Syntactically Non-Integrated Finnish<i>Jos</i>‘If’-Conditional Clauses as Directives

Laury, Ritva

doi:10.1080/0163853x.2012.664758

Cited by 27 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, similar to the extract above, the facilitator's turn frequently includes a particle jos 'if', which marks the turn as a proposal. As shown by Laury (2012), Finnish jos-clauses may be interpreted as either subordinate or independent clauses depending on their syntactic formatting and the performed action. In the latter case they have a falling prosody and appear in a context where some future action is being planned and negotiated --and are oriented to as directives, such as proposals.…”

Section: Presenting the Final Entry Proposal As A Formulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

From entry proposals to a joint statement: Practices of shared text production in multiparty meeting interaction

Nissi

2015

Journal of Pragmatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Presenting the Final Entry Proposal As A Formulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

From entry proposals to a joint statement: Practices of shared text production in multiparty meeting interaction

Nissi

2015

Journal of Pragmatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…After some intermediate talk, by which the participants ascertain that there will be the Eucharist next Sunday (lines 6--9), and yet another silence (line 10), the pastor delivers her proposal anew (lines 11--12). The renewed proposal has the form of an independent jos ''(what) if'' clause, which represents a typical Finnish way of making proposals (Hakulinen et al, 2004(Hakulinen et al, : 1570Laury, 2012;Stevanovic, 2013a), exhibiting no orientation to the same proposal having already been made. While the pastor thus implies that the cantor has not responded to her proposal in an adequate way, she does not treat the cantor's omission in this regard as an indication of any problem with the local legitimacy of her proposal.…”

Section: Dispelling the Doubtmentioning

confidence: 97%

Displays of uncertainty and proximal deontic claims: The case of proposal sequences

Stevanovic

2015

Journal of Pragmatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Joint planning consists of people making proposals for future actions and events, and others accepting or rejecting these proposals. While proposals convey their speakers' judgments of some ideas as feasible, however, in anticipation of and in an attempt to pre-empt the recipients' rejection of their proposals, the speakers may begin to express doubt with the feasibility of their proposals. It is such ''post-proposal displays of uncertainty,'' and their interactional corollaries, that this paper focuses on. Drawing on video-recorded planning meetings as data, and conversation analysis as a method, I describe three ways for the recipients to respond to post-proposal displays of uncertainty: the recipients may (1) overcome, (2) confirm, or (3) dispel their co-participants' doubts. Even if the outcome of the proposal, in each case, is its abandonment, the analysis points out to important differences in how these response options treat the first speakers' ''proximal deontic claims'' --that is, their implicit assertions of rights to control the participants' local interactional agenda. The paper concludes by discussing the idea of proximal deontics with reference to other related notions.

show abstract

“…By doing so, it projects both syntactically and prosodically a turn continuation (cf. Laury, 2012), and in what follows, the feasibility of the presented idea is called into question. This is accomplished by combining the idea with a hypothetical situation, which is usually connected to the first clause by the particle niin 'then' (extract 1, line 2) although the particle may also be omitted (see extract 2, line 2;…”

Section: The Design Of Conditional Constructionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sometimes jos 'if' clauses may also be interpreted as independent depending on their syntactic formatting and the performed action (Laury, 2012).…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this way, the conditional construction establishes a causal relation between two matters: the first clause introduces a condition for the state of affairs disclosed in the latter clause, where they are presented as probable if the condition mentioned in the first clause is actualised. (Laury, 2012;see also VISK § 1134see also VISK § -1135see also VISK § , 1595 Using conversation analytical (e.g. Sidnell and Stivers, 2012) and discourse analytical (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Spelling out consequences: Conditional constructions as a means to resist proposals in organisational planning process

Nissi

2016

Discourse Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Organisational planning processes often materialise as a series of meetings, where the future of the organisation is jointly discussed and negotiated as a part of local decision making sequences. Using conversation and discourse analytical approaches, this article investigates how proposals concerning the future can also be resisted by employing a specific device, a conditional construction (if X, then Y). The data for the study originate from a city organisation, whose customer services are being developed. The results show how the conditional constructions work in two interrelated ways. Firstly, by introducing a problematic hypothetical situation, they outline the undesirable consequences of the proposed idea in real work life. Secondly, by highlighting the experience of the customer, they present the organisation as benefitting from the potential rejection of the idea. The article discusses the implications of the results for the study of proposal and decision making sequences in longitudinal, multisemiotic discursive processes.

show abstract

Syntactically Non-Integrated FinnishJos‘If’-Conditional Clauses as Directives

Cited by 27 publications

References 27 publications

From entry proposals to a joint statement: Practices of shared text production in multiparty meeting interaction

From entry proposals to a joint statement: Practices of shared text production in multiparty meeting interaction

Displays of uncertainty and proximal deontic claims: The case of proposal sequences

Spelling out consequences: Conditional constructions as a means to resist proposals in organisational planning process

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About