Comparing Single and Double Sayings of the German Response Token ja and the Role of Prosody: A Conversation Analytic Perspective

In this article, we argue that although single ja (yes) is typically analyzed as an acknowledgment token, confirmation marker, or continuer, a doubled ja, either produced as ^jaja. or ja^ja., cannot be considered a more intense version of the same action. Moreover, the two forms ^jaja. and ja^ja. systematically accomplish separate interactional goals. Both forms are produced when the prior speaker utters something that is obvious and/or known by the jaja speaker. However, by uttering ^jaja. (with pitch peak on the first syllable), the speaker merely indicates that the prior utterance contains already known information and that therefore the current action should be stopped. In contrast, with a ja^ja. (with pitch peak on the second syllable), its speaker treats the action/content of the previous speaker's utterance as either unwarranted or self-evident and takes issue with it. With a ^jaja., its speaker indicates “I already got it, so stop,” whereas with a ja^ja., its speaker indicates “hold on, you didn't get it.” In this article, we corroborate the work of others who have argued against grouping response tokens into one single category. Moreover, in this article, we contribute to the growing body of work on grammar and interaction by demonstrating that the linguistic shape (prosody) of an utterance is intertwined with the interactional contingencies of a given situation.

[1]  E. Couper-Kuhlen Coherent voicing : On prosody in conversational reported speech , 1998 .

[2]  Margret Selting,et al.  Syntax and lexis in conversation : studies on the use of linguistic resources in talk-in-interaction , 2005 .

[3]  Herbert S. Gross,et al.  Therapeutic Discourse: Psychotherapy as Conversation , 1978 .

[4]  E. Schegloff Sequencing in Conversational Openings , 1968 .

[5]  Author The Right connections : Acknowledging epistemic progression in talk , 2007 .

[6]  Rezension zu: Andrea Golato, Compliments and Compliment Responses. Grammatical Structure and Sequential Organization. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins 2005 , 2005 .

[7]  Robert Hopper,et al.  Emergent Goals at a Relational Turning Point: The Case of Gordon and Denise , 1990 .

[8]  E. Schegloff,et al.  Reflections on Studying Prosody in Talk-in-Interaction , 1998, Language and speech.

[9]  E. Schegloff Reflections on Quantification in the Study of Conversation , 1993 .

[10]  Robert Hopper,et al.  Back Channels Revisited: Acknowledgment Tokens and Speakership Incipiency , 1993 .

[11]  Gail Jefferson,et al.  Caveat Speaker: Preliminary Notes on Recipient Topic-Shift Implicature , 1993 .

[12]  John H Eritage,et al.  Oh-prefaced responses to inquiry , 1998, Language in Society.

[13]  M. Selting Prosodie im Gespräch : Aspekte einer interaktionalen Phonologie der Konversation , 1995 .

[14]  Andrea Golato,et al.  Two contours, two meanings: the intonation of jaja in German phone conversations , 2006 .

[15]  J. M. Atkinson Structures of Social Action: Contents , 1985 .

[16]  Rod Gardner,et al.  Between Speaking and Listening: The Vocalisation of Understandings1 , 1998 .

[17]  Martin Durrell Using German: A Guide to Contemporary Usage , 1992 .

[18]  Andrea Golato,et al.  Compliments and Compliment Responses: Grammatical structure and sequential organization , 2005 .

[19]  J. Atkinson,et al.  A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement , 1985 .

[20]  Gail Jefferson,et al.  Notes on a systematic deployment of the acknowledgement tokens “Yeah”; and “Mm Hm”; , 1984 .

[21]  Robert Hopper,et al.  Some Uses of Yeah , 1993 .

[22]  Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen,et al.  Prosody in conversation : interactional studies , 1996 .

[23]  Andrea Golato German compliment responses , 2002 .

[24]  Emma Betz,et al.  German ach and achso in repair uptake: Resources to sustain or remove epistemic asymmetry , 2008 .

[25]  Ian Hutchby,et al.  `Oh', Irony and Sequential Ambiguity in Arguments , 2001 .

[26]  Jack Whalen,et al.  Sociology as a Natural Observational Science@@@Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. , 1987 .

[27]  Marja-Leena Sorjonen,et al.  Responding in Conversation: A Study of Response Particles in Finnish , 2001 .

[28]  Geoffrey Raymond,et al.  The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Talk-in-Interaction , 2005 .

[29]  M. Sorjonen Recipient activities: the particle "no" as a go-ahead response in Finnish conversations , 2002 .

[30]  Frank Ernst Müller,et al.  Prosody in conversation: Affiliating and disaffiliating with continuers: prosodic aspects of recipiency , 1996 .

[31]  E. Couper-Kuhlen English speech rhythm , 1993 .

[32]  E. Schegloff Discourse as an interactional achievement : Some uses of "Uh huh" and other things that come between sentences , 1982 .

[33]  Rod Gardner,et al.  The Conversation Object Mm: A Weak and Variable Acknowledging Token , 1997 .

[34]  G. Jefferson The abominable ne? : an exploration of post-response pursuit of response , 1981 .

[35]  Martina Möllering,et al.  Teaching German modal particles: A corpus-based approach , 2001 .

[36]  Roderick James Gardner,et al.  On some uses of the conversational token Mm , 1995 .

[37]  Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen,et al.  Sound patterns in interaction : cross-linguistic studies from conversation , 2004 .

[38]  Robert Hopper,et al.  Acknowledgment tokens in series , 1993 .

[39]  E. Schegloff Repair After Next Turn: The Last Structurally Provided Defense of Intersubjectivity in Conversation , 1992, American Journal of Sociology.

[40]  Rod Gardner,et al.  When Listeners Talk: Response Tokens and Listener Stance , 2001 .

[41]  T. Stivers,et al.  Modified Repeats: One Method for Asserting Primary Rights From Second Position , 2005 .

[42]  Friederike Kern,et al.  Prosody as a resource in children's game explanations: Some aspects of turn construction and recipiency , 2007 .

[43]  Jakob Steensig,et al.  Notes on disaligning ‘yes but’ initiated utterances in Danish and German conversations: Two construction types for dispreferred responses , 2005 .

[44]  Y. Maschler The Role of Discourse Markers in the Construction of Multivocality in Israeli Hebrew Talk in Interaction , 2002 .

[45]  Harvey Sacks,et al.  Lectures on Conversation , 1995 .

[46]  Geoffrey Raymond The epistemics of social relations: Owning grandchildren , 2006, Language in Society.

[47]  T. Stivers,et al.  “No no no” and Other Types of Multiple Sayings in Social Interaction , 2004 .

[48]  Armin Burkhardt,et al.  Gesprächswörter. Ihre lexikologische Bestimmung und lexikographische Beschreibung , 1982 .

[49]  Tom Barney English Speech Rhythm: Form and Function in Everyday Verbal Interaction , 1994 .

[50]  Emma Betz,et al.  Remembering Relevant Information and Withholding Relevant Next Actions: The German Token achja , 2008 .

[51]  Don H. Zimmerman,et al.  Acknowledgment Tokens and Speakership Incipiency Revisited , 1993 .