headerpos: 17406

Emakeele Seltsi aastaraamat
The Yearbook of the Estonian Mother Tongue Society
ISSN 2228-1215 (electronic)   ISSN 0206-3735 (print)

Emakeele Seltsi aastaraamat
The Yearbook of the Estonian Mother Tongue Society
ISSN 2228-1215 (electronic)   ISSN 0206-3735 (print)

Journal Information
» History
» Editorial Policy
» Editorial Board
» Abstracting/Indexing
Guidelines for authors
» For Authors
» Instructions to authors
» For Review
List of Issues
» 2016
Vol. 62, Issue 1
» 2015
» 2014
» 2013
» 2012
» 2011
» 2010


(Full article in PDF format) http://dx.doi.org/10.3176/esa62.07


Andriela Rääbis


Offers in everyday telephone conversations

This study discusses the use of different offer formats in Estonian everyday telephone conversations, using the methodology of interactional linguistics and concepts of conversation analysis.

The data come from the Corpus of Spoken Estonian of the University of Tartu, which comprises 165 everyday telephone conversations. There are 41 offers in the collection.

Offers are produced with different grammatical formats in Estonian:

     declaratives (oh ma saadan sulle ühe väga=ea ret`septi. ‘I’ll send you a very good recipe.’);

     modalized declaratives (m:a=võin `elistada ja `küsida. ‘I can call and ask.’);

     existential clauses (ja=sis=mul=on=ta `nimi ja telefoninumber täitsa `olemas. ‘And I have his name and phone number.’);

     conditional + main clause constructions (ma võin sulle selle ühe `riiuli anda kui sa tahad ‘I can give you the shelf if you want.’);

     division-of-labor constructions (sa pead mulle oma `graafiku andma sis ma akkan sulle `elistama iga omiku. ‘You must give me your schedule then I’ll call you every morning.’);

     interrogatives (sa aput `kurki ka `tahad=või. ‘Do you want some pickled cucumbers?’);

     imperatives (used as parts of division-of-labor constructions) (`kirjuta `rohud `ülesse, võipolla siis ku=ma ükskord `polikasse lähen, ee järsku see Kertu `annab ilma retseptita kah. ‘Write down the medicines, maybe if I go to the polyclinic someday, maybe Kertu will give them without a prescription.’).

The analysis shows how the different syntactic constructions used to make offers are related to the interactional situation and the sequential placement of the offer, deontic status and responsibilities of interactants, distribution of benefits and/or costs.


interactional linguistics, offer, sequence, social action, deontic status, Estonian


Brown , Penelope , Stephen Levinson 1987. Politeness. Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Clayman , Steven E. , John Heritage 2014. Benefactors and beneficiaries. Benefactive status and stance in the management of offers and requests. – Requesting in Social Interaction. Eds. Paul Drew , Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen. (= Studies in Language and Social Interaction 26.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company , 55–86.

Couper-Kuhlen , Elizabeth 2014. What does grammar tell us about action? – Pragmatics 24 (3) , 623–647.

Couper-Kuhlen , Elizabeth , Marja Etelämäki 2014. On divisions of labor in request and offer environments. – Requesting in Social Interaction. Eds. Paul Drew , Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen. (= Studies in Language and Social Interaction 26.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company , 115–144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/slsi.26.05cou.

Curl , Traci S. 2006. Offers of assistance: constraints on syntactic design. – Journal of Pragmatics 38 (8) , 1257–1280.

Goffman , Erving 1983. Felicity’s condition. – American Journal of Sociology 89 (1) , 1–53.

Hennoste , Tiit 2000. Sissejuhatus suulisesse eesti keelde IV. Suulise kõne eri­sõnavara III. Partiklid. – Akadeemia 8 , 1773–1806.

Hennoste , Tiit 2012. Küsimuse vorm , episteemiline staatus ja episteemiline hoiak. – Keel ja Kirjandus 8/9 , 674−695.

Hennoste , Tiit , Andriela Rääbis 2004. Dialoogiaktid eesti infodialoogides: tüpoloogia ja analüüs. Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.

ISK = Auli Hakulinen , Maria Vilkuna , Riitta Korhonen , Vesa Koivisto , Tarja Riitta Heinonen , Irja Alho 2004. Iso suomen kielioppi. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.

