The dividing question as a hedging tool in the dialogues of the British working class

Shchegortsova Elizaveta Alekseevna ORCID: 0009-0007-3580-9597 Postgraduate Student, Department of English Studies and Cross-Cultural Communication, Institute of Foreign Languages, Moscow City Pedagogical Universty 105064, Russia, Moscow region, Moscow, lane Small State-owned, 5B yeashch@gmail.com

Due to globalization and the strengthening of international relations around the world, the study of the peculiarities of speech behavior of representatives of different cultures is an important area of modern linguistic thought. One of the most striking features of the linguistic culture of the British, noted by scientists, is the tendency to use a strategy of speech fencing, or hedging (from the English "hedge" – hedge).

The term "hedging" was coined by the American linguist J. Lakoff was used in the 1970s to denote words that give blurriness and uncertainty to statements, for example: kind of, about, approximately, etc. ^{[11, p. 492]}. Subsequently, however, the interpretation of this phenomenon was somewhat expanded, and today hedges are understood not only as individual lexical units, but also grammatical constructions and even phonetic techniques aimed at reducing the power of utterance, emphasizing the addressee's uncertainty in his rightness and removing responsibility from him ^{[12, 10, 6,]}.

In the linguistic culture of the British, hedging is an integral part of interacting with other people. In many ways, its abundance in dialogues is explained by the theory of politeness of P. Brown and S. Levonson, since it allows the speaker to preserve the "social face" of the interlocutor, avoiding encroachment on his independence and freedom ^[8]. Modern society as a whole increasingly notes the increasing importance of a tolerant attitude towards others and showing respect for the interlocutor ^{[1, p. 32]}. In English culture, where the concept of personal freedom and inviolability, or privacy, is one of the key ones ^{[9, p. 30]}, this issue is even more acute, and hedging, minimizing the intrusion into the privacy of interlocutors, has become one of the most common speech strategies.

It is noteworthy, however, that hedging can be observed in the speech not only of members of the upper circles of society, whose behavior is inextricably associated with politeness, but also in the dialogues of representatives of the British working class, who, according to stereotypes, sound more rude. For example, in the movie "Sorry We Missed You" (directed by K. Loach, 2019), which tells about the life of an ordinary working-class family in London, we recorded 164 hedged phrases. In 53 of them, the grammatical construction of the dividing question was used as a means of speech separation, which indicates the high frequency of this hedge.

Let's consider the specifics of the functioning of the separation issue as a means of hedging in the speech of the British working class using the example of dialogues from the film "Sorry We Missed You". The choice of this film is due to the fact that its director, screenwriter, and actors are British, its plot reflects the realities of modern London, and the quality of the life of ordinary British people in it has been noted by many critics, which makes the speech of its characters suitable material for research. In addition, due to the fact that the viewer can immerse himself in the life of the characters as much as possible, when studying their dialogues, it is possible to take into account their characters and the situation of communication. This factor is very valuable, since the analysis of sounding speech necessarily involves an analysis of the context ^{[7, p. 65]} Let's pay attention to the grammatical, pragmatic and phonetic components.

From the point of view of normative grammar, most of the dividing questions in the speech of the heroes are constructed correctly. However, considering that the interpretation of grammatical structures depends on social, psychological and situational factors ^{[5, p. 105]}, we also included in this category sentences where universal ‘eh’, ‘right’, ‘alright’, ‘OK’, ‘yeah’ are used instead of an auxiliary verb and pronouns:

·       Let’s get you a nice bath, eh?

·       Have your dinner and have your tablets, ok?

·       Look after yourself, yeah?

·       So have a think about this, right?

Often, the characters of a motion picture end statements with a reduced form of the combination "isn't it", which sounds like [n?t] or [n]. The spread of this form among residents of London is noted by researchers of modern trends in the English language ^{[13, p. 29]} At the same time, it can be used in phrases where, from the point of view of the normative grammar of the English language, it is necessary to use another auxiliary verb and pronoun. For example, an irritated teenager demands that his father return his phone to him as follows: "Give me my phone then, innit?" (instead of the normative version of "will you").

As grammarians note, the dividing question in English is a typical way to clarify information and express doubt ^{[4, p. 45]}. However, an analysis of the communicative situations in which the characters used this construction showed that it also allows the speaker to somewhat distance himself from his words or soften the power of utterance when solving the following communicative tasks:

· Request for information (When Harpoon was suspended, could he do his work from the school library, supervised, right?);

· criticism (Maybe your best isn't good enough, is it?);

· Expression of opinion (We've had a good laugh, haven't we?);

· statement of intent (But I'll see you later on, OK?);

· guess (I suppose you're gonna hit me with another 100 quid fine as well, aren't you?);

· suggestion (Why don't we get an Indian take-away tonight, eh?);

· advice (So have a think about this, right?);

· requirement (Heat it up in the microwave, OK?);

· statement of fact (They track every parcel, don't they).

Most often, the characters hedged their opinions (15 statements), criticism (9 statements) and facts (9 statements) with the help of a dividing question. Thus, the British manage to reduce the imposition of their point of view on the interlocutor. It is noteworthy that criticism is often hedged even in moments of quarrels, when the characters are in an emotionally unstable state and definitely do not seek to be tactful:

·       You just don’t give a sh*t, do you?

