Cover not available

In:Responding to Polar Questions across Languages and Contexts
Edited by Galina B. Bolden, John Heritage and Marja-Leena Sorjonen
[Studies in Language and Social Interaction 35] 2023
► pp. 109–138

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

Chapter 4
Responses to polar questions in Polish

 | Kazimierz Wielki University
Published online: 27 November 2023
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/slsi.35.04wei
Abstract
Using data from naturally occuring Polish conversations this chapter demonstrates how speakers of Polish answer polar questions. It offers a detailed conversation analytic examination of two response formats, particularly in their unexpanded form: (i) particle responses, which are used for confirming the terms and the action agenda of the question and which display the participants’ understanding of the status of the question as subsidiary to a larger course of action and (ii) repetitional responses, which are understood to do more than simple confirmation (e.g., to fullfil requests). By identifying the interactional circumstances for the choice of a particular format of a response, the chapter highlights the importance of social action as key to building and understanding polar question-answer sequences in Polish.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Questions and responses in Polish: Prior research
  • 3.Data and method
  • 4.Responses to polar questions in Polish: Analysis
    • 4.1Particle responses: tak, nie and no
    • 4.2Repetitional responses
  • 5.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgment
  • Notes
  • References
References (63)
References
Ajdukiewicz, Kazimierz. 1974 [1965]. Pragmatic logic [Logika pragmatyczna]. Dordrecht: Reidel. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beach, Wayne. 1993. “Transitional Regularities for Casual “okay” Usages.” Journal of Pragmatics 19: 325–352. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Betz, Emma, Arnulf Deppermann, Lorenza Mondada, and Marja-Leena Sorjonen, eds. 2021. OKAY across Languages: Toward a Comparative Approach to Its Use in Talk-in-Interaction. John Benjamins.
Bolden, Galina. 2009. “Beyond answering: repeat-prefaced responses in conversation.” Communication Monographs 76 (2): 121–143. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. “A simple da?: Affirming responses to polar questions in Russian conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 100: 40–58. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boyd, Elizabeth, and John Heritage. 2006. “Taking the History: Questioning During Comprehensive History Taking.” In Communication in Medical Care: Interactions between Primary Care Physicians and Patients, edited by John Heritage and Douglas Maynard. 151–184. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clayman, Steven E., and John Heritage. 2002. “Questioning Presidents: Journalistic deference and adversarialness in the press conferences of Eisenhower and Reagan.” Journal of Communication 52 (4): 749–775. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth. 2012. “Some truths and untruths about final intonation in conversational questions.” In Questions. Formal, Functional and Interactional Perspectives, edited by Jan P. De Ruiter. 123–145. Language, culture & cognition, 12; New York: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth and Margret Selting. 2018. Interactional Linguistics: Studying Language in Social Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2013. “Position of polar question particles.” In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, edited by Martin Haspelmath, Matthew Dryer, David Gil, and Bernard Comrie. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Enfield, Nick J., Tanya Stivers, and Stephen Levinson. 2010. “Question-response sequences in conversation across ten languages: An introduction.” Journal of Pragmatics 42: 2615–2619. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Enfield, N. J., Tanya Stivers, Penelope Brown, Christina Englert, Katariina Harjunpää, Makoto Hayashi, Trine Heinemann, et al. 2019. “Polar Answers.” Journal of Linguistics 55 (2): 277–304. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hakulinen, Auli. 2001. “Minimal and non-minimal answers to yes-no questions.” Pragmatics 11 (1): 1–15.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heinemann, Trine. 2005. “Where grammar and interaction meet: The preference for matched polarity in responsive turns in Danish.” In Syntax and Lexis in Conversation: Studies on the use of linguistic resources in talk-in-interaction, edited by Auli Hakulinen and Margaret Selting. 375–402. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 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, edited by J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage. 299–345. Cambridge: Cambridge University 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, edited by Douglas 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
. 2010. “Questioning in medicine.” In ”Why Do you Ask?”: The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse, edited by Alice F. Freed and Susan Ehrlich. 42–68. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012a. “Epistemics in Action: Action Formation and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language & Social Interaction 45: 1–25. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012b. “The Epistemic Engine: Action Formation, Sequence Organization and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45: 25–50. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. “Epistemics in conversation.” In Handbook of Conversation Analysis, edited by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers. 370–394. Boston: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. “Well-prefaced turns in English conversation: A conversation analytic perspective.” Journal of Pragmatics 88: 88–104. 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
Heritage, John, and Steven Clayman. 2010. Talk in Action: Interactions, Identities and Institutions. Oxford: Blackwell-Wiley. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John, and Geoffrey Raymond. 2012. “Navigating Epistemic Landscapes: Acquiescence, Agency and Resistance in Responses to Polar Questions.” In Questions edited by J-P. De Ruiter. 179–192. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John, and Chase Wesley Raymond. 2021. “Preference and Polarity: Epistemic Stance in Question Design.” Research on Language and Social Interaction, 39–59. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Houtkoop-Steenstra, Hanneke, and Charles Antaki. 1997. “Creating happy people by asking yes-no questions.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 30 (4): 285–313. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jefferson, Gail. 1978. “Sequential aspects of storytelling in conversation.” In Studies in the organization of coversational interaction, edited by Jim Schenkein. 219–248. New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jefferson, Gail, Harvery Sacks, and Emanuel A. Schegloff. 1977. “Preliminary Notes on The Sequential Organization of Laughter.” Pragmatics Microfiche.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keevallik, Leelo. 2010. “Minimal answers to yes/no questions in the service of sequence organization.” Discourse Studies 12 (3): 283–309. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kubiński, Tadeusz. 1980. An Outline of the Logical Theory of Questions. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.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