Kasterpalu , Riina , Tiit Hennoste 2016. Estonian aa: a multifunctional change-of-state token. – Journal of Pragmatics 104 , 148−162.

Keevallik , Leelo 1999. Informatsioonikäsitluse partikkel ahah telefonivestlustes. – Emakeele Seltsi aastaraamat 43 (1997). Peatoim. Mati Erelt. Tartu , 34–56.

Keevallik , Leelo 2003. From Interaction to Grammar. Estonian Finite Verb Forms in Conversation. (= Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Studia Uralica Upsaliensia 34.) Uppsala.

Keevallik , Leelo 2017. Negotiating deontic rights in second position: young adult daughters’ imperatively formatted responses to mothers’ offers in Estonian. – Imperative Turns at Talk. The Design of Directives in Action. Eds. Marja-Leena Sorjonen , Liisa Raevaara , Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen. (= Studies in Language and Social Interaction 30.) Amsterdam , Philadelphia: John Benjamins , 271–295.

Kendrick , Kobin H. , Paul Drew 2014. The putative preference for offers over requests. – Requesting in Social Interaction. Eds. Paul Drew , Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen. (= Studies in Language and Social Interaction 26.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company , 87–114.

Kendrick , Kobin H. , Paul Drew 2016. Recruitment: offers , requests , and the organization of assistance in interaction. – Research on Language and Social Interaction 49 (1) , 1–19.

Kärkkäinen , Elise , Tiina Keisanen 2012. Linguistic and embodied formats for making (concrete) offers. – Discourse Studies 14 (5) , 587–611.

Lerner , Gene H. 1996. Finding face in the preference structures of talk-in-interaction. – Social Psychology Quarterly 59 (4) , 303–321.

Liddicoat , Anthony J. 2007. An Introduction to Conversation Analysis. New York: Continuum.

Lindström , Anna 2005. Language as social action. A study of how senior citizens request assistance with practical tasks in the Swedish home help service. – Syntax and Lexis in Conversation. Studies on the Use of Linguistic Resources in Talk-in-Interaction. Eds. Auli Hakulinen , Margret Selting. (= Studies in Language and Social Interaction 17.) Amsterdam , Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company , 209–230.

Rossi , Giovanni 2012. Bilateral and unilateral requests: the use of imperatives and Mi X? in Italian. – Discourse Processes 49 , 426–458.

Rääbis , Andriela 2009. Eesti telefonivestluste sissejuhatus: struktuur ja suhtlusfunktsioonid. (= Dissertationes linguisticae Universitatis Tartuensis 13.) Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.

Schegloff , Emanuel A. 2007. Sequence Organization in Interaction. Volume 1 , A Primer in Conversation Analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Schegloff , Emanuel A. , Harvey Sacks 1973. Opening up closings. – Semiotica 8 , 289–327.

Searle , John R. 1976. A classification of illocutionary acts. – Language in Society 5 , 1–23.

Searle , John R. 1979. Expression and Meaning. Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sidnell , Jack 2010. Conversation Analysis. An Introduction. Sussex: Wiley & Sons.

Stevanovic , Melisa 2011. Participants’ deontic rights and action formation: the case of declarative requests for action. – InLiSt – Interaction and Linguistic Structures 52.
http://www.inlist.uni-bayreuth.de/issues/52/Inlist52.pdf  (30.11.2016).

Stevanovic , Melisa , Anssi Peräkylä 2012. Deontic authority in interaction: the right to announce , propose , and decide. – Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (3) , 297–321.

Taleghani-Nikazm , Carmen 2006. Request Sequences. The Intersection of Grammar , Interaction , and Social Context. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Teemets , Helena 2010. Ettepanekute ja pakkumiste väljendamine eesti argi­dialoogides. Bakalaureusetöö. http://www.murre.ut.ee/arhiiv/naita_pilt.php?materjal=kasikiri&materjal_id=D1610&sari=D.

Teemets , Helena 2012. Direktiivid eesti keele argivestlustes. Magistritöö. http://dspace.ut.ee/bitstream/handle/10062/42658/Teemets ,H2012.pdf.


Current Issue: Vol. 62, Issue 1, 2016

Publishing schedule:
               Next year June