In traditional grammar books question types as well as spoken (or written) interaction are explained very theoretically, far from being practically orientated and therefore often not applicable to interaction in practice. While in grammar books sentence structure is always precisely ordered, in naturally occurring spoken language we often deal with syntactically incomplete utterances which are not exactly arranged as described in grammar books Furthermore, the most important difference between theory and real life is that grammar books focus on form is described rather than function. (see Weisser, 2002:3). From these differences several problems arise which I will examine in this paper.
In the first section I will give a general definition of the term question as well as a classification of question types according to Quirk et al. (1985). In the second part I will analyse each question type by working out the differences between the theory of Quirk et al. (1985) and Tsui (1992). On the one hand, I will always compare the theory of Quirk et al. with the contrastive, more practically orientated theory of Tsui. On the other hand, I will substantiate Tsui’s theory with examples from the trainline corpus in order to demonstrate that her analysis is correct. Further, I will analyse to which extent the trainline examples are applicable to the theories.
Table of Contents
- Introduction
- Questions: A definition and classification
- Yes/No Questions
- Wh-Questions
- Alternative Questions
- Exclamatory Questions
- Question and Illocutionary Act
- Conclusion
Objectives and Key Themes
This paper aims to examine the discrepancies between theoretical definitions of question types in traditional grammar and their practical application in naturally occurring spoken language. It analyzes the limitations of focusing solely on form over function in linguistic analysis.
- Defining and classifying question types.
- Comparing theoretical models (Quirk et al. and Tsui) of question types.
- Analyzing the function of different question types in spoken discourse.
- Illustrating the practical application of theoretical models with real-world examples.
- Highlighting the importance of considering both form and function in linguistic analysis.
Chapter Summaries
Introduction: This introductory chapter sets the stage for the paper by highlighting the disconnect between theoretical grammatical descriptions of questions and their actual use in everyday communication. It introduces the core problem: traditional grammar often overlooks the functional aspect of questions in favor of formal structure, leading to an inadequate understanding of naturally occurring speech. The author outlines the methodology, stating an intention to compare the theoretical framework of Quirk et al. (1985) with the more practical approach of Tsui (1992), using examples from the trainline corpus for empirical grounding.
Questions: A definition and classification: This chapter delves into the definitions of "question" offered by Quirk et al. (1985) and Tsui (1992), highlighting the contrasting perspectives. Quirk et al. define questions semantically as information-seeking utterances, while Tsui expands on this by emphasizing the interrogative form and the expectation of a response. The chapter then presents Quirk et al.'s three-part classification of questions – Yes/No, Wh-, and Alternative questions – which serves as a foundation for the subsequent analysis, acknowledging that Tsui's approach focuses more on the function of these question types.
Yes/No Questions: This chapter provides a detailed analysis of Yes/No questions, building upon the classification provided by Quirk et al. It explores the characteristics of these questions, including their typical formation using operators and intonation patterns (rising intonation being the norm, but falling intonation also possible). The chapter meticulously examines the subtypes of Yes/No questions proposed by Quirk et al., categorizing them based on their orientation (positive, negative, neutral) and their conduciveness (whether they bias the response towards yes or no). The discussion highlights the role of assertive and non-assertive forms in shaping the orientation and implications of Yes/No questions, illustrating with numerous examples. The significance of this categorization lies in understanding the subtle communicative intentions embedded within seemingly simple question forms.
Keywords
Question types, pragmatics, spoken language, discourse analysis, Quirk et al., Tsui, Yes/No questions, Wh-questions, Alternative questions, function, form, intonation, conduciveness, orientation, trainline corpus.
Frequently Asked Questions: A Comprehensive Language Preview
What is the main topic of this language preview?
This preview examines the discrepancies between theoretical definitions of question types in traditional grammar and their practical application in naturally occurring spoken language. It focuses on the limitations of prioritizing form over function in linguistic analysis.
What are the key themes explored in this preview?
Key themes include defining and classifying question types, comparing theoretical models of question types (Quirk et al. and Tsui), analyzing the function of different question types in spoken discourse, illustrating theoretical models with real-world examples, and highlighting the importance of considering both form and function in linguistic analysis.
Which theoretical models are compared?
The preview compares the theoretical framework of Quirk et al. (1985) with the more practical approach of Tsui (1992).
How are the theoretical models applied?
The models are applied by analyzing examples from the trainline corpus to provide empirical grounding for the comparison and illustrate the practical application of the theories.
What types of questions are discussed?
The preview discusses Yes/No questions, Wh-questions, and Alternative questions, as well as exclamatory questions. It delves into the subtypes of Yes/No questions based on orientation (positive, negative, neutral) and conduciveness (bias towards yes or no).
What is the significance of the comparison between Quirk et al. and Tsui?
The comparison highlights the contrasting perspectives on defining "question": Quirk et al. focus on the semantic aspect (information-seeking), while Tsui emphasizes both interrogative form and the expectation of a response. This comparison reveals the limitations of solely relying on formal structure in understanding the function of questions in spoken language.
What is the role of intonation in the analysis?
The preview examines the role of intonation, particularly rising and falling intonation, in Yes/No questions, demonstrating how intonation contributes to the meaning and interpretation of the utterance.
What is the role of the Trainline Corpus in this study?
The Trainline corpus provides real-world examples of spoken language used to illustrate and support the theoretical analyses presented in the preview. It serves as empirical evidence for the claims made.
What are the key takeaways of this preview?
The key takeaway is the importance of considering both form and function when analyzing questions in natural language. A purely formal approach is insufficient for understanding the nuances of communication in spoken discourse. The preview emphasizes the need for a more pragmatic approach to linguistic analysis.
What are the keywords associated with this preview?
Keywords include: Question types, pragmatics, spoken language, discourse analysis, Quirk et al., Tsui, Yes/No questions, Wh-questions, Alternative questions, function, form, intonation, conduciveness, orientation, trainline corpus.
- Citar trabajo
- Corinna Roth (Autor), 2007, Question Types and Functions, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/82248
