Az Eszterházy Károly Tanárképző Főiskola Tudományos Közleményei. 2004. Vol. 4. Eger Journal of English Studies. (Acta Academiae Paedagogicae Agriensis : Nova series ; Tom. 30)

ÁGNES DELI Interpersonality and Textuality in Discourse

Interpersonality and Textuality in Discourse 111 The implication of the first speaker's words is as follows: You don't write straight on the page, I think/imagine. Similarly to exchange 15, the simple confirmation No would not be a sufficient response. The unspecific negative You don't write straight on the page requires specification, which is most probably due to the cooperative principle of quantity (cf. Grice, 1975). Following this principle means making a contribution as informative as required for the current purposes of the exchange. The confirmation here would not be informative enough as the U-factor is present with double force. Its manifested in the hypothetical act of the speaker lexicalised by I don't imagine

, and also in the unspecific negative situation. The exchange pattern here is as follows: INITIATION: HYPOTHESIS OF AN UNSPECIFIC SITUATION (NEGATIVE) RESPONSE: CONFIRMATION-SPECIFICATIO

N In extract 24 below the first speaker introduces a hypothetical Situation, which involves some negative features (you are an anti-clockwise ballet dancer, you can't do the polka). The second speaker confirms the hypothesis and also adds the Reason for this Situation: 24. A: I gather you're actually an anti-clockwise ballet dancer. You can't do the polka [**] B: No. I was taught to do it but [a] the wrong way. Because I think he came from Hungary. Our teachers came from Hungary. They do it in the wrong way in Hungary. The discourse pattern of extract 24 is as follows: INITIATION. HYPOTHESIS OF A SITUATION WITH NEGATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES RESPONSE: CONFIRMATION-REASO

N A simple negative response would not be acceptable here either. Kiefer (1983) also observes that in a question-answer pair the adequacy of a simple yes or no answer after a question is a pragmatic issue and he notes that a negative answer typically requires some explanation. This is what in such a context the adequate communicative attitude is and this is how the speaker's behaviour becomes cooperative. The above examples are but a few of those that clearly show the shared knowledge of some conventional discourse patterns by the participants. These patterns can work in conversational exchanges across speaking turns in the same way as they do in narratives. In conversation, however, they