12 Advances in spoken discourse analysis
Using the answers to these questions we can formulate three rules to predict
when a declarative or interrogative will be realizing something other than
a statement or question. See Figure 1 (p.11) for a systemic treatment of the
classification of interrogatives by means of these rules.
Rule 1
An interrogative clause is to be interpreted as a command to do if it fulfils
all the following conditions:
(i) it contains one of the modals ‘can’, ‘could’, ‘will’, ‘would’ (and sometimes
‘going to’);
(ii) the subject of the clause is also the addressee;
(iii) the predicate describes an action which is physically possible at the
time of the utterance.
Examples:
1 can you play the piano, John command
2 can John play the piano question
3 can you swim a length, John question
The first example is a command because it fulfils the three conditions—
assuming there is a piano in the room. The second is a question because the
subject and addressee are not the same person. The third is also a question
because the children are in the classroom and the activity is not therefore
possible at the time of utterance. However, as we have so far discovered no
exceptions to this rule, we predict that if the class were at the swimming
baths, example (3) would instead be interpreted as a command and followed
by a splash.
Rule 2
Any declarative or interrogative is to be interpreted as a command to stop
if it refers to an action or activity which is proscribed at the time of the
utterance.
Examples:
1 I can hear someone laughing command
2 is someone laughing command
3 what are you laughing at command
4 what are you laughing at question
The declarative command, as in the first example, is very popular with
some teachers. It is superficially an observation, but its only relevance at
the time of utterance is that it draws the attention of ‘someone’ to their