#whatdoesinappositereallymeantho

Oh-prefaced responses to inquiry

By: John Heritage

Published by: Language in Society
Volume 27
Pages 291–334

LL Abstract:

In this article, Heritage (1998) looks at the appearance of the discourse marker “oh” in a particular context - turn-initial position in responses to questions - and demonstrates how the use of “oh” generally suggests a change of state in the speaker. He shows how this oh-prefacing may mark a previous question as problematic or indicate that a speaker is reluctant to pursue a conversational topic. After exploring a wide range of examples where oh-prefaced turns are produced, the article concludes that while “oh” generally shows its producer has undergone a cognitive “change of state,” people rely on the contextual aspects of their utterances to determine the sense of this change.

LL Summary:

Heritage begins with several examples from conversations to show how “oh” generally shows or registers that its producer has undergone a change in state of knowledge or information. He then specifies the focus of this paper: oh-prefaced turns that are produced as the second pair in a sequence, aka those that are produced in response to a question. The author continues by characterizing “oh” as indicating that a question has occasioned a marked shift of attention, meaning it was unexpected or problematic in some way. In this section, Heritage discusses an interview with Princess Margaret and excerpts between students and teachers to conclude that one function of “oh” prefaced responses is to indicate that the question to which they respond is inapposite. In the next section, he expands on inapposite inquiries by distinguishing between cases where the question indexes something “already known” by participants because of prior talk or joint understandings, and cases where questions are poorly fitted to the sequential context they are produced in. The author looks at examples of women and men and finds a pattern of assertion -> query -> oh-prefaced reassertion that is produced when matters from prior talk are questioned. Looking at reported speech, Heritage shows how some oh-prefacing indicates that a question’s answer is self-evident from the physical or cultural/individual knowledge context, or that there is some element of the social environment that makes the question problematic. After using examples of the functions of oh-prefacing in troubles-telling, questions, and problematic questions, he notes that in some contexts, the exploitation of oh-prefacing as a method of emphatic response to questions has become quite common. In the following section, the article explores cases where oh-prefacing is used to project reluctance to talk about the topic raised by an inquiry. Heritage identifies three ways that this reluctance is shown in the data: oh-prefaced responses are minimal or unelaborated in the matter of the inquiry, producers of oh-prefaced responses unilaterally shift topic immediately after the response or shortly after, or these producers withhold on-topic talk (aka remain silent). In the final section of the article, Heritage examines responses to personal state inquiries like “How are you?” Building on Jefferson’s (1980) work on troubles talk, where she proposes that this troubles talk is marked by a general tension between attending the trouble or “business as usual,” the author shows that oh-prefacing can intensify the downgrading of downgraded responses (like “oh pretty good”). Finally, Heritage concludes by restating his argument that oh-prefacing uniformly conveys the sense that the prior question has occasioned a shift in attention to the matter of the question, so that its central use is implying the inappositeness of this question.

LL Recipe Comparison:

This article reminds me of the recipe for Lemon-Asparagus Linguine with Garlicky Panko:

While Heritage identifies multiple functions of oh-prefaced responses in his article, the recipe for this dish will leave you swooning over its simple steaming ingredients! Much as we use oh-prefaced responses to suggest a range of social cues, this dish has a range of flavors - asparagus, lemon, garlic, that suggest a crisp and zesty bite. Good cooking!

MWV 2/12/18

PS Apologies for the delays in posting, all! About to finish a qualifying review paper by March so going underground until that’s done- will post short updates until that’s over! Bon Appétit until then!