Cover not available

In:Questioning and Answering Practices across Contexts and Cultures
Edited by Cornelia Ilie
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 323] 2021
► pp. 193–226

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

Formulation questions and responses in Korean TV talk show interactions

ORCiD logo with link | Kyung Hee University
 | Hankuk University of Foreign Studies
Published online: 26 July 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.323.07kim
Abstract
This chapter examines the sequence-organizational role of the host’s formulation questions and the guest’s responses in entertainment-oriented Korean talk-shows. Constructed as a ‘follow-up’ re-presenting the upshot of the guest’s response on the host’s terms, the host’s formulation questions mediate sequence expansion through which an ‘information-oriented’ sequence is transited to an ‘affectively-loaded’ assessment sequence. This transition, contingent on the guest’s confirmation, is co-constructively accomplished; the host’s enticement of the guest’s confirmation is embodied in the turn-design features of formulation questions rendering an ‘obvious’ gist of the guest’s response, or indexing the host’s agentivity and empathic stance. The host’s move to implicate the guest in his/her ‘master-sequential’ transition may be resisted, with the guest, through disconfirmation, promoting a master narrative of his/her own.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background: Formulation questions
  • 3.Organization of formulation sequences
    • 3.1Formulation question as preliminary action
    • 3.2Post-expansion into assessment sequence
  • 4.Turn design of formulation questions
    • 4.1Mundane character of formulation questions
    • 4.2Indexing high agentivity
  • 5.Guest’s disconfirmation: Competing agendas in organizing master narratives
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
References (78)
References
Atkinson, J. Maxwell, and John Heritage (eds). 1984. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bamberg, Michael. 2008. “Small Stories as a New Perspective in Narrative and Identity Analysis.” Text & Talk 28(3): 377–396. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bamberg, Michael, and Molly Andrews (eds). 2004. Considering Counternarratives: Narrating, Resisting, Making Sense. Amsterdam. John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bilmes, Jack. 2009. “Taxonomies are for Talking: Reanalyzing a Sacks Classic.” Journal of Pragmatics 41: 1600–1610. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cameron, Deborah. 1995. Verbal Hygiene. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drew, Paul. 1987. “Po-Faced Receipts of Teases.” Linguistics 25: 219–253. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1992. “Contested Evidence in Courtroom Cross-Examination: The Case of a Trial for Rape.” In Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. ed. by Paul Drew, and John Heritage, 470–520.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. “Comparative Analysis of Talk-in-Interaction in Different Institutional Settings: A Sketch.” In Studies in Language and Social Interaction in Honor of Robert Hopper, ed. by Phillip J. Glenn, Curtis D. LeBaron, and Jenny Mandelbaum, 293–308. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, John. 2000. Seeing Things: Television in the Age of Uncertainty. London: I.B. Tauris. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garfinkel, Harold, and Harvey Sacks. 1970. “On Formal Structures of Practical Actions.” In Theoretical Sociology: Perspectives and Developments, ed. by John C. McKinney and Edward A. Tiryakian, 337–366. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glenn, Phillip. 2003. Laughter in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1979. “Footing.” Semiotica 25: 1–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1981. Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John. 1984. “A Change-of-State Token and Aspects of Its Sequential Placement.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by Michael Atkinson, and John Heritage, 299–345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1985. “Analyzing News Interviews: Aspects of the Production of Talk for an Overhearing Audience.” In Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Volume 3: Discourse and Dialogue, ed. by Teun A. van Dijk, 95–117. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002. “Ad Hoc Inquiries: Two Preferences in the Design of “Routine” Questions in an Open Context.” In Standardization and Tacit Knowledge: Interaction and Practice in the Survey Interview, ed. by Douglas W. Maynard, Hanneke Houtkoop-Steenstra, Nora Cate Schaeffer, and Johannes van der Zouwen, 313–333. New York: Wiley Interscience.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John, and Steven Clayman. 2010. Talk in Action: Interactions, Identities, and Institutions. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John, and Geoffrey Raymond. 2005. “The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Assessment Sequences.” Social Psychology Quarterly 68(1): 15–38. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. “Navigating Epistemic Landscapes: Acquiescence, Agency and Resistance in Responses to Polar Questions.” In Questions: Formal, Functional and Interactional Perspectives, ed. by Jan P. de Ruiter, 179–192. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John, and D. Rod Watson. 1979. “Formulations as Conversational Objects.” In Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. by George Psathas, 123–162. New York: Irvington.