Pragmatics6:4.49I-509.

International Pragmatics Association

ASKING TO ASK: THE STRATEGTC FUNCTION OF INDIRECT REQUESTSFOR INFORMATTON TN INTERVIEWS

In a recentcolumn one televisioncritic for Toronto's The Globeand Mail bemoans the lossof "aggressive interviewingin Canadiantelevision." points out that "At He their best,good televisioninterviewers...have edge and persistence an that makes somesubjects squirm and sweat.For viewersthere is alwaysthe chancesomething revealing unexpected occur and it is this elementof surprisethat is altogether or will too rare in the painfully polite and well-behavedstudios of both the state broadcaster (CBC) and the private networks." In her discussionof political interviews Israelitelevision, on Blum-Kulka (1983)likenssuchinterviewsto a game between which "whenthe gameis well playedby all interactants, drama" speakers is (146)."The goal of the interviewers," she states,"is not necessarily corner the to politicianbut to get him to state his opinions and analysis political issues,in a of mannerthat is quotable" (146). Blum-Kulka points out that political interviews represent a distinct genre or register wherein speakers adhere to Grice's Cooperative Principle and engagein supportiveor non-supportivemoves largely determined reinforcement non-reinforcement presuppositions by or of represented in the questions posedby interviewers. In the data which I examine, which consist of 23 interviews done by four interviewers, female,two male, three Canadian,one American, and which range two frompoliticalto topicalinterviews both television on and radio, interviewers employ an extensive repertoire of speech acts which includes requestsfor information, assertions, requests for confirmation, rhetorical questions, socratic questions, clarifications, and comments or evaluations. one would expect, requests for As information the principalspeechact employedby interviewers. are Moreover, most requests informationemployedby interviewers direct requests.Nonetheless, for are a significant percentage requestsfor information are indirect. Interviewers,in of effect,ask to ask. For example, interviewerscan state directly "Tell me about downsizing your viewson it, because certainlythe buzzwordon the current and it's economy," usingan imperative,but they can also employ a range of indirect forms suchas (1) (2) I want to ask you more about that festival. I would like to know the relationship betweenrepression emotions of ah most specifically anger and depression. Do you really think you can live to be I meanyou're what in your late 40's closeto your 50's biologically, you think you can live to be a do

(3)

492

Marcin Macaulay

(4)

100 ah 120? But you know now that you're not going to changethat by yourself.

It is not altogether clear what motivates these indirect forms on the part of interviewers,since the interview is by definition an asymmetrical discoursewhich privilegesthe interviewerand giveshim or her the right to ask questions. Politeness, which is normally associated with indirectness, would seemto haveiittle role to play in the negotiation of interpersonalmeaningbetween speakers. And, indeed, it is desirable for interviewers to be seen as tough and hard-edged in their representationof requestsfor information. Asking to ask would seemto be a very strangesort of requestmade by interviewers, indirect requestsfor information yet make up between 20-36Vo all speechacts for the four interviewersI examine. of One interviewer,the most acclaimedof all Canadianinterviewers, Barbara Frum, employs slightly more indirect forms than direct (direct requests35Va;indirect requests 36%io). With rhetorical and socratic questionsas well as requests for confirmation and clarification,interviewerspossess sub-repertoireof direct and a indirect forms to effect the requestof information.

t. Indirect requests for information Indirect requests information are little analysed the literature.In their seminal for in discussion questionsin therapeuticdiscourse, of Labov and Fanshellconceptualize questions in speechact terms as "requests information,"but they do not provide for particular analysis indirect requests information,largelybecause of for requestsfor information are heavilyintegratedwith requests action, and analysedeither as for information requestsor as potential indirect requests action.The more indirect for indirect requestfor information is not dealt with. However,Tanz (1981) notes that indirect requestsfor information like other indirect requestscan be produced by invoking the preconditions a direct requestfor information:"A speakerwho says, for I'd like to know wlrcn the ferry is leaving, conveysa request for information by literally assertinghis desire to know the information.The speakercan convey the same request by saying,Do yott know when the ferry is leaving?Literally, he queries the hearer's ability to provide the answer.So there are other ways to convey a request for information than by directly askingthe pertinent question"(190). Tanz' brief discussion suggestive. can formalize indirect requestsfor We is information through referenceto preconditions generaldirectives. for Theoretically, usingSearle(1991),we can accountfor indirectforms throughfour principal felicity conditionsfor indirect directives: The preparatorycondition,the sinceritycondition, the propositionalcondition and the essential condition.The preparatorycondition refers to the hearer's ability to perform a given request.Tanz above gives the example of.Do yott know when tlrc ferry is leavirtg?We can analysethis as a query about a precondition for requests for information, but such a request is not technicallyabout the hearer's ability to answera question. What is really being queried is the state of knowledgeof the hearer.Hearers,however,can be queried about their ability to answera question: (5) (6) I wonder if you could comment on that for us please Answer that questionif you can please

The strategic function of indirect requestsfor information

493

Speakers alsoassertthe sincerityconditionfor directives can (desire,wish,want that an actionbe performed) as an indirect meansof making a requestfor information: (7) I wanna talk about health carebecause that'sone of the thingsyou've had to tackle...

Further, speakers assertthe propositional can conditionfor directives which concern the performance a future act on the part of the hearer or his/her willingness of to performa future act: (8) (9) Will you tell me more about your tactics? Would you begin by sketchingin the detailsof the Andes crash?

