Sep 2026· Corpus Pragmatics· Vol 10· 0 citations· 26 references
Abstract
Questions provide speakers with a means of managing turn-taking, demonstrating engagement, and giving the communicative ‘floor’ to their interlocutor, among a range of other functions. When English interrogatives function as direct questions, they are typically identifiable via their subject-verb inversion (regardless of communication mode). When spoken, we can also look for rising intonation and, when written—including when written as part of speech-related transcripts—the illocutionary force indicating device (hereafter, IFID) of the question mark can signal a question. Direct answers become identifiable, in turn, if we assume they immediately follow the relevant interrogative. Historically, speech-related studies of questions and answers have identified them manually or semi-automatically. More recently, a growing body of work has begun to suggest ways of automating these processes. Limited attention has been paid to date to the identification of indirect questions, nonetheless. This paper addresses this gap. We report on the application of an integrated methodology, combining Archer’s (2005) classification of questions and answers with Curry’s (2023) approach to direct and indirect question identification, focusing on comparable British and Irish English spoken corpora. Our paper thus provides insights into the relationship between questions and (expectations of) answers, the affordances of initiation-related IFIDs for pragmatic annotation, and similarities and differences in questioning and answering practices in these two English language varieties.
This paper applies speech act and politeness theory to a corpus-pragmatic analysis of 2,000 English-language prompts drawn from publicly shared ChatGPT conversations, showing a consistent movement toward indirect, implicit, and fragmentary realizations of directive force, accompanied by a decline in politeness marking.
Turn-taking is a fundamental mechanism that governs when interlocutors speak and listen. Although Spoken Dialogue Systems (SDS) exploit a range of linguistic, acoustic, and non-verbal cues, they produce ill-timed responses in unscripted interaction. A central challenge is anticipating Transition Relevance Places (TRPs)...
A methodology for automatically detecting shared lemmatised constructions is put forward and applied to a referential communication corpus where participants aim to identify novel objects for which no established labels exist and shows that automatically detected shared constructions offer a useful level of analysis to...
E. Ghaleb, Marlou Rasenberg, Wim Pouw et al.· 0 citations
Hear2Act is introduced, a unified evaluation protocol for text and spoken assistants with 480 persona-grounded scenarios, hidden user concerns, and objectively verifiable outcomes that show that prosody matters when lexical evidence is insufficient, and that audio-capable LLMs can recover information from speech but do...
Xin-Yi Liu, H. Nayyeri, Dilek Hakkani-Tur et al.· 3 citations· ⚡1
We analyze the use and distribution of Spanish synthetic and periphrastic future-inflected
wh
-interrogatives in a corpus of informal Spanish conversations, within Linell’s (2009) Dialogical Theory of
Language. Our corpus analysis reveals that future-inflected interrogatives realize three types of discourse func...
Malte Rosemeyer, María Sol Sansiñena· Pragmatics: Quarterly Public...· 0 citations