Multiple <i>Soo</i> as Response and Management of Epistemic Primacy

Wang Yafeng; Yu Guodong

doi:10.19979/j.cnki.issn10082689.2024030108

Volume 43 Issue 4

Aug. 2026

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Article Navigation > Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition) > 2026 > 42(4): 135-144

Wang Yafeng, Yu Guodong. Multiple Soo as Response and Management of Epistemic Primacy[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2026, 42(4): 135-144. doi: 10.19979/j.cnki.issn10082689.2024030108

Citation:

Wang Yafeng, Yu Guodong. Multiple Soo as Response and Management of Epistemic Primacy[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2026, 42(4): 135-144. doi: 10.19979/j.cnki.issn10082689.2024030108

Citation:

PDF( 834 KB)

Multiple Soo as Response and Management of Epistemic Primacy

doi: 10.19979/j.cnki.issn10082689.2024030108

Wang Yafeng¹,
Yu Guodong²

1.
School of Foreign Languages, Shanxi University, Taiyuan 030006, China
2.
College of Foreign Languages, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100, China

Received Date: 2024-03-30
Available Online: 2026-05-15
Publish Date: 2026-08-25

Abstract

Abstract

Drawing on a conversation-analytic perspective, this study explores the interactional functions of the repeated response token Soo in Japanese when used to respond to polar questions. By formulating a proposition, polar questions display the questioner’s best guess about the matter at hand and offer a preferred candidate answer, thereby indexing a relatively strong epistemic stance on the part of the questioner. In responding to such questions, recipients may orient to and manage this epistemic display, and multiple Soo constitutes a recurrent resource for doing so. While previous studies have primarily discussed Soo as a confirmation device, little attention has been paid to the interactional differences between single Soo and multiple Soo in response to polar questions. Analysis of naturally occurring conversational data shows that a single Soo, while confirming the question’s proposition, asserts the respondent’s epistemic primacy and may implicitly call into question the warrant for asking. By contrast, multiple Soo mitigates the force of confirmation and softens the respondent’s epistemic primacy, while simultaneously orienting to the epistemic stance displayed in the question design. Through this practice, participants manage epistemic relations and maintain social relationships at the micro-interactional level.
- yes/no interrogative,
- multiple Soo,
- confirmation,
- epistemics,
- social relationship

FullText(HTML)

References(39)

