Cover not available

Article published In: Genre- and register-related discourse features in contrast
Edited by Marie-Aude Lefer and Svetlana Vogeleer
[Languages in Contrast 14:1] 2014
► pp. 93–126

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Canonical tag questions in English, Spanish and Portuguese

A discourse-functional study

 | University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain
Published online: 4 March 2014
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.14.1.06gom
This paper compares and contrasts the patterns of variation exhibited by canonical tag questions ((C)TQs) in English (e.g. ‘That’s enough, isn’t it?’) with those presented by their analogous constructions in Spanish (Es suficiente, ¿no?/ ¿verdad?) and Portuguese (É suficiente, não é?/não?) across a variety of spoken genres that represent the monologic-dialogic, formal-informal and private-public oppositions. The aim is to provide previously lacking comparative statistics that emerge from this trilingual comparison along four parameters: (i) frequencies, (ii) formal features, (iii) distribution across genres, and (iv) functional characteristics. It will be observed that English CTQs are less frequent than analogous constructions in Spanish and particularly in Portuguese. A tag/polarity-based scale will also be proposed in which Portuguese situates itself at one extreme in displaying the widest array of variant and invariant tag types; at the other extreme is Spanish allowing for invariant tags only, whereas English occupies a middle position as it admits both invariant and variant tags but the latter exhibit less variability in kind than their Portuguese counterparts. Lastly, it will be shown that English CTQs display less distributional and functional flexibility than the analogous constructions in the two Romance languages under analysis.
References (65)
Aijmer, K. 1979. “The Function of Tag Questions in English”. In Papers from the Fifth Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics , T. Pettersson (ed), 9–17. Lund: Acta Universitatis Lundensis and Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1990. “It’s a Myth, innit? Politeness and the English Tag Question”. In The State of the Language , C. Ricks and L. Michaels (eds), 443–450. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2006. British or American English? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Allerton, D. 2009. “Tag Questions”. In One Language, Two Grammars: Differences between British and American English , G. Rohdenburg and J. Schlüter (eds), 306–323. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Axelsson, K. 2006. “Tag Questions in English Translations from Swedish and Norwegian – Are There Differences?” In Svenska som källspråk och målspråk. Aspekter på översättningsvetenskap: artiklar från en forskarkurs vid Göteborgs universitet höstterminen , B. Englund Dimitrova and H. Landqvist (eds), 4–21. Göteborgs universiteit: Översättarutbildningen vid Humanistiska fakulteten.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2011a. Tag Questions in Fiction Dialogues . PhD Dissertation, University of Gothenburg.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. and Finegan, E. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English . London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Briz, A. 1998. El español coloquial en la conversación . Barcelona: Ariel.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Briz, A., Pons Bordería, S. and Portolés, J. 2008. Diccionario de partículas discursivas del español [on line]. Available at [URL]
Brown, P. and Enfield, N. 2006. “Epistemic Dimensions of Polar Questions: Declarative Questions and Tag Questions in Comparative Perspective”. In Questions and their Responses [on line], N. Enfield, J.P. de Ruiter. Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, March 23–March 25. Available at [URL]. [Last accessed 27 March 2006].
Cameron, D., McAlinden, F. and O’Leary, K. 1989. “Lakoff in Context: The Social and Linguistic Functions of Tag Questions”. In Women in their Speech Communities: New Perspectives on Language and Sex, J. Coates and D. Cameron (eds), 74–93. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carter, R. and McCarthy, M. 2006. A Comprehensive Guide Spoken and Writen English Grammar and Usage . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Christl, J. 1996. “Muletillas en el español hablado”. In El español hablado y la cultura oral en España e Hispanoamérica , T. Kotschi, W. Oesterreicher and K. Zimmermann (eds), 117–143. Madrid: Vervuert.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coates, J. 1989. “Gossip Revisited: Language in All-Female Groups”. In Women in their Speech Communities , J. Coates and D. Cameron (eds), 94–122. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1996. Women Talk . Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cortés, L. and Camacho, M. 2005. Unidades de segmentación y marcadores del discurso . Madrid: Arco Libros.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cruz Ferreira, M. 1981. “Tag Questions in Portuguese: Grammar and Intonation”. Phonetica 381:341–352. .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cuenca, M.J. 1997. “Form-Use Mappings for Tag Questions”. In Discourse and Perspective in Cognitive Linguistics, W. Liebert, G. Redeker and L. Waugh (eds), 3–19. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Domínguez Mujica, C.L. 2005. “Marcadores de (in)conclusión en el español de Mérida-Venezuela”. Boletín de Lingüística 231:3–23.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Elsness, J. 1997. The Perfect and the Preterite in Contemporary and Earlier English . Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fernández Sanmartín, A. 2006. “La expresión de la modalidad epistémica en español conversacional”. Unpublished manuscript. Universidade de Santiago de Compostela.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Field, A. 2009. Discovering Statistics Using SPSS (3rd edition). Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore and Washington: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
