It was very interesting. (And I no longer have to feel guilty explaining tag questions to my male students when it comes up. :wink: )

fluffyhamster
Posts: 3031
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again

Post by fluffyhamster » Tue Oct 18, 2005 6:26 am

I spotted the following in a textbook used in junior high schools here in Japan (the dialogue concerns Ototake Hirotada, who was born without any arms or legs, and wrote the bestselling Nobody's Perfect):
A: Have you ever read this book?
B: No. Who is that young man?
A: Ototake Hirotada. But his friends call him Oto. I was really impressed by his book.
B: What impressed you the most?
A: The writer himself. For example, he played basketball in his junior high school days.
B: Really? But he didn't take part in the games, did he?
A: Yes, he did. Everyone was surprised at his good dribbling.
The question tag in the penultimate sentence there is spoken with a rising intonation.

Most contexts aren't as deliberately contrived: it's interesting to ponder the opinion we might, upon a bit of reflection, form of speaker B (or, more precisely, the textbook writers). At best/most neutrally, I suppose we might describe B as being "merely" "surprised".

So, despite (arguably, in fact because of) the "good", "clear" context above, we have here an "unthinking" use of a tag, and many textbooks and exercises have much less complex/"rich" contexts or examples, which makes it almost inevitable that students the world over must be unsure if not totally confused about the function and potential force of tags, and using at least some (types of) tags inappropriately (unthinkingly, almost uncaringly), if and when they do "dare" to try using them. That's kind of what I've been trying to say throughout this thread, I guess.

Incidentally, the Japan teachers of English that I've seen teaching the above dialogue have, after going through it, begun explaining to students about "negative questions" and the (form of the) answer that the question presupposes in English (versus especially in Japanese). Would you agree though that this is in fact a clear example of a negative question (the term 'negative question' seems a bit too general for a start)? (Two reasons why I ask are a) I'm interested in the typology of questions generally and want to widen the scope of any subsequent discussion with an eye to arriving at better definitions of question types and b) how to answer negative questions - if you'll excuse the a priori use of a rather hazy term there - is another area beside tags that is by no means clear-cut).
Last edited by fluffyhamster on Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:07 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Lorikeet
Posts: 1374
Joined: Sun May 18, 2003 4:14 am
Location: San Francisco, California
Contact:

Post by Lorikeet » Tue Oct 18, 2005 4:05 pm

fluffyhamster wrote:
B: Really? But he didn't take part in the games, did he?
A: Yes, he did. Everyone was surprised at his good dribbling.

Incidentally, the Japan teachers of English that I've seen teaching the above dialogue have, after going through it, begun explaining to students about "negative questions" and the (form of the) answer that the question presupposes in English (versus especially in Japanese). Would you agree though that this is in fact a clear example of a negative question (the term 'negative question' seems a bit too general for a start)?
I'm confused. I thought the "problem" with negative questions was that a question like, "Aren't you coming tomorrow?" (assuming you were not) should generally be answered, "No, I'm not." as opposed to "*Yes, I'm not" I thought speakers of other languages got confused because they generally respond to the truth of the statement.

In the tag question, "He didn't play, did he?" Where the answer is the unexpected, "Yes, he did" what would the normal Japanese response be?

Signed, curious ;)

fluffyhamster
Posts: 3031
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again

Post by fluffyhamster » Wed Oct 19, 2005 2:35 am

The problem to me seems to be that the question in the textbook is not a negative question par excellence and as we know and love them, but rather a (negative) statement followed by a tag.*

This is in contrast to e.g. 'Didn't he take part in the games?', which clearly has a quite different preceding discourse and suppositional basis (it is more a reaction than surprise, and certainly not fearful surprise - see footnote below).

So, the answer supplied in the textbook makes sense but is of no help in illuminating what the answers should be (or rather could or might be) in response to what we might exclusively call and categorize, for the sake of argument, 'negative questions'.

The basic wisdom is that in Japanese you respond to the truth of the "statement" ( :wink: ), whereas in English you commence by mirroring the negative form. I recall coming up with some examples in Japanese that perhaps contradicted this wisdom regarding Japanese at least, but unfortunately I don't have those notes (if I indeed actually made any!) and don't have time right now to think up any (more?).

What I can say though (as I've said elsewhere - do a search for 'Armadeira' :lol: ) is that the "easy", "agreeable" 'No' in English should not be a problem for even Japanese learners; the problem rather is surely more in contradicting the supposition that one is not v(-ing) - how do we proceed to commence saying that? With a Yes or a No? With what kind or prosody?