·       It’s your choice to be a skivvy, isn’t it?

·       That’s f**king joke, innit? 

Thus, it can be assumed that hedging for the British is not just a communication strategy to make words polite. The need to avoid invading someone else's privacy has become one of the unknowingly determining factors of speech behavior for representatives of the English linguistic culture and forces them to express their thoughts as distantly as possible, even in stressful situations. However, the emotional state affects the intonation design of the hedging, since the rhythmic logic of the utterance depends both on linguistic (for example, on the type of sentence for the purpose of the utterance) and on extralinguistic components ^{[2, p. 60]}.

To analyze the intonation in hedged phrases of movie characters, we used the Praat program. In this study, we focused on the nuclear tones of the "tail" part of the separation issues. As a rule, the end of dividing questions is pronounced either with a rise on the last stressed syllable (rise), if the speaker really wants to hear an honest answer from the interlocutor, or with a fall (fall), if the addressee is expected to exclusively agree with the statement ^{[14, pp. 48-49]}.

In the examples we analyzed, 21 statements ended with a rise, 30 with a fall, and 1 with an ascending–descending tone (fall-rise). Let's turn to some patterns.

Firstly, in situations of irritation and emotional intensity, the characters almost always use a descending tone (16 statements against 2 phrases with an ascending tone and 1 with a descending-ascending one):

·       So it’s my fault, | ?is it?

·        Well, 'yeah, of course I do, | ?don’t I?

·       'That’s how it is, | ?isn’t it?

In these cases, the speaker does not really need the recipient's response. An auxiliary verb with a pronoun at the end of sentences serves as a kind of shield, which implies: "We both understand what's going on." At the same time, the ascending tone used in two similar statements in the film carries a slightly different meaning. When an employee loses control of the situation and snaps at an unfairly treated boss, he says, "'Squeeze us out, | eh?" using a high ascending tone at the end of the phrase.  With this intonation contour, the addressee seems to be challenging: "Is that what you're going to do?" In another situation, the husband is unhappy that his wife tells him at the last moment that he is being called to his son at school: "'That's a bit 'short notice | ?innit?" (again with a high ascending tone). The rise in the "tail" of the question can be interpreted as follows: "Maybe I don't have to go?" Thus, both statements are aimed not at putting an end to the dispute, but either at escalating the conflict, or at trying to shift responsibility for the development of the dialogue to the interlocutor.

Another pattern identified during the analysis is the tendency to use an ascending tone in sentences, tips and requirements. Such speech acts pose the greatest threat to the privacy of the addressee, as they directly imply an impact on his behavior, which is why it is especially important to hedge them. In nine of the twelve statements, an ascending tone was used. Thus, rhythmomelodics seems to give the interlocutor the opportunity to refuse to do what the speaker wants him to do. However, in fact, this possibility does not always exist. For example, when a mother tells her daughter: "And 'get into 'bed for 'quarter to nine, | all ? right?"; or a boss tells a subordinate: "Let's 'start here  | as we 'mean to goon, | ? eh?", they can't disobey. But the reluctance to violate the privacy of another is so strong that, at the linguistic level, the option of refusal is still provided.

When expressing hedged opinions or stating facts, a downward nuclear tone is more often used (15 statements against 9). However, out of nine phrases with an intonation rise at the end, four were uttered in only one scene: a policeman was conducting an educational conversation with a teenager caught for hooliganism:

·       A 'big ?moment, young man, | all ?right?

·       And 'not just you, | but for your 'folks as ?well, | all ?right?

The policeman is trying to convey to the young man the importance of his words, as evidenced by a slower pace of speech, noticeable pauses, as well as an ascending nuclear tone. Despite the fact that the interlocutor is silent, the addressee at the end of his statements seems to ask: "Do you understand what I'm talking about? Do you agree?" In this situation, it is not implied that the teenager has the opportunity to answer negatively, since the policeman is talking to him from a position of strength, but the intonation urges him, if not to give an answer, then at least to demonstrate understanding and involvement.

As the study showed, in addition to the emotional state, the gender factor can also have a significant impact on the rhythmic and melodic design of hedged phrases. Thus, one third of the statements ending in an ascending tone belong to female characters, while of the questions with a descending tone, only one sixth were uttered by women. As a result, it can be assumed that men are more likely to allow themselves a more categorical tone in their statements, while women are more likely to further reduce the strength of even already hedged statements.

Thus, the analysis of hedging in the dialogues of movie characters allowed us to draw a number of conclusions. 1) Hedging is an important communication strategy of the English working class, not necessarily related to the desire to be polite. 2) The dividing question is one of the most common means of hedging in the speech of representatives of this stratum of society, but it is not always formulated correctly from the point of view of normative grammar. 3) Most often, this hedge is used to reduce categoricality when expressing opinions, criticizing or stating facts. 4) The "tail" part of the dividing question can be intonationally characterized by both an ascending and descending nuclear tone, depending on the emotional state of the communicant, on his desire to support or complete the conversation, and on his gender identity.