Iastly, according Searle,directivescan be understoodby a hearer as indirect if to the essential condition is queried.Searleanalyses essential the condition in terms of efforts on the speaker'spart to get a hearer to perform a given task. This category largelyconcernsreasonsgiven by the speakerfor the performance of a speechact. He includes, then, a very general class of behaviours in this precondition: (10) (11) Dr. Chopra, I am interestedin knowingwhere there are Arathetical alternatives Aids-relatedproblems. for I'm going to bring it up because still there, I am going to bring it it's up becauseLucien Bouchardbringsit up every day and saysit's still not settledbecause that issue. of But the questionwas why don't you like being interviewed?

(12)

In the lastthree examples, speakers the assert either the consequences or reasons of for the requestfor information.Speakers can also invoke purposeto effect indirect requests information. for

2. Strategicpolitenessin indirect requestsfor information Searle's theoryprovidesa usefuland elegantmechanism which indirect directives by canbe understood, but, of course,it doesnot focusspecifically indirect requests on for information,nor does it take into considerationthe context of situation of requesting informationas a speechact.Searleis primarily interestedin how hearers process speechacts inferentially so as to understandhow a second illocutionary meaning be conveyedby a speaker,that is, an indirect speechact. Labov and can Fanshell, however, focus more attention on sociolinguistic variables and thus speaker's strategicchoicesin requestsfor information and thus give attention to interpersonalfactors as speaker's such and hearer's rightsand obligations. Questions are not in any way neutral speech acts, whereby there is simply a transfer of information from one party to another.By definition,requests information are for negative-face threatening and can also threaten the positive face of the hearer/respondent.

494

Marcia Macaula,

on of In his discussion the pragmatics answers, Kiefer (1988) delineatesthe "epistemic-imperative questionsas embedded within approach"which analyses imperatives. The hearer is commandedto "bring it about" (imperative)that "I know" (epistemic) (264). The request for information imposes a condition of when expectancyon the hearer who must fulfil it. Of course,there are occasions hearersindicate that the speakerdoes not have the right to ask a certain question, that a given request for information is too personalor inappropriate under the circumstances. general, however, requestsfor information carry with them a In strongobligationon the part of the hearer.Blum-Kulka(1983)goesso far as to call them "control acts":"questions in [whetheror not interrogative form] can also be consideredcontrol acts,sinceby requiringor demanding response they often carry a a strong command message (147).Bublitz (1981)notes further that [Goody, 1978)" "It is a characteristic feature of questions often overlookedthat the speakerby askingis not only able to causethe hearer to take the floor and react in a certain way, e.g.to answer...but he that in addition [and similarto directives] is also exerting (852). his influence as to the CONTENT of the hearer'sresponse" Not only is the relationshipbetween speaker and hearer asymmetricalin requestsfor information, but also the relationshipcan be coercive.Interviewers and indeed there can often downplaythe power they have ("I just have questions"), the act. Interviewees can even be extensive struggles control surrounding speech for attempt to reverse the roles. In one interview the actor Marlon Brando almost achieves this betore the interviewer, Larry Kng, finally reassertshis role and authority as interviewer: "Okay. Well, one night we'll have Marlon Brando Live. Why did you chooseacting You'll host it. I'll guest...No, night,you'rethe guest. this as a career?Why did you chooseto be other people?" In their discussion negativeface,Brown and kvinson point out that there of are many meanslinguistically which a speakercan redress by threat of negativeface for a hearer. lndirect requestsfor informationformed by invokingthe preparatory the condition concerning hearer's conditionconcerning hearer's ability, propositional certainof the speaker's willingness, the essential and conditions concerning reasons all have the effect of redressing negative face.Theseare, in Labov and Fanshell's terms, mitigating forms in that they take into considerationthe hearer's dispreferencefor impingement.By queryingthe hearer's ability or willingnessto answer,or by providing the hearer with reasons making the request,a speaker for can mitigate imposition upon a hearer.For example,in an interviewwith Margaret Thatcher, the Canadianinterviewer,Barbara Frum, makesthe following request: (13) Will you let me ask two more quick questions?

Frum wants to continue what has been a very tough interview with Thatcher; Thatcher has grown impatient. Frum therefore redresses Thatcher'snegativeface by literally asking to ask. In this requestfor information,there is absenceof coercion.Thatcher is tree to say 'no'. Frum also minimizesthe imposition by minimizing her goal. She has only two questions and further they are "quick."The threat to Thatcher's negative face is small, and so this indirect request for form has the strategic purposeon the interviewer'spart information as a politeness of enabling the interview to continue.The indirect requestfor information serves a phatic function of keepingthe channels communication of open at a time when

The stategic function of indirect requestsfor infomtation

495

thereis threat that they may close. A speakercan also redressthreat to negativeface by querying a hearer's beliefor knowledgestate.Tanz aboveprovidesthe exampleDo you know when the fery it leavingto illustrate an indirect requestfor information.According to Tanz, this requestqueriesthe hearer'sability to answerthe request.However, querying a hearer's knowledgeor belief state is not the same as queryinga hearer'sability. Speaker's invoke the preparatoryconditionfor directives perform an indirect can to request information: tor (14) Can you explain the difference'/

Sucha fcrm is only marginallypolite, because, althoughit redresses negativeface, it hasthe potential to threaten positiveface through the conventionalimplicature that the hearer may not have the ability to "explainthe difference."Invoking the preparatory condition as a means of performing indirect requestsfor information is potentially problematic,sincethe hearer may lose face if his or her ability is put into question. Queryinga hearer'sbelief or knowledgestate,however,has far less potential threaten positiveface: to (15) But do you think this is a justice denied,this is a Donald Marshall caseatler all this time I (16) Do you know if the SovietUnion or the USA seriously considered dropping nuclear weapons on any country - for example, on Vietnam,or Korea? Alghanistan,