One could exhaustedly reach the easy but potentially confused/confusing "conclusion" (from thinking about these kind of texts, running through (counter)examples etc) that a bland 'Yes I am' would be just the ticket for answering not (only) the text's kind of tags but (also) (certain types of) negative questions. Me, I think that could well be the simplest solution, but it just seems more natural to contradict the types of "mistaken" speaker suppositions that I'm envisaging here with a nice juicy 'No...' (underline that with a squiggly line), and then proceed to stress the predicate some too. But as I say, I for one am maybe thinking too much (or not well enough) here (might have to accept the received wisdom soon for the purposes of teaching in the meantime etc).

Finally, an example from Tsui where B confirms A's supposition with the use of a 'Yes':
A: It's not too late to apply now is it?
B: Yeah, I think they're all full up.
(Just some extra food for thought there).

* The tag perhaps could be viewed as a mini/ellipted Y/N question, but such an analysis would deal more in mere form (of possible answers) rather than reflect any underlying supposition in the "form" of the "question", and therefore fail to take account of the fact that it is the previous statement that is being questioned (the starting point is not a neutral non-supposition (!)), all of which obviously results in the "fear" of B being confirmed by B (i.e. confirmation is the usual analysis); that is not to say that supposition can't be expressed by Y/N questions through subtler prosody, narrowing of the eyes, body language etc (in fact, this is all seemingly neglected in the analysis of questions generally), but all this is not our immediate concern here (where we are dealing with a different form with a function differing by unclear degrees. The task I'm setting myself is to define those functional differences to my own satisfaction).
Last edited by fluffyhamster on Thu Oct 20, 2005 3:38 am, edited 3 times in total.

JuanTwoThree
Posts: 947
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 11:30 am
Location: Spain

Post by JuanTwoThree » Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:30 am

Perhaps one can get some idea of the potential for confusion with things like:

Nobody is sitting in that seat, are they?

Yes, nobody is/No, nobody is/Yes, somebody is/No, somebody is.

Spanish students occasionally get confused between Y/N and T/F when the question or assertion is negative:

Is it Friday? No.

Isn't it Friday? No.

It's Friday. F

It isn't Friday. (long pause) T

It's Wednesday. T

It isn't Wednesday. (another long pause) F

But who really goes round saying "Am I right in saying that today isn't Friday?" ?

fluffyhamster
Posts: 3031
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again

Post by fluffyhamster » Thu Oct 20, 2005 3:32 am

Thanks for the post, JTT (and Lori before that!).

I was editing mine just now to help make it a bit clearer, but unfortunately I don't have time to think about and respond to yours right now. I hope to be back soon, though! :wink:

fluffyhamster
Posts: 3031
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again

Post by fluffyhamster » Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:45 am

JTT wrote:Nobody is sitting in that seat, are they?

Yes, nobody is/No, nobody is/Yes, somebody is/No, somebody is.
I'd plump for either 'No (you are right, nobody is)', or 'Yes(?)/Um/Oh/Er/~No~=~Actually~, somebody IS (and they'll be back soon)'. (The ~ ~ marks are meant to represent a kind of perturbed tone of voice).

In the first example, the fact that a confirmation is in order allows and indeed positively invites ellipsis of everything that could follow the bare 'no' answer, but that in the second, where a contradiction will be involved, the subsequent expansion seems much more called for (almost as an explanation and possibly leading into an apology of sorts); the choice of what precedes all that is a lot more open and therefore less relevant than the first example's use of 'No'.

For consistency's sake, I'd teach students to just reply 'No...' (and/or e.g. 'Actually/actually') to examples like the second, because this would show a clear use of a marked and functional prosody (in contrast to the first example's less to-be-dwelt-upon 'No') and/or relexicalization, either of which would be a logical extension of the hard-won knowledge the students will have gained by learning or observing that with examples of the above first type, English speakers are agreeing with the "negative form", or rather, not explicitly confirming the truth of the asker's supposition. (The slightly tricky phrasing of my last few words there - 'not explicitly confirming the truth of the asker's supposition' - brings us right back into and helps "explain" the range of possible answers to the second example).