García Vizcaíno, M.J. 2005. “El uso de los apéndices modalizadores ‘no?’ y ‘eh?’ en español peninsular”. In Selected Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Spanish Sociolinguistics , L. Sayahi and M. Westmoreland (eds), 89–101. MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gili Gaya, S. 1971. Curso superior de sintaxis española . Barcelona: Gredos.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gómez González, M.Á. 2012. “The Question of Tag Questions in English and Spanish”. In Encoding the Past, Decoding the Future: Corpora in the 21st Century , I. Moskowich and B. Crespo (eds), 59–97. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholarly Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gonçalves, F. 1995. Negação frásica em Português: Caracterização com referência ao processo de aquisição . Dissertação de Mestrado, Lisboa: FLUL.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hagemeijer, T. and Santos, A.L. 2004. “Elementos polares na periferia direita”. Actas do XIX Encontro Nacional da Associação Portuguesa de Linguística , C. Nunes Correia and A. Gonçalves (eds), 465–476. Lisboa: Associação Portuguesa de Linguística.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoffmann, S. and Mukherjee, J. 2011. “Canonical Tag Questions in Asian Englishes: Forms, Functions and Frequencies in Hongkong English, Indian English and Singapore English”. Paper presented at the 32nd Conference of the International Computer Archive of Modern and Medieval English (ICAME 32). Oslo, Norway, 1–5 June 2011.
Holmes, J. 1983. “The Functions of Tag Questions”. English Language Research Journal 31:40–65.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1984. “Hedging your Bets and Sitting on the Fence: Some Evidence for Hedges as Support Structures”. Te Reo 271:47–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1986. “Functions of ‘You Know’ in Women’s and Men’s Speech”. Language in Society 151:1–21. .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1995. Women, Men and Politeness . White Plains, NY: Longman. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huddleston, R. 1970. “Two Approaches to the Analysis of Tags”. Journal of Linguistics 61:215–222. .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
and Pullum, G.K. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hudson, R. 1975. “The Meaning of Questions”. Language 511:1–31. .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kay, P. 2002. “English Subjectless Tagged Sentences”. Language 781:453–81. .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kimps, D. 2007. “Declarative Constant Polarity Tag Questions: A Data-Driven Analysis of their Form, Meaning and Attitudinal Uses”. Journal of Pragmatics 39(2):270–291. .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ladd, D.R. 1981. “A First Look at the Semantics and Pragmatics of Negative Questions and Tag Questions”. Proceedings of CLS 171.164–171.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, R. 1975. Language and Woman’s Place . New York: Harper and Row. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martín Zorraquino, M.A. and Portolés, J. 1999. “Los marcadores del discurso”. In Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española , vol. 31, I. Bosque and V. Demonte (coords.), 4051–4213. Madrid: Espasa Calpe.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martins, A. 2006. “Emphatic Affirmation and Polarity: Contrasting European Portuguese with Brazilian Portuguese, Spanish, Catalan and Galician”. In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory. Selected papers from Going Romance 2004, J. Doetjes and P. González (eds), 197–223. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moniz, M., Batista, F., Trancoso, I. and Mata, A.I. 2011. “Analysis of Interrogatives in Different Domains”. In Proceedings of the Third COST 2102 International Training School Conference on Toward Autonomous, Adaptive, and Context-aware Multimodal Interfaces: Theoretical and Practical Issues , A. Esposito et al.. (eds), 134–146. Berlin: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moravcsik, E.A. 1971. “Some Cross-linguistic Generalizations about Yes-No Questions and their Answers”. Stanford Working Papers on Linguistic Universals 71:45–193.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nässlin, S. 1984. The English Tag Question: A Study of Sentences Containing Tags of the Type ‘Isn’t it?, Is it?’ . Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell International.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nelson, G. 2004. “Negation of Lexical ‘Have’ in Conversational English”. World Englishes 231: 299–308. .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Connor, J.D. 1955. “The Intonation of Tag Questions in English”. English Studies 361:97–105. .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ortega Olivares, J. 1985. “Apendices modalizadores en español: los ‘comprobativos’”. In Estudios románicos dedicados al profesor Andres Soria Ortega , A. Soria et al.. (eds), 239–255. Granada: Universidad de Granada.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pons Bordería, S. 1998. Conexión y conectores. Estudio de su relación en el registro informal de la lengua. Anejo XXVII de Cuadernos de Filologia . Valencia: Universitat de Valencia.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Portolés, J. 1998. Marcadores del discurso . Barcelona: Ariel.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S, Leech, G. and Svartvik, J. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language . London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Recsky, L. 2006. “Epistemic Modality and Spoken Discourse: An English-Portuguese Crosslinguistic Investigation”. Linguagem e Ensino 9(1):159–185. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reese, B. 2007. Bias in Questions . PhD Dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rigney, A.C. 1999. “Questioning in Interpreted Testimony”. Forensic Linguistics 6(1):83–108. .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rodríguez Muñoz, F.J. 2009. “Estudio sobre las funciones pragmadiscursivas de ‘¿eh?’ ‘¿no?’ en el español hablado”. Revista de lingüística teórica y aplicada 47(1):83–101.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Roesle, A. 2001. Tag Questions in British and American English . M.A. Thesis, University of Zurich.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stenström, A.-B. 1997). “Tags in Teenage Talk”. In Studies in English Corpus Linguistics , U. Fries, V. Müller and P. Schneider (eds), 139–147. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2005. “Teenagers’ Tags in London and Madrid”. In Contexts -Historical, Social, Linguistic. Studies in Celebration of Toril Swan , K. McCafferty, T. Bull and K. Killie (eds), 279–291. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tottie, G. and Hoffmann, S. 2006. “Tag Questions in British and American English”. Journal of English Linguistics 34(4):1–29. .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
and Hoffmann, S. 2009. “Tag Questions in English: the First Century”. Journal of English Linguistics 37(2):130–161. .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ultan, R. 1969. “Some General Characteristics of Interrogative Systems”. Working Papers on Language Universals 11:41–63.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1978. “Some General Characteristics of Interrogative Systems”. In Universals of Human Language . Volume 41, Syntax , J.H. Greenberg (ed), 211–248. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (17)

