This study examines the characteristics of request sequences in Chinese public service calls. The data analysis indicates that a prominent characteristic of Chinese public service calls is the frequent appearance of insert expansions and non-minimal post-expansions, with the latter occurring after both preferred response and dispreferred response. This is closely related to participants’ institutional identities and epistemic asymmetry; operators handling such service calls should pay due attention to this asymmetry to ensure mutual understanding in conversation.
AtkinsonJMHeritageJ (1985) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2.
Blum-KulkaSOlshtainE (1984) Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns. Applied Linguistics5(3): 196–213.
3.
BrownPLevinsonSC (1987) Politeness: Some Universals of Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4.
CurlTSDrewP (2008) Contingency and action: A comparison of two forms of requesting. Research on Language and Social Interaction41(2): 129–153.
5.
DrewP (2013) Conversation analysis and social action. Journal of Foreign Languages37(3): 2–19.
6.
DrewPCouper-KuhlenE (2014) Requesting – From speech act to recruitment. In: DrewPCouper-KuhlenE (eds) Requesting in Social Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 1–34.
7.
DrewPHeritageJ (1992) Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8.
DrewPWalkerT (2010) Citizens’ emergency calls: Requesting assistance in calls to the police. In: CoulthardMJohnsonA (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 95–110.
9.
EdwardsDStokoeE (2007) Self-help in calls for help with problem neighbors. Research on Language and Social Interaction40(1): 9–32.
10.
Felix-BrasdeferJC (2005) Indirectness and politeness in Mexican requests. In: EddintonD (ed.) Selected Proceedings of the 7th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project, pp. 66–78.
11.
GoodwinMHCekaiteA (2013) Calibration in direct/response sequences in family interaction. Journal of Pragmatics46: 122–138.
12.
HeinemannT (2006) ‘Will you or can’t you?’ Displaying entitlement in interrogative requests. Journal of Pragmatics38: 1081–1104.
13.
HepburnAWilkinsonSButlerCW (2014) Intervening with conversation analysis in telephone helpline services: Strategies to improve effectiveness. Research on Language and Social Interaction47(3): 239–254.
14.
HeritageJ (2012) The epistemic engine: Sequence organization and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction45(1): 30–52.
15.
HeritageJ (2013) Epistemics in conversation. In: SidnellJStiversT (eds) The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 370–394.
16.
HeritageJClaymanS (2010) Talk in Action: Interactions, Identities, and Institutions. Oxford: Blackwell.
17.
KentA (2012) Compliance, resistance and incipient compliance when responding to directives. Discourse Studies14(6): 711–730.
18.
KuroshimaS (2010) Another look at the service encounter: Progressivity, intersubjectivity, and trust in a Japanese sushi restaurant. Journal of Pragmatics42: 856–869.
19.
LeeC (2005) A cross-linguistic study on the linguistic expressions of Cantonese and English requests. Pragmatics15: 395–422.
20.
LeeS-H (2006) Requests and responses in calls for service. PhD Thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.
21.
LeeS-H (2009) Extended requesting: Interaction and collaboration in the production and specification of requests. Journal of Pragmatics41: 1248–1271.
22.
LinY-H (2009) Query preparatory modals: Cross-linguistic and cross-situational variations in request modification. Journal of Pragmatics41(8): 1636–1656.
23.
LindstromA (2005) Language as social action: A study of how senior citizens request assistance with practical tasks in the Swedish home help service. In: HakulinenASeltingM (eds) Syntax and Lexis in Conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 209–233.
24.
OgiermannE (2015) Object requests: Rights and obligations surrounding object possession and object transfer. Journal of Pragmatics82: 1–4.
25.
PomerantzAHeritageJ (2013) Preference. In: SidnellJStiversT (eds) The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 210–228.
26.
RauniomaaMKeisanenT (2012) Two multimodal formats for responding to requests. Journal of Pragmatics44: 829–842.
27.
RaymondG (2003) Grammar and social organization: Yes/no interrogatives and the structure of responding. American Sociological Review68(6): 939–967.
28.
RonnebergKSvennevigJ (2010) Declining to help: Rejections in service request to the police. Discourse & Communication4(3): 279–305.
29.
SacksHSchegloffEAJeffersonG (1974) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language50: 696–735.
30.
SchegloffEA (2006) Interaction: The infrastructure for social institutions, the natural ecological niche for language, and the arena in which culture is enacted. In: EnfieldNJLevinsonSC (eds) Roots of Human Sociality: Culture, Cognition and Interaction. New York: Berg, pp. 70–96.
31.
SchegloffEA (2007) Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32.
SchegloffEAJeffersonGSacksH (1977) The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language53: 361–382.
33.
SearleJR (1976) A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society5(1): 1–23.
34.
ShahrokhiM (2012) Perception of dominance, distance and imposition in Persian males’ request speech act strategies. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences46: 678–685.
35.
StiversTRossanoF (2010) Mobilizing response. Research on Language and Social Interaction43(1): 3–31.
36.
VacsiA (2011) Cross-cultural and situational variation in request behavior: Request strategies in American English and Hungarian. Argument7: 95–106.
37.
ZimmermanDH (1992) The interactional organization of calls for emergency assistance. In: DrewPHeritageJ (eds) Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 418–469.
38.
ZinkenJ (2015) Contingent control over shared goods: ‘Can I have x’ requests in British English informal interaction. Journal of Pragmatics82: 23–38.