Suchhighly conventionalindirect requestsfor information invoke the existential status the information. When a speaker of queriesor asserts hearer's a belief state (Do yott thhtk, you think), s/he is, as it were, establishing the existenceof the informations/he needs, desires,or wants. For example, to the request Do yott thiltklknow hearer can respondeither 'yes' or 'no'. Such requestsconstrainthe the hearer further.unless no the hearerchooses elaborate. to In suchindirectrequests, precondition a prior to that of the hearer'sability to respondis being queried, since the speaker is first ascertainingwhether the hearerhas the desired information. If the hearer has the information requested, thenit followsthat s/he can answer.On the one hand, such an indirect request for information avoidsputting the hearer on the spot as well as further challenging the hearer's abilityand so positiveface,while on the other,the socialconstraints the of interviewas an asymmetricaldiscourseobliges the hearer to provide the information, realized either as "knowledge" "opinion."Suchindirectrequests or for information highlypolite forms servingthe interests both the intervieweeand are of the interviewer.For the interviewee, threat to negative and positive face is minimized; the interviewer,suchindirect forms serveas promptswhich provoke for the interviewee into "say[ing]more." As well as queryinghearer'sbelief state,speakers can also politely request information representingtheir own mental statesas in I was wondeing I have by asking been myselfwherebythey realizeboth the roles of speakerand hearer,while assigning hearer to a new role akin to listener: the

496

Marcia Macaulay

(17)

I waswonderingwhat you think of CalvinKlein's designs compared as to what other designers putting on the runwaythesedays? are

Searlewould analysethis indirect request in terms of invocationof the essential condition; that is, it counts as an attempt to get the hearer to perform an action. But, in this example the action is only being hinted at. The interviewercould ask directlyAre Calvin Klein's desigrts betteror worsetlnn what other desigtersareputting on the ntnway thesedays? Such a requestfor information would require that the interviewee,Grace Mirabella, provide an answerin the form of an evaluation of Calvin Klein. Such a requestwould be both negativeand positiveface threatening since the interviewee would be required to make a potentially controversial judgment; that is, such a request presumesthat Mirabella has the ability to make this judgment and further requires she must make it known to others and specifically the interviewer,PamelaWallin. Of course,Wallin could also have askedDo you thir* Calvin Klein's designs arex as compared...2. This requestwould alsobe polite. Why then does she choose an evenmore mitigatingform, which is highlyindirect and technically doesnot make a requestof the intervieweeat all, exceptinferentially? Although Grace Mirabella is a fashionwriter who makesa livinganalysing designers'work, is beingdrawn she in by Wallin to make a controversial assessment Calvin Klein. To prompt or of encourageher interviewee Mirabella to make that assessment, Wallin virtually removes all threat to negativeface. Mirabella is made aware of a need on the speaker's part, but there is no linguisticcoercionfor her to answer,sincetechnically she is not being asked a question.This is not the same as if Wallin had said 1 wantlneedto know wlnt yott think of Calvin Klein which would invoke the sincerity condition and be highly face-threatening for Mirabella. Wallin's need for the information can only be arrived at by conversational implicature(relevance)which permitsMirabella the freedomto respondor not to respond, sincethe implicature can be taken up or not taken up according Mirabella's to wishes. Indirect requestsfor informationwhich minimizethreat to the negativeface of the intervieweein my data are "politeness" is forms,but politeness not the main goal or issue. Interviewerschoosecertain of the indirect requestsfor information to reduce threat to the interviewee to ensure that the interview will proceed smoothly or continue. In the exampleabovewhere the interviewerBarbara Frum literally asks to ask of Margaret Thatcher, she does so at a point where the interview is breaking down and where to continue she needs the cooperation of Thatcher.Thus she minimizesher impositionupon Thatcher,who consents be to further interviewed. The questions whichfollow,however, highlyconfrontational: are "Do you like being called Iron Lady?". "Do you ever allow yourselfself-doubt?" These requestsfor information are quite obviouslythreatening to positive face. then, Frum usesan indirectrequestredressing hearer'snegative Strategically, the face, only to set up further requests which have no such redress. When PamelaWallin asksher interviewee Michael Harris in (15), "But do you think this is a justice denied,this is a Donald Marshallcaseafter all this time?", she strategicallyavoids any embarrassment Harris should he not be able to to answer her question; however, she also makes a request which is positively conduciveand carries the implicature that Harris does think that "this is a justice denied, this is a Donald Marshall case after all this time." Moreover. this