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1980. “Aspects of the Properties of Formulations in Natural Conversations: Some Instances Analysed.” Semiotica 30(3/4): 245–262. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hester, Stephen, and Peter Eglin (eds). 1997. Culture in Action: Studies in Membership Categorization Analysis. Lanham, MD: University Press of America and International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hutchby, Ian. 1996. “Power in Discourse: The Case of Arguments on a British Talk Radio Show.” Discourse & Society 7(4): 481–497. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. “‘Active Listening’: Formulations and the Elicitation of Feelings-Talk in Child Counseling.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 38(3): 303–329. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hymes, Dell. 1974. Foundations of Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach. University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ilie, Cornelia. 1999. “Question-Response Argumentation in Talk Shows.” Journal of Pragmatics 31: 975–999. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001. “Semi-Institutional Discourse: The Case of Talk Shows.” Journal of Pragmatics 33(2): 209–254. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. “Discourse and Metadiscourse in Parliamentary Debates.” Journal of Language and Politics 2(1): 71–92. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015a. “Questions and Questioning.” In The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction, ed. by Karen Tracy, Cornelia Ilie, and Todd Sandel, 1–15. Boston: John Wiley & Sons. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015b. “Follow-Ups as Multifunctional Questioning and Answering Strategies in Prime Minister’s Questions.” In The Dynamics of Political Discourse: Forms and Functions of Follow-ups, ed. by Anita Fetzer, Elda Weizman, and Lawrence N. Berlin, 195–218. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jaworski, Adam, and Crispin Thurlow. 2009. “Taking an Elitist Stance: Ideology and the Discursive Production of Social Distinction.” In Stance: Sociolinguistic Perspectives, ed. by Alexander Jaffe, 195–226. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jefferson, Gail. 1980. “On ‘Trouble-Premonitory’ Response to Inquiry.” Sociological Inquiry 50: 153–185. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, Kyu-hyun. 1999. “Other-Initiated Repair Sequences in Korean Conversation: Types and Functions.” Discourse and Cognition 6(2): 141–168.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. “A Conversation Analysis of Korean Sentence-Ending Modal Suffixes -Ney, -Kwun(a), and -Ta: Noticing as a Social Action.” The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea 12(1): 1–35.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, Kyu-hyun, and Kyung-Hee Suh. 2015. “Formulating Practices in Korean TV Talk Shows: The Host’s Category Work as Morally-Ordered Action.” Paper presented at the 14th International Pragmatics (IPrA) Conference. University of Antwerp, Belgium.
Kim, Stephanie H. 2016. “When Speakers Account for Their Questions: Ani-Prefaced Accounts in Korean Conversation.” In Accountability in Social Interaction, ed. by Jeffrey D. Robinson, 294–320. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labov, William, and David Fanshel. 1977. Therapeutic Discourse: Psychotherapy as Conversation. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labov, William, and Joshua Waletzky. 1967. “Narrative Analysis: Oral Versions of Personal Experience.” In Essays on the Verbal and Visual Arts, ed. by June Helm, 12–44. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, Hyo Sang. 1991. Tense, Aspect, and Modality: A Discourse-Pragmatic Analysis of Verbal Affixes in Korean from a Typological Perspective. Doctoral dissertation, University of California at Los Angeles.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1993. “Cognitive Constraints on Expressing Newly Perceived Information, with Reference to Epistemic Modal Suffixes in Korean.” Cognitive Linguistics 4–2: 135–167. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1999. “A Discourse-Pragmatic Analysis of the Committal -Ci in Korean: A Synthetic Approach to the Form-Meaning Relation.” Journal of Pragmatics 31: 243–275. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lerner, Gene H. 2013. “On the Place of Hesitating in Delicate Formulations: A Turn-Constructional Infrastructure for Collaborative Indiscretion.” In Conversational Repair and Human Understanding, ed. by Jack Sidnell, Makoto Hayashi, and Geoffrey Raymond, 95–134. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lerner, Gene H., Galina B. Bolden, Alexa Hepburn, and Jenny Mandelbaum. 2012. “Reference Recalibration Repairs: Adjusting the Precision of Formulations for the Task at Hand.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45(2): 191–212. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria. 2005. “A Rapport and Impression Management Approach to Public Figures’ Performance of Talk. Journal of Pragmatics 37: 611–631. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mihler, Elliot G. 1975. “Studies in Dialogue and Discourse: II. Types of Discourse Initiated by and Sustained through Questioning.” Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 4(2): 99–121. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moore, Shaun. 1995. “Media, Modernity and Lived Experience.” Journal of Communication Inquiry 19: 5–19. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Newman, Judith. 