References

[1]	Bolinger D. Yes-no questions are not alternative questions [C] // Hiz H. Questions. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 1978: 87-105.
[2]	Sacks H. On the preferences for agreement and contiguity in sequences in conversation [C] // Button G, Lee J R E. Talk and Social Organization. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 1987: 54-69.
[3]	Sorjonen M. Simple answers to polar questions: the case of finnish [C] // Drew P, Heritage J. Contemporary Studies in Conversation Analysis. London: Sage, 2013: 15-40.
[4]	串田秀也. 理解の問題と発話産出の問題: 理解チェック連鎖における「うん」と「そう」[J]. 日本語科学, 2009(25): 43-66.
[5]	Kushida S. Confirming understanding and acknowledging assistance: managing trouble responsibility in response to understanding check in Japanese talk-in-interaction [J]. Journal of Pragmatics, 2011(43): 2716-2739.
[6]	Stivers T. The Book of Answers: Alignment, Autonomy, and Affiliation in Social Interaction [M]. New York: Oxford University Press, 2022.
[7]	定延利之. 「うん」と「そう」に意味はあるか[C] // 定延利之. 「うん」と「そう」の言語学. 東京: ひつじ書房, 2002: 75-112.
[8]	黄丽华. 中国語の肯定応答表現--日本語と比較しながら[C] // 定延利之. 「うん」と「そう」の言語学. 東京: ひつじ書房, 2002: 47-60.
[9]	中岛悦子. 自然談話における応答詞「そう」--その機能および条件·制約[J]. ことば, 2001(22): 91-102.
[10]	大岛资生. 応答句の「そうです」の機能について[J]. 日本語研究, 1995(15): 109-119.
[11]	北野浩章. 応答やあいづちに用いられる照応的な「そう」について[J]. 京都大学言語学研究, 2000(19): 79-94.
[12]	堀口纯子. 日本語教育と会話分析[M]. 東京: くろしお出版, 1997.
[13]	Heritage J. Epistemics in action: action formation and territories of knowledge [J]. Research on Language & Social Interaction. 2012, 45(1): 1-29.
[14]	Robinson J D. One type of polar information-seeking question and its stance of probability: implications for the preference for agreement [J]. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 2020, 53(1): 1-18.
[15]	Heritage J, Raymond C W. Preference and polarity: epistemic stance in question design [J]. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 2021, 54(1): 39-59.
[16]	Raymond G. Grammar and social organization: yes/no interrogatives and the structure of responding [J]. American Sociological Review, 2003, 68(6): 939-967.
[17]	Stivers T, Hayashi M. Transformative answers: one way to resist a question’s constraints [J]. Language in Society, 2010, 39(1): 1-25. doi: 10.1017/S0047404509990637
[18]	Schegloff E A. Confirming allusions: toward an empirical account of action [J]. American Journal of Sociology, 1996, 102(1): 161-216.
[19]	Stivers T. Modified repeats: one method for asserting primary rights from second position [J]. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 2005, 38(2): 131-158.
[20]	Bolden G B. Beyond answering: repeat-prefaced responses in conversation [J]. Communication Monographs, 2009, 76(2): 121-143.
[21]	Heritage J, Raymond G. Navigating epistemic landscapes: acquiescence, agency and resistance in responses to polar questions [C] // De Ruiter J P. Questions: Formal, Functional and Interactional Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012: 179-192.
[22]	Margutti P, Tainio L, Drew P, et al. Invitations and responses across different languages: observations on the feasibility and relevance of a cross-linguistic comparative perspective on the study of actions [J]. Journal of Pragmatics, 2018(125): 52-61.
[23]	Macwhinney B, Wagner J. Transcribing, searching and data sharing: the CLAN software and the TalkBank data repository [J]. Gesprä chsforschung, 2010(11): 154-173.
[24]	Jefferson G. Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction [C] // Lerner G H. Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2004: 13-31.
[25]	Bolden G B, Hepburn A, Mandelbaum J. The distinctive uses of right in British and American English interaction [J]. Journal of Pragmatics, 2023(205): 78-91.
[26]	Stivers T. “No no no” and other types of multiple sayings in social interaction [J]. Human Communication Research, 2004, 30(2): 260-293.
[27]	Stivers T. How we manage social relationships through answers to questions: the case of interjections [J]. Discourse Process, 2019, 56(3): 191-209.
[28]	Lindstöm A, Sorionen M. Affiliation in conversation [C] // Sidnell J, Stivers T. The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Wiley-Blackwell, 2012: 350-369.
[29]	Pomerantz A. Offering a candidate answer: an information seeking strategy [J]. Communication Monographs, 1988, 55(4): 360-373.
[30]	Garfinkel H. Studies in Ethnomethodology [M]. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1967.
[31]	Tanaka H. Multimodal expressivity of the Japanese response particle Huun: displaying involvement without topical engagement [C] // Barth-Weingarten D, Reber E, Selting M. Prosody in Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2010: 303-332.
[32]	Labov W, Fanshei D. Therapeutic Discourse: Psychotherapy as Conversation [M]. New York: Academic Press, 1977.
[33]	Hayashi M. An overview of the question-response system in Japanese [J]. Journal of Pragmatics, 2010, 42(10): 2685-2702.
[34]	Morita E. Stance marking in the collaborative completion of sentences: final particles as epistemic markers in Japanese [C] // Akatsuka N, Strauss S. Japanese/Korean Linguistics. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 2002: 220-233.
[35]	Enfield N J. Social consequences of common ground [C] // Enfield N J, Levinson S C. Roots of Human Sociality: Culture, Cognition, and Interaction. London: Berg, 2006: 399-430.
[36]	庵功雄, 高梨信乃, 中西久实子, 等. 初級を教える人のための日本語文法ハンドブック[M]. 東京: スリーエーネットワーク, 2000.
[37]	Pomerantz A. Asking and Telling in Conversation [M]. New York: Oxford University Press, 2021.
[38]	王亚峰, 于国栋. 亲子互动中的范畴建构与观照[J]. 北京科技大学学报(社会科学版), 2023, 39(3): 267-276.
[39]	王亚峰. 言语互动中的嵌入型道德工作: 互动证据与研究理据[J]. 西安外国语大学学报, 2025, 33(3): 21-27.