The strategic function of indirect requestsfor information

497

conventional indirect requestfor information carriesanother implicature,that the will interviewee "saymore." By virtue of the Maxim of Relevance,Wallin expects by her interviewee only to agreewith the presupposition not conveyed her request but to expandor elaborateon his reasonsfor doing so. Wallin's highly indirect request for information in (17), "I was wondering whatyou think of Calvin Klein's designs comparedto what other designersare as puttingon the runway thesedays?"invoking the essential condition,also functions as a prompt for more talk. By redressing Mirabella's face so extensively that she doesnot technicallyrequest information of her, but of herself, Wallin in fact is prompting Mirabella to evaluateCalvin Kein's designs. The more controversialor problematica request for information may be for an interviewee, the more delicately more indirectly a questioncan be put. Redressing or negative face by going far as to not technically so threatenit, as Wallin doeswhen shewonderswhat Mirabella thinks rather than asking her directly, has the strategic purpose of encouraging intervieweeto open up and talk about a subjectwhich otherwise the mightnot be taken up at all. The interpersonal meaningor roles betweenthe interviewerand interviewee are completelyaltered by such indirect requests.The interviewer momentarily suspends his/her right to request and rather than obliging the interviewee to respond, assigns interviewee more equalrole of co-conversationalist can the the who respond will, or meet the needs of the interviewerat will. The conventionsof at general conversation brought into the contextof situationof the interview and are thereis the momentaryillusion that conversation existsbetweenequals.But this is only an illusion, since the interviewer'sreal motive is to get the interviewee to respond highly face threateningrequests. to These indirect forms all function as prompts encourage to the intervieweeto "saymore" in the interview.The concern of the intervieweris not really politeness but the interview itself and the strategic getting information and talk. of

3. Provocation indirect requestsfor information in Not all indirectrequests information are mitigatingor negativeface redressing. for Interviewers also employ conventional indirect requests for information which invokethe sinceritycondition. In such indirect requeststhe speaker'swishes or are needs foregrounded. Such indirect requestshave the effect not of diminishing the powerof the interviewer but of enhancing it: (18) or (19) I wannatalk abouthealthcarebecause that'sone of the thingsyou've had to tackle I want to hear your view about Nato and and what in fact the membersof Nato are not doing

By invokingthe sincerityconditionto effect an indirect requestfor information, the interviewer signals well as signifies or her role as interviewerin the discourse. as his Suchindirect requestsserve as markers of both the interviewer'sfunction and power, specificallythe power to choose and direct topic. Whereas in normal

498

Marcia Macaulay

conversation topic in interviews topic is negotiatedbetweenco-conversationalists, is largelycontrolledby the interviewer.This fact of the discourse overtly signalled is use which invoke the sinceritycondition. by the interviewer's of indirect requests In (18), the interviewercould easilyhave chosento say What do you think about Nato and what in fact the membersof ltlato are not doing. Such a direct requestrequiresthat the intervieweeprovide his "view" of Nato as is the case in (18), but the constraints his answerare very dilferent.In (18), the interviewer of foregroundsinterpersonalmeaningbetweenherself and the interviewee,Andreas Pompandreou. Part of the explicitmeaningof the utteranceis the speaker's right to make the request as well as the hearer'sobligationto answer."1" realizes thematicinformationin the utterance, whereas "yourview aboutNato" realizes new information and by definition contrasts"your view" with that of others which is old information. The interviewer,by linguistically realizing her right to request, constrainsthe hearer not simply to "saymore" but to say somethingwhich is new and thus salientfor the interviewand the audience listening. Though askingto ask and by asking to ask, the interviewer reinforceshis/her power and obliges the intervieweeto provide the desiredinformation.Within the discourse, threat to the negativeface which suchindirect requests produceis not seenas inappropriate,but rather as appropriate and acceptable sincenormativerolesbetweenthe interviewer and intervieweeare reinforced.

4. Assertions as provocationin interviews In the interview, as in exposition,new infbrmation is at a premium. More than anything else, new information constitutes desired goods. As indicated above, interviewers can invoke the sincerity condition for requestsfor information to constrain intervieweesto provide such information,but their repertoire, their competence,would be extremelylimited if this were the only means availableto them.The conventionalindirect requests that I haveexamined abovefunctioneither as prompts or provocations. Provocation, however,is ironicallylessmarked in the asymmetricalinterpersonalrelationsbetweenthe interviewerand the interviewee. "toughquestions," what exactlyis This can be achievedby askingtheoretically but the mechanism askingsuchquestions? for Tough questions, art of provocation the in interviews,are realized as much through indirect requestsfor information as through direct requests.Such indirect requestsare not formed conventionally through the invocationof felicityconditions, throughassertions what Labov but of and Fanshellrefer to as A-,B-, and D-events. Strategic assertion suchevents, of as indirect requestsfor information,constitutemore than even direct requeststhe interviewer's linguistic means of provoking new and salient information from intervieweesand thus servingthe interestsof the interview.Rather than querying the hearer/interviewee's state of belief or opinion as in conventionalindirect requestsfor information ascertaining the existence information (Do you think, of krtow, believe), the speaker/interviewercan assert his/her own. The hearer's response, although still technicallyan "answer," more accurately is termed response sinceaboveall what is requiredis a response the assertion to which is made by the speaker. Labov and Fanshell defineA-Eventsas events informationknown only to or

The strategic function of indirect requestsfor informction

499

the speaker, whereasB-Eventsare those known only to the hearer. D-Events are disputable betweenthe speakers. A-,B-, and -D Events can all be assertedby an interviewer rather than making a direct requestfor information or a conventional indirect requestbasedon a felicity condition.Theseassertions allow interviewersto introducecontroversialand often personally delicate topics into the discourse withoutformally appearingto ask tough questionsat all and as such they are not dissimilar prompts of the I wonder,I ask myselftype; however, becausepositive to facerather than negativeface concernsare raisedby theseindirect forms, they are provocativerather than prompting. Standard for such indirect requests for informationis a move that can best be termed a "set-up,"usually reahzedby an assertion seriesof assertions, requestitself, and then possiblya follow-up, or the whichis most often realizedas a reiteration or reformulationof the request. (20) Would you you be offended if I told you my feeling as I read the story? And ah this is really awkwardbecause man who wrote the the book never makes judgements.But I thought in some way that a human being has in someway to be a bastardto survive.That saints maybe don't make it.