1992. “Why Do People Tell All on Talk Shows?” New Woman, August 1992, 216–219.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nir, Bracha, Gonen Dori-Hacohen, and Yael Maschler. 2014. “Formulations on Israeli Political Talk Radio: From Actions and Sequences to Stance via Dialogic Resonance.” Discourse Studies 16(4): 534–571. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Penz, von Hermine. 1996. Language and Control in American TV Talk Shows: an analysis of linguistic strategies. Tubingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pollner, Melvin. 1974. “Mundane Reasoning.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 4: 35–54. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita. 1978. “Compliment Responses: Notes on the Co-operation of Multiple Constraints.” In Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction, ed. by Jim Schenkein, 79–112. New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1984. “Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey. 2003. “Grammar and Social Organization: Yes/No Interrogatives and the Structure of Responding.” American Sociological Review 68: 939–967. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. “Grammar and Social Relations: Alternative Forms of Yes/No-Type Initiating Actions in Health Visitor Interactions.” In “Why Do You Ask?”: The Functions of Questions in Institutional Discourse, ed. by Alice F. Freed, and Susan Ehrlich, 87–107. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reynolds, Edward. 2013. Enticing a Challengeable: Instituting Social Order as a Practice of Public Conflict. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. The University of Queensland.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1984. “On Doing ‘being ordinary’.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 413–429. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1988/89. “On Members’ Measurement Systems.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 22: 45–60. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1992. Lectures on Conversation, vols. 1 & 2. Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1988. “Presequences and Indirection: Applying Speech Act Theory to Ordinary Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 12(1): 55–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1988/1989. “From Interview to Confrontation: Observations on the Bush/Rather Encounter.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 22: 215–240. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2001. “Getting Serious: Joke  Serious ‘No’.” Journal of Pragmatics 33(12): 1947–1955. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2007. Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Simonen, Mika. 2012. “Formulation in Clinical Interviews.” Communication & Medicine 9(2): 133–144. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sinclair, John, and Malcolm Coulthard. 1975. Toward an Analysis of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya. 2011. “Morality and Question Design: ‘Of Course’ as Contesting a Presupposition of Askability.” In The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation, ed. by Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada, and Jakob Steensig, 82–106. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stokoe, Elizabeth H., and Derek Edwards. 2008. “‘Did You Have Permission to Smash Your Neighbour’s Door?’ Silly Questions and Their Answers in Police-Suspect Interrogations.” Discourse Studies 10(1): 89–111. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Suh, Cheong-Soo. 2006. Korean Grammar. Seoul: Hanyang University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A., Fox, Barbara A., and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen. 2015. Grammar in Everyday Talk: Building Responsive Actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tolson, Andrew. 2001. “‘Being Yourself’: The Pursuit of Authentic Celebrity.” Discourse Studies 3(4): 443–457. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. Media Talk: Spoken Discourse on TV and Radio. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thornborrow, Joanna. 2007. “Narrative, Opinion and Situated Argument in Talk Show Discourse.” Journal of Pragmatic 39: 1436–1453. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walker, Esther. 1995. “Making a Bid for Change: Formulations in Union/Management Negotiation.” Negotiating Work. In The Discourse of Negotiation: Studies of Language in the Workplace, ed. by Alan Firth, 101–140. Oxford: Pergamon. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weizman, Elda. 2006. “Roles and Identities in News Interviews: The Israeli Context.” Journal of Pragmatics 38: 154–179. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Whitehead, Kevin A. 2009. “Categorizing the Categorizer: The Management of Racial Common Sense in Interaction.” Social Psychology Quarterly 72(4), 2009: 325–342. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yoon, Kyung-Eun. 2010. “Questions and Responses in Korean Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 42: 2782–2798. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Choe, Hanwool
2024. “할미 마음이 아파요”: Korean Honorific Speech Level Markers as Contextualization Cues in Family Instant Messages. In Exploring Korean Politeness Across Online and Offline Interactions [Advances in (Im)politeness Studies, ], ► pp. 35 ff. DOI logo
Kim, Kyu-hyun
2024. Request for confirmation sequences in Korean. Open Linguistics 10:1 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 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