We've been discussing answers to "negative questions" (even though I've suggested that there is at least a formal difference between them and tags), so admittedly there must be a fair amount of fuzzy overlap in suppositional, pragmatic, semantic, whatever-I'm hand-waving-here terms (please excuse the fudging, but I'll still hesitate to say 'functional' quite just yet, especially when you consider that certain types of e.g. tag themselves lead into other functions e.g. 'You aren't going past the bank, are you?' 'Yes, why?' 'Can you pay this in for me?' 'OK!' - "Hopeful preliminary to request" - Requesting/Asking sb to do you a "favour" etc. This type of tag would thus be functionally distinct from not only other types of "hopeful" tags - some of them might be better characterized as e.g. "Expressing dismay" - but also from e.g. 'Aren't you going past the bank?'; and functionally less distinct from e.g. 'Are you going past the bank?...').

fluffyhamster
Posts: 3031
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again

Post by fluffyhamster » Fri Oct 21, 2005 2:04 am

I had a quick peek in Murphy's English Grammar in Use (3rd Edition) again yesterday, and saw the following example:

Don't you want to go to the party? Yes. (=Yes, I want to go)/No. (=No, I don't want to go).

Whilst this is subtly different from e.g. 'Aren't you going (to the party)?' - 'Yeah, I am (prosody of 'Yes' is what? Also, that of 'am'?)/Yeah, I am (but).../No, I AM, (but) it's just...', I'm now thinking that it's probably easiest to just teach answers to negative questions in the Murphy kind of way (i.e. I'll shelve my "contradictory/contradicting" 'No'); that being said, there is still scant mention of the prosodic features of all those 'Yes's', which could probably do with a little more attention at some point.

I might use the tags and more besides from e.g. Murphy as a "sample" of the sort of examples (contexts?) that are often taught; it would make a good starting point for sketching out a rough typology of hopefully relevant, suitable and appropriate (tag) questions that will hopefully be "reasonably exhaustive" to boot.

fluffyhamster
Posts: 3031
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again

Post by fluffyhamster » Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:39 pm

Oh..my...GOD. The day I'd hoped would never arrived finally did: 'It's a beautiful day, ^isn't it?^' actually got presented and taught by the Japanese teacher of English in a class that I team taught today (first day back at this particular school, so zero prep/discussion time was available). This teacher had obviously never heard of 'invitation tags' (not questions as such) - re. Lewis's recommendations.

I was actually a bit surprised that the JTE chose to focus on tags, because the class was only JHS second grade, and the lone example in the book seemed much less illuminating than the one detailed several posts above. Here, Santa (apparently) is replying to a girl who wrote to him:
Dear Virginia,
Thank you for your letter.
Of course, nobody sees Santa Claus. There are lots of important things in the world. But can we see all of them? No, we can't. We can't see love, ^can we?^
Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus. He brings children joy and love every year. And they feel happy.
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
If you're finding it hard to follow, you're not the only one (I later learnt that the 'important things' were starving kids in Africa, and the war in Iraq, courtesy of a tasteful Sunshine poster-size flashcard); and does the use of the rising tag there seem dodgy to you, given all the foregoing rhetoric?

Anyway, an example on the grammar practice (i.e. form manipulation) sheet (all rising intonation, wouldn't you know) that the teacher/school had prepared caught my eye: 'She is your sister, _____ ____? (gapfill=^isn't she?^).

That got me thinking...see if you agree with the sort of function(s) I'm envisaging for the main varieties/"alternatives" of forms:

(Is) she('s) your sister? [Basic meat-and-potatoes Y/N Q with standard Y/N-or-even-additional-information-seeking function - asker doesn't know much if anything and is therefore assuming little (so the received wisdom goes, anyway), to which we might compare the surprised/incredulous etc statement (intonation variable, could rise-fall, even?): She's your SISter? (function: Good job I didn't kiss her! etc)]. (Negatives: She's not/Isn't she your sister? - I thought she was...damn I wish I'd snogged her, then!).

She's your sister, v isn't she v - Little doubt here; inferring etc. (vs. She's not your sister, is she).

She's your sister, ^isn't she?^ - How can you possibly treat her like that! (Or some other context of a kind that's murkier than most textbooks ever show or admit). (vs. She's not your sister, ^is she?^ - So ugly!).


Last item: 'Come back at once, ______ ____?' I had it pegged as 'won't you(?)/OK?', but apparently the required answer should've been 'will you?'. Hard to tell if the JTE sees much difference between them; personally, I hate 'will you' tags (think they are far too pushy, but it depends on who's using them - Make me cuppa will ya darlin'! (Little or no rise there)).

fluffyhamster
Posts: 3031
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again

Post by fluffyhamster » Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:11 am


fluffyhamster
Posts: 3031
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again

Post by fluffyhamster » Tue Feb 05, 2008 1:06 pm

I guess that this excerpt from the CGEL is as good a take on tags as one is likely to find:
http://forums.eslcafe.com/job/viewtopic ... 686#636686

Post Reply