Caught in the act 1217 A: It’s hot in here.
B: I’m sorry. I’ll open the window.
It was proposed that the initiation in each of these cases be regarded as
an inform, but that in (7) this inform be reclassified as a direct. The
reclassifying mechanism is marked by ‘I’m sorry’ which is seen as accepting
the need for some action. In the light of our introduction of a commissive
a different interpretation is possible. Example (7) is exactly parallel to
(3) and (4) above. It is the commissive, ‘I’ll open the window’ which has
the effect of showing that the initiation is interpreted as a direct and
which is the head of the Follow-up move. The words ‘I’m sorry’ make
up a pre-head act, let us call it a pre-commissive, which introduces the
commissive.
Given this analysis the initiating moves are seen as having illocutionary
potential rather than illocutionary force. In (5), (6) and (7) the initiation has
the interactive force of an inform. It may or may not be the case that any
or all of these initiations were intended as directives. But in an analytical
model we have no way of retrieving A’s intentions. We can only describe
the discourse as it unfolds. We cannot claim privileged insight into the
participants’ knowledge and intentions. In (5), therefore, we have an IF
exchange. A produces an inform and B responds with an acknowledge. In
(6) we have three moves:
A: It’s hot in here. (I/opening/inform)
B: The window’s jammed. (I/opening/inform)
A: Oh, I see. (F/follow-up/acknowledge)In (7), however, we have a two-move exchange:
A: It’s hot in here. (I/opening/inform)
B: I’m sorry. I’ll open the window. (F/follow-up/Pre-commissive
+ commissive)Because of the commissive at the head of the Follow-up it is the directive
potential of the Opening move that is actualized in the discourse. This may
or may not have been A’s intention, but that is the stage the discourse has
now reached. A is seen as having issued a direct to which B has responded
with a commissive.
A POSSIBLE ANSWER TO THE PROBLEMS
In answer to our original question:
How...does a hearer know when a declarative structure has the function
of a question, and how does he know that a clause does or does not ask
a question depending on where it occurs in a sequence of clauses?
(Sinclair and Coulthard 1975:2)