Imperative Directives: Orientations to Accountability

Alexandra Kent; Kobin H. Kendrick

doi:10.1080/08351813.2016.1201737

Imperative Directives: Orientations to Accountability

Alexandra Kent, Kobin H. Kendrick

Language and Linguistic Science

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Our analysis proceeds from the question that if grammar alone is insufficient to identify the action of an imperative (e.g., offering, directing, warning, begging, etc.), how can interlocutors come to recognize the specific action being performed by a given imperative? We argue that imperative directives that occur after the directed action could have first been relevantly performed explicitly to direct the actions of the recipient and tacitly treat the absence of the action as a failure for which the recipient is accountable. The tacit nature of the accountability orientation enables both parties to focus on restoring progressivity to the directed course of action rather than topicalizing a transgression. Data are from everyday interactions in British and American English.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	272-288
Number of pages	17
Journal	Research on Language and Social Interaction
Volume	49
Issue number	3
Early online date	5 Aug 2016
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2016.1201737
Publication status	Published - 2016

Bibliographical note

© 2016 Taylor & Francis. This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details

Access to Document

10.1080/08351813.2016.1201737

Kent and Kendrick (2016)
© 2016 Taylor & Francis. This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details (embargo period: 18 months)
Accepted author manuscript, 7.31 MB

Cite this

@article{8adb92fd32c94585bd38108eb2c7b190,

title = "Imperative Directives: Orientations to Accountability",

abstract = "Our analysis proceeds from the question that if grammar alone is insufficient to identify the action of an imperative (e.g., offering, directing, warning, begging, etc.), how can interlocutors come to recognize the specific action being performed by a given imperative? We argue that imperative directives that occur after the directed action could have first been relevantly performed explicitly to direct the actions of the recipient and tacitly treat the absence of the action as a failure for which the recipient is accountable. The tacit nature of the accountability orientation enables both parties to focus on restoring progressivity to the directed course of action rather than topicalizing a transgression. Data are from everyday interactions in British and American English.",

author = "Alexandra Kent and Kendrick, {Kobin H.}",

note = "{\textcopyright} 2016 Taylor & Francis. This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher{\textquoteright}s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details",

year = "2016",

doi = "10.1080/08351813.2016.1201737",

language = "English",

volume = "49",

pages = "272--288",

journal = "Research on Language and Social Interaction",

issn = "0835-1813",

publisher = "Routledge",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Imperative Directives

T2 - Orientations to Accountability

AU - Kent, Alexandra

AU - Kendrick, Kobin H.

N1 - © 2016 Taylor & Francis. This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Our analysis proceeds from the question that if grammar alone is insufficient to identify the action of an imperative (e.g., offering, directing, warning, begging, etc.), how can interlocutors come to recognize the specific action being performed by a given imperative? We argue that imperative directives that occur after the directed action could have first been relevantly performed explicitly to direct the actions of the recipient and tacitly treat the absence of the action as a failure for which the recipient is accountable. The tacit nature of the accountability orientation enables both parties to focus on restoring progressivity to the directed course of action rather than topicalizing a transgression. Data are from everyday interactions in British and American English.

AB - Our analysis proceeds from the question that if grammar alone is insufficient to identify the action of an imperative (e.g., offering, directing, warning, begging, etc.), how can interlocutors come to recognize the specific action being performed by a given imperative? We argue that imperative directives that occur after the directed action could have first been relevantly performed explicitly to direct the actions of the recipient and tacitly treat the absence of the action as a failure for which the recipient is accountable. The tacit nature of the accountability orientation enables both parties to focus on restoring progressivity to the directed course of action rather than topicalizing a transgression. Data are from everyday interactions in British and American English.

U2 - 10.1080/08351813.2016.1201737

DO - 10.1080/08351813.2016.1201737

M3 - Article

SN - 0835-1813

VL - 49

SP - 272

EP - 288

JO - Research on Language and Social Interaction

JF - Research on Language and Social Interaction

IS - 3

ER -