This requestfor information is taken from an interview between the Canadian interviewer Barbara Frum and one of the survivorsof a plane crash in the Andes whowereforced to resort to cannibalism. Frum's first move is to set up her indirect request information by initially querying her interviewee'sfeelings.This first for move is a conventionalindirect request for information except that the felicity which pertain concern the hearer's positive face ("Would you be conditions offended") rather than negative face (Wouldyoumind). Suchan indirect form would seem have politeness a principal concern. Frum is, in fact, askingto ask and to as she is certainly being polite. She follows this conventionalindirect request for with an evaluativeassertion information which again indicatesher unwillingness to attackthe interviewee's positiveface. She contrastsherselfwith anotherjournalist who does not make judgements and indicates her own awkwardnessand so reluctance do so. Twice, then, she redresses to her interviewee'spositive face. However, such politenessis entirely strategicbecausewhat follows, the principal moveas an indirect requestfor information,althoughtechnicallyan assertionof a D-Event, carriesa B-Event implicaturewhich seriously threatensthe positive face of the interviewee:"But I thought that a human being has in some way to be a to bastard survive." Labov and Fanshellarguethat assertions D-Events have the of function gainingagreementor disagreement the hearer. The purpose of this of by indirectrequestfor information is not to gain agreementor disagreement, but to provokea responsefrom the interviewee. Prior to this request, Frum has several times explored with two of the survivors whether the experiencehas changedthem in any way ("Now that you're backdo you think you're the same personyou were before this happened?""Are yourinsides changed"), but has receivedminimal or low-keyresponse which hardly evokes ordealwhich thesemen went through. Her assertion a D-Event which the of carriessuch a strong B-Event implicature, that by surviving their ordeal in the Andes two men are bastards, the seryes a highlyprovocative as meansof gettingthe newand salientinformation Frum wants for her interview. Her provocationworks

500

Marcia Macaulay

becauseit threatens or challenges the positivetace of her two interviewees, who respondby literally askingFrum, "Do you really think we're bastards?"Technically, Frum has not assertedor asked this at all. but what she has assertedcarries such a strong B-Event implicature that her intervieweesare forced to examine the significanceof their survival not only for themselves but for every human being. Frum's purpose is not initially to redressthe positiveface of her interviewees only then to threaten it, but to provoke them into response, and indeedto provoke them into thought and analysisand so get a good interview.Frum's linguisticbehaviour goes well beyond that of a game between herself and her interviewees. Through such very complex indirect requestsfor information, Frum elevatesthe interview into a truly investigative discourseconcerned with understanding truth. the Although Frum's indirect requestfor informationaboveis formed by means of an assertionof a D-Event, its real provocativepower comes from its B-Event implicature. Assertions of B-Events are analysedby Labov and Fanshell as "requestsfor confirmation." Such assertions can function in this way, but when so are usually marked by an high rising terminal intonation contour. One of the four interviewers I examined, a Jewish American male, is strongly predisposed to realizing requests for information as declarativein form with an interrogative contour: (2I) (22) His life is a success? And it was instant?You knew him, you like him, when you first met him?

The first utterance,which is a direct requestto Margaret Thatcher about Michail Gorbachev, requestsThatcher to give her opinion of Gorbachev'scareer. In the secondutterance,I-arryKing, the interviewer,asksThatcher about her feelingsfor Ronald Reagan,while in the third, "You knew him, you like him, when you first met him?", by asserting B-Event known only to Thatcher,requests a confirmationof his 'have I got it right, yclu liked Ronald Reagan proposition.In effect, King is saying, instantlywhen you first met him?'. However,in the requestfor information which immediately precedesthis in the interview,King also assertsa B-Event, but this does not have the force of a requestfor confirmation: (23) But you can have the same opinions and the same goals, but that doesn't mean you have to like someone.And the two of you had genuine affection.

The first utteranceis an assertion which seryes set up the the indirect requestfor to information which follows. There is no interrogativecontour accompanyingthis utterance and so King is not simply askingThatcher to confirm what he has said. Instead,King asserts B-Event aboutwhich only Thatchershouldhaveinformation. a He does not want Thatcher to say 'yes,we had genuineaffection,'rather he wants to provoke Thatcher to talk about her feelingsfor Reagan.Even when positive as (23) is, indirect requests informationas assertions B-Eventsare highlypositive for of face-threateningbecause the speaker assertsknowledgewhich only the hearer should have. There is a sensein which such assertions also threaten negativeface since although there is no impositionupon the hearer,there is nonetheless form a

The strategic function of indirect requestsfor information

501

of violation of the hearer's boundaries or sense of internal self. When such and so provoke are assertions negativeas above,they functionmuch like challenges However,when positive,their function would seem as response a form of defense. to be to provoke revelation, since they provide a means by which the can hearer/interviewee reveal aspectsof himiherself which enhancethe social self. they reinforce positiveface and allow the intervieweeto boast. In this sense, can Interviewers alsoassertA-Eventsas a meansof making indirect requests for information.By assertinghis or her own beliefs,feelingsor even dilemmas,a ('I can speaker provoi" u r".ponse of solidarity('I'm with you') or problem-solving and can/will help you'): your problem recognize (24) You look in the mirror and you think'that's not me' but this person is to who is supposed be a professional tellingyou that you look great and you buy it and it hangsin your closet.