Levinson, Stephen. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lipińska-Grzegorek, Maria. 1981. “Existential sentences in english and polish.” In Theoretical Issues in Contrastive Linguistics, edited by Jacek Fisiak. 347–364. Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 12: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ogiermann, Ewa. 2009. “Politeness and in-directness across cultures: A comparison of English, German, Polish and Russian requests.” Journal of Politeness Research 5: 189–216. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita. 1980. “Telling my side: ‘Limited access’ as a ‘fishing device’.” Sociological Inquiry 50: 186–198. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1984. “Pursuing a Response.” In Structures of Social Action, edited by J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage. 152–164. 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 Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse, edited by Alice F. Freed and Susan Ehrlich. 87–107. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey, and John Heritage. 2006. “The epistemics of social relations: Owning grandchildren.” Language in Society 35: 677–705. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rossi, Giovanni. 2015. “Responding to pre-requests: The organisation of hai x ‘do you have x’ sequences in Italian.” Journal of Pragmatics 82: 5–22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1987 [1973]. “On the Preferences for Agreement and Contiguity in Sequences in Conversation.” In Talk and Social Organisation, edited by Graham Button and John R. E. Lee. 54–69. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1980. “Preliminaries to Preliminaries: ‘Can I Ask You a Question’.” Sociological Inquiry 50: 104–152. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1988. “Presequences and Indirection: Applying Speech Act Theory to Ordinary Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 12: 55–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1996. “Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction.” In Interaction and grammar, edited by Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Sandra A. Thompson. 52–133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2007. Sequence organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis Volume 1. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sorjonen, Marja-Leena. 1996. “On repeats and responses in Finnish conversations.” In Interaction and Grammar, edited by Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Sandra A. Thompson. 277–327. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001a. “Simple answers to polar questions: The case of Finnish.” In Studies in Interactional Linguistics edited by Margret Selting and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen. 405–431. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001b. Responding in Conversation: A study of response particles in Finnish. Pragmatics & Beyond; Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sorjonen, Marja-Leena, and John Heritage. 1991. “And-prefacing as a feature of question design.” In Leikkauspiste [Intersections: Essays in Honor of Auli Hakulinen], edited by L. Laitinen, P. Nuolijärvi, and M. Saari. 59–74. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya. 2005. “Modified Repeats: One Method for Asserting Primary Rights from Second Position.” Research on language and social interaction 38 (2): 131–158. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. Prescribing Under Pressure: Parent-Physician Conversations and Antibiotics. New York City: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. “An overview of the question-response system in American English conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 42: 2772–2781. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. “How We Manage Social Relationships Through Answers to Questions: The Case of Interjections.” Discourse Processes 56 (3): 191–209. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya and John Heritage. 2001. “Breaking the sequential mold: Answering ‘more than the question’ during comprehensive history taking.” Text 21 (1/2): 151–185.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya and Federico Rossano. 2010. “Mobilizing Response.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 43 (1): 3–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, Lorenza Mondada, and Jakob Steensig. 2011. The morality of knowledge in conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Swan, Oscar. 2002. A grammar of contemporary Polish. Bloomington, Indiana: Slavica Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weidner, Matylda. 2015. “Telling somebody what to tell : “Proszę mi powiedzieć” in Polish doctor-patient interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 78: 70–83. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. “Treating something as self-evident: No-prefaced turns in Polish.” In Between Turn and Sequence. Turn-initial particles across languages, edited by John Heritage and Marja-Leena Sorjonen, 225–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Witkoś, Jacek. 2008. “On the correlation between A-type scrambling and lack or weak crossover effects.” Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 44.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zagorska Brooks, Maria. 1975. Polish Reference Grammar. The Hague: Mouton & Co. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zinken, Joerg, and Ewa Ogiermann. 2011. “How to propose an action as objectively necessary: the case of Polish Trzeba X (“one needs to x”).” Research on Language and Social Interaction 44 (3): 263–287. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zinken, Jörg, Giovanni Rossi, and Vasudevi Reddy. 2020. “Doing more than expected: Thanking recognizes another’s agency in providing assistance.” In Mobilizing others: Grammar and lexis within larger activities, edited by Carmen Taleghani-Nikazm, Emma Betz and Andrea Golato, 253–278. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Fang, Hongmei
2025. Echo answers. Linguistic Typology 29:2 ► pp. 269 ff. DOI logo
Gubina, Alexandra
2025.  Countering Prior Interactional Conduct with Responsive doch in German Talk-in-Interaction . Research on Language and Social Interaction 58:1 ► pp. 85 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 december 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