Cited by 17 other publications

Degenhardt, Julia
2025. Pragmatic functions of question tags in Indian and Sri Lankan English. Journal of Pragmatics 239 ► pp. 77 ff. DOI logo
Ehmer, Oliver
2025. Request for confirmation sequences in Castilian Spanish. Open Linguistics 11:1 DOI logo
Silvano, Purificação, María Gómez González & João Cordeiro
2025. Tag questions in English and Portuguese monologues: types, features, and functions. Linguistics Vanguard DOI logo
Martínez, Brandon Joseph
2024. On the Functional Convergence of Pragmatic Markers in Arizona Spanish. Languages 9:4 ► pp. 148 ff. DOI logo
Silvano, Purificação & María Gómez González
2024. Developing a Comparative Model of Predicted Associations for Invariable Question Tag Types in British English and European Portuguese. In Constructional and Cognitive Explorations of Contrastive Linguistics, ► pp. 173 ff. DOI logo
de los Ángeles Gómez González, María & Maria da Purificação Moura Silvano
2022. A functional model for the tag question paradigm: The case of invariable tag questions in English and Portuguese. Lingua 272 ► pp. 103255 ff. DOI logo
Pichler, Heike
2021. Grammaticalization and language contact in a discourse-pragmatic change in progress: The spread ofinnitin London English. Language in Society 50:5 ► pp. 723 ff. DOI logo
Axelsson, Karin
2020. Questions in English and Swedish fiction texts. Languages in Contrast 20:2 ► pp. 235 ff. DOI logo
Gómez González, María de los Ángeles & Nicole Dehé
2020. The pragmatics and prosody of variable tag questions in English: Uncovering function-to-form correlations. Journal of Pragmatics 158 ► pp. 33 ff. DOI logo
Carvalho, Ana M. & Joseph Kern
2019. The permeability of tag questions in a language contact situation. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) 29:4 ► pp. 463 ff. DOI logo
Doval-Suárez, Susana M. & Elsa M. González Álvarez
2018. The use of tag questions in the oral production of L2 English learners. In The Construction of Discourse as Verbal Interaction [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 296], ► pp. 145 ff. DOI logo
Gómez González, María de los Ángeles
2018. “God that came out quick didn’t it eh”. In The Construction of Discourse as Verbal Interaction [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 296], ► pp. 109 ff. DOI logo
Gómez González, María de los Ángeles & J. Lachlan Mackenzie
2018. Introduction. In The Construction of Discourse as Verbal Interaction [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 296], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Buysse, Lieven
2017. Question tags in translation. Languages in Contrast 17:2 ► pp. 157 ff. DOI logo
Egan, Thomas & Hildegunn Dirdal
2017. Lexis in contrast today. In Cross-linguistic Correspondences [Studies in Language Companion Series, 191], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2018. Discourse Markers and (Dis)fluency [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 286], DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2018. Tag Questions in Conversation [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 83], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue