A functional description of questions 933 (C:4:3)
G: //p Fox is his FIRST-name //p ISn’t it //
S: //p RIGHT //
4 (ibid.:26)
G: //p sounds like a soCIety of MOLEs //p DOESn’t it //
S: ( (laughs) )
In (4), S responds to G’s tag question by laughing, which is commonly used
as a minimal indication of agreement. This kind of response would be
unacceptable for a tag with a rising tone because it would require a more
explicit response of a confirmation or disconfirmation.
Thus, although both types of tag question expect a ‘yes’ (or ‘no’) answer
from the addressee, the function that they realize is different. While a ‘yes’
(or ‘no’) answer to a rising tag realizes a confirmation, a ‘yes’ (or ‘no’)
answer to a falling tag realizes an agreement. The difference can be best
seen by comparing (1) with (5) below.
5 (On a sunny day)
A: //p it’s a LOVEly day //p ISn’t it //
B: //p YES //
While S’s question in (1) seeks confirmation from G, A’s question in (5)
cannot possibly seek confirmation from B that it is a lovely day because the
truth of the asserted proposition is self-evident. It functions to get B to
agree with him that it evidently is a lovely day (see Brazil 1984a:36).
Thus we can see that in terms of the function or communicative choice
realized by the expected answers, there are only two types of tag question,
not four: one which expects agreement and one which expects confirmation
from the addressee.
The third type of question which falls under yes/no questions, according
to Quirk et al., is declarative questions which are items that are identical
lexico-grammatically to declaratives but function as questions because they
are spoken with rising intonation. For example, ‘You’ve got the
sives?’ Declarative questions are said to invite the hearer’s verification, that
is, either a ‘yes’ or a ‘no’ answer (see 1985:814).
This analysis of declarative questions is questionable. Firstly, the very fact
that the question should be presented in declarative form suggests that the
speaker has certain assumptions and the utterance is biased towards an expected
response. Brazil (1985) suggests that in the utterance //r+ you preFER THAT
one //, the speaker is heard as ‘proffering a tentative assessment of common
ground’ and the response expected is a ‘confirmation of a proclaimed endorsement,
yes’ (pp. 155–6). A response which denies the tentative assessment of the
speaker can of course occur, but it will be contrary to the expectation and is
likely to be spoken in contrastive high key. Secondly, Quirk et al. have overlooked
the fact that ‘declarative questions’ can also be realized by a declarative sentence
spoken with a falling intonation. For example, the arrowed utterance in (6):