In the first request,the interviewer, Pamela Wallin, presentsto Grace Mirabella a havingbought an item which is which is faced by many female consumers, problem ieallynot suitablefor them. Wallin employsa you of solidarity,and so represents by her own A-Event as one experienced women in general.Through this A-Event as to Wallinrepresents Mirabella a common experience a problem, thus provoking Mirabella a solution: from (25) that's not easy.I know it's not easy.You Hangs in the closet.I guess of watching around you and being very aware have to really keep sort of yourself. And and not doing things that will make you uncomfortable.I think being uncomfortableis maybe the key word. of Regardless what anybodysaysto you. And maybeyou do look very nice in it but you're not comfortable.So go with your gut.

initially chimesin with her interviewerby repeatingthe interviewer'slast Mirabella "I "Hangsin the closet."She then evaluates, guessthat's not easy.I know remarks, Her first comment,"I guessthat's not eas]," representsan assertive it's not easy." betweenherselfand the "you"of Wallin's assertion. which marks distance evaluation Her secondcomment, "I know it's not eas/," marks Mirabella's transition from evaluatingan A-Event to that of an A-B Event, since she asserts her own of experienCe the same proposition, "Hangs in the closet."Wallin's experience beiomesMirabella's experienceand so provokesfrom Mirabella the need for a as solution.Response solution follows immediatelyfrom Mirabella'sown embrace of the A-B Event: "You have to really keep sort of watchingaround you and being Of very awareof yourself...." course,Wallin could have asked What does one do whin one has bought an item and it never gets wom or How do you deal with you don't wQnt,but she does not. Instead, who salespersons talk you into buyingthings of a sheprovokes response solidarityfrom Mirabella and thus a much more heartfelt ind salientsolution than a direct requestcould afford. Mirabella's languageis "so and idiomatic impassioned, go with your gut,"rather than beingauthoritativeand act All the provocationsformed by assertions to involve the interviewee neutral. as emotionally well as intellectually in the discourseand so enhancewhat we could call the "so-what" factor in interviewing.In this way the interview becomes a

502

MarciaMacaulay

meaningful exchangebetween the interviewer and the interviewee,rather than simply a game played befween them.

5. Two interviews with Margaret Thatcher Two of the interviewersI examine,one femaleand one male, interuiewedMargaret Thatcher. These interviewsprovide a locusfor examiningthe role and function of indirect requestsfor information in the interview.One interviewwas done by Larry King, an American interviewer, who continues to have one of the top-rated interview programs in North America; the other was done by Barbara Frum, a Canadian televisioninterviewer,for the CanadianBroadcasting Company's(CBC) nightly news program. The profiles of theseinterviewers revealvery different styles of interviewing. Of all speech acts in the respectiveThatcher interviews, King employs45Vodirect requestsand 27Voindirect requests, while Frum employs27Vo direct requestsand 42Voindirect requests. The percentilesare almost entirely the reverseof one another.Of all speechactsin all interviews, direct King employs40%o requestsand Zlo/aindirect requests, while Frum employs35%o direct requestsand 36Voindirect requests. King employsindirectrequests slightlylessthan half the time that he employsdirect requests, whereasFrum employsdirect and indirect requests with approximatelythe same frequency.However,in her Thatcher interview there is a marked increasein frequencyfrom 36Voto 42%. King's interviewingstrategy with Thatcher is consistent with his generalinterviewing style,whereasFrum varies her strategic choices increasing use of indirectrequests by her and decreasing her use of direct requests. The questionof courseis why. The interviewersbegin both interviewsby askingThatcher why she got into politics. However, their approaches are quite different. King interview LK: MT: And how much of "all" is told? When they say,"Tell it all," Lady Thatcher, how much have you told'l I've told quite a a lot, becauseI had to tell it to make it live. I had to say who said what and the kinds of arguments we had between heads of governmentand headsof state.Thingswhich concernsecurity, course,are of never told. When, along the route to your own rise, did you say to yourself,"I want to be prime minister-" Oh, never. "-l want to lead the country"'l Never. How did it happen/ I can tell you exactly how it happened.I became an ordinary member of Parliament.I went and sawsomeof thosescenes Parliament, debates. in the You know how noisythey are. I thought,"Thank goodness, on the back I'm benches,an ordinary member and not a minister.I don't think I could take this, some of the cat-callingthey have."Then, I becamea cabinet minister, and that seemedall right. And then we lost that election,and we had lost

LK: MT: LK: MT: LK: MT:

The strategic function of indirect requestsfor infomtation

503

several, and so Keith Josephand I decidedto go right back to the drawing board on principles, And I had expected, followedby policy,followedby detaileddecisions. whenTed Heath put up again as leader of the party, that Keith Joseph, as the leaderof this particular group, would stand.And he came into my study one day andsaid,"Margaret,I just can't stand.I don't think I can take that kind of criticism and that kind of pressure."And almost immediately,I said, "Look, Keith, if you won'tstand,I will. someonewho holds our views has got to stand,so that we have a chance putting them into action." of LK: So, had he stood that day and said so, you wouldn't haveand I wouldn'thavebeen prime MT: I wouldhavebeen his most loyallieutenant, minister.We still had to go through, of course,a generalelection. In thisexchange, but one of Larry King'srequests information are direct. He all for onlyindirectrequest,"So, had he stood that day and said so, you wouldn't have-" asserts B-Event and would act as a provocationfor Thatcher to tell a less selfa serving account were King not interrupted by Thatcher. King's first two direct you questions well asbeingpositively conducive ("When...did requests closed are as sayto yourself,'l want to be prime minister-"'),but Thatcher respondsfirst by interrupting King and secondlyby cancellingthe proposition which his request conveys, there was a time when Thatcher choseto become prime minister is. that Thatcher chooses deny any agencyfor herselfin this interview. She avoids any to representation herself as making a decisionto become prime minister. of King follows Thatcher'sdenial of agency,"Never,"with an open question, "How did it happen?"which has no conduciveforce positive or negative and so permits Thatcherto render an accountquite unconstrained any other view but by herown.Thatcherpresents to herselfas someone whom thingshappen,a patient rather thanan agent.Initiallyhappyto be a back benchernot havingto go into the fray,her first move up the ladder is accounted simply as an event in time: "And for then, became junior minister." by I a The and employed Thatcheris simplyan and Thatcher"becamea junior of sequence. Magically, no apparentcausalreason, for minister." Grammatically,all that Thatcher marks is a change of state, but no explicit cause, reasonor motive is given for this change. We don't know why she becomesa junior minister, any more than we know why she becomes a backbencher. Thatchercontinuesthis renderingof herselfas a patient until she represents agency thrust upon her by the refusalof her colleagueKeith Josephto run for as the head of the ConservativeParty. Thatcher reports Keith's speech to her, "Margaret,just can't stand. I don't think I can take that kind of criticismand that I kindof pressure."According to Thatcher,Keith presentshimself as inadequateto the task.Thatcher then reports her own speech,"And almost immediately,I said, 'Lnok,Keith, you won't stand, will. if I Someonewho holds our views has got to stand, that we havea chanceof putting them into action."In this narrative clause, so Thatcher revealsnot motive, not cause, but result.The and sheemploysis an and of result, "And almost immediately,I said."Grammatically, Keith's speechrealizes action, while Thatcher's speech realizesthe result of that action, the two being linkedby an and of result. Thatcher comes to the role as a result of a failure of nerve JosephKeith's part. Thatcher'sagencythen is a limited one, sinceit is on represented her as being reactiverather than proactive. by

504

MarciaMacaulay

l-atry King does attempt to provoke another version of this story from Thatcher through his assertion of her B-Event as an indirect request for information. His request,"So,had he stood that day and saidso,you wouldn't have" is negativelyconducive, that is, King represents Thatcher'sexperience back to her as a means of provoking from her a different response, new information,from that which she has provided.He challenges through this assertion a B-Event, but her of in the processof so doing is interrupted by Thatcherwho goeson to complete her very self-servingrepresentation.Thatcher, therefore, has been able to use her interview with King to representherself not as an ambitioushard-nosedpolitician who as a minister was known as "Thatcherthe Snatcher," and as Prime Minister as "The Iron Lady," but as a noble and brave women who had the courage of her convictionsto enter the fray when otherswould not. There is only one attempt by King to counter this convenientrepresentation which Thatcher provides,and which amountsto little more than public relations. Barbara Frum's interview with Thatcher contrastsmarkedly with that of King's. Frum interview BF: Mrs. Thatcher, until you came to power most politicians in the Western world thought they had to crowd the centre of the road, you stakedout that hard bold ground on the right, and the electoratein Britain has bought it utterly. How do you accountfor that? Becausewe had clear goalsand clear ways of getting there. I think people much prefer that. They like to know what we want to do, why we want to do it, how we are going to do it. That's what we set out to do. How far are you going to take them because everythingthat you've said in there's a senseof crusade,as though you want to changethe way Britons think even act and ah live and frankly since coming to Canada there's a sensetoo that you want to stiffen all of our backbones, Canadiansincluded. Oh, I am just speakingof my experience and from thingsthat I have seengo wrong on the internationalstagebecause people have tried somehowto go just round the rules and the lawsaren't suspended because politicianswould like them to be or like to get round them. Ah in Britain I think we had something which we'd not had in Canada which explains several social socialistgovernments. The essence Socialismis that you surrenderquite of a bit of power over your own life to the state - well we all do that to some extent but of courseit went much further. Ah you pay very high taxes and they wish to uh take um even highertaxesbecause they think that politicians can spend money better than the people can spend it. The more you take away the less there is for private industryand that's where the creation of wealth comes. So you have to establishvery clear limits on the role of just be governmentand really you know politiciansI think shouldsometimes a little bit more modest about their abilitiesthan they are. We can't run everythingand we shouldn'ttry. Mrs. Thatcher,though,you'regoingfor attitudes. You're trying to changethe way people think about their role in life. It's almostsometimes though you as think by your own resolveyou can inspire people to be different. You're

MT:

BF:

MR:

BF:

The strategic function of indirect requestsfor information

505

you're still inside if I can suggest that very bright green grocer'sdaughter MT: Well BF: who made herself a chemist,who made herself a tax lawyer, made herself Prime Minister, anybodycan. MT: I don't really quite recognizewhat you are saying.I believe certain things verystrongly. believethat we will gain towardsa way of life in which people I were constantly looking to the stateto solvetheir problemsand to do things for them. You know when the state does everythingfor you it will soon take from you. You'll then haveno basisfor personalfreedom,political everything freedom,nor economic freedom. I saw it go much too far and I think it wouldhavegone even further had I not won that 1979election- too far ever to pull it back. I said in my speechtoday the state must never substitutefor personal nor private initiative. responsibility, BF: But there'sa message. MT: There is a message. BF: But you said MT: There'sa message, indeed yes you hate slackness BF: You hate softness, don't you? or Theme topic in Barbara Frum's discourse "you,"that is, Thatcher herself. All is of Frum'srequests information focus careful attention on Thatcher'sattitudes for andbehaviours. Indeed,shecharacterizes Thatcher'spoliticalactivityas a "crusade," andby extension Thatcheras someone who wantsto changehow other people think andbelieve. grammaticalterms,Thatcheris portrayedover and over again as an In activeagent of change.Frum's first request for information is direct, neutral in termsof conduciveness, and queries an explanationfor Thatcher's successas a politician taking up the right on the political spectrum,"How do you account for that?" As in the King interview, Thatcher chooses to evade any personal responsibility agency explainthe embraceof the right by the British electorate: or to "Because had clear goalsand clear waysof getting there. I think people much we preferthat."The we of solidaritywhich Thatcher employscancelsthe focus Frum hasplacedon Thatcher herself. Also, grammatically, "we had clear goals"realizes notagency patiencybut simplyattribution,"cleargoals"being attributedto "we." nor "people much prefer that" realizesbehaviouror experience. Thatcher's Equally, constructions avoid action on anyone'spart. Thatcher does not answer Frum's question. Moreover,she deflectsthematicattentionawayfrom herselfas an agent having affect on other people'sattitudesand behaviours. any Frum's responseis simply to return thematic focus back upon Thatcher, "Flow are you [m.e.] going to take them because everythingthat you've [m.e.] far in saidthere's a sense of crusade,as though you [m.e.] want to change the way Britain's think even and act and ah live?" In this speechact, Frum employsanother directrequestfor information which nonetheless implicatesthat Thatcher herself hasgonetoo far and is without awareness the extent of her own actions.This is of followed the tirst of Frum's indirect requests information,"and frankly since by for coming Canadathere'sa sensetoo that you want to stiffen all of our backbones, to Canadians included."The and employedby Frum is an and of evaluationwhich givesfocus to the entire clause which realizes new information in the overall utterance. this indirect requestfor informationFrum asserts B-Event,"that you In a

506

Marcin Macaulay

want to stiffen all of our backbones, Canadian's to included," provokeThatcher first into a recognitionof her own extremism, second into recognition her agencyor of responsibility, and third and most salienttor the discourse into responding this to agentivecharacterization, which has the force of a challenge. Thatcher respondsby again not taking up the question:"Oh, I am just speaking of my experience and from things I have seen go wrong on the international stagebecausepeople have tried somehowto go round the rules and just because the laws aren't suspended politicians would like them to be or like to get round them." Thatcher, in fact, violatesthe Maxim of Relevance, but not for purposes of an implicature, but simply to deflect attention away from herself as thematicsubjectand onto "people" who have"triedsomehow go round the rules." to There is no sensein which Thatcher functionsas a cooperativeinterlocutor. She doesnot simply resistFrum's question; sheignoresit entirely,and in so doing she challenges Frum's authorityas interviewer, on and indeedturns the discourse its h e ad. Frum respondsto this challengeof her own role by employingher second indirect requestfor information,"Mrs. Thatcher,though,you're going for attitudes. You're trying to changethe way people think about their role in life." Here again Frum asserts B-Event which clearlyrepresents a Thatcher as agentive. And turther Frum escalates her provocationof Thatcher by representing Thatcher her own to "You're still insideif I can suggest motivationalschemawhich is clearlyclass-based, that very bright green grocer'sdaughterwho made herself a chemist,who made herself a tax lawyer,made herselfPrime Minister, anybodycan." In contrastto the very self-serving characterization Thatcherprovidesof herselfin her interview with Larry Kng, Frum represents Thatcher to herselfas self-made,realizingboth roles of agent and patient.Thatcherhas made herselfPrime Minister;the role has not simply been thrust upon her by an accidentof circumstance. She is an agent of marked propensity. Thatcher for the first time is completely unable to deflect or avoid provocation.She must respond.She doesso initially by stating,"I don't really quite what you are saying," recognize however,all thematicutterances this response in are realizedby "L" For the first time in the interview,Thatchertalks about herself,and as well she explicitly and categorically marks herself as agent,"I [m.e.] saw it go much too far and I [rn.".] think it would have gone even further had I [m.e.] not won that 1979election." Gone is the we of solidarity; Thatchernow explicitlycredits of in herselfwith stoppingthe advancement Socialism Great Britain and tor causing the ConservativeParty to win a crucial election. What Frum achievesthrough her strategic use of indirect requests for information is far more interestingand salient as information than that in King's interview with Thatcher.As provocations, Frum's indirect requestsfor information causeThatcher to reveal somethingof herselfin terms of her own motivations, concerns ambitions, etc. In contrast, Thatcheris made to revealnothingof herself in her interviewwith Krng.Where Thatcheris made to acknowledge own agency her in Frum's interviewwhich reliesheavilyon indirectrequests, comesto no such she precipiceof understanding her exchange with King, who relies much more on in with little conduciveforce. King's style is direct requests,and often open requests convivialwhereasFrum's is exploratoryand at times confrontational. Apart from her use of assertions indirect requests, as Frum also reinforces

The strategic function of indirect requestsfor infomtation

507

her own status as interviewer several times in her interview with Thatcher by the condition:"I I want to askyou so many things.I want to hear invoking sincerity "I whatyou think about public works but I know we are under time pressures..." want to raise a whole other question." Frum's increasein her normal use of indirect requests can be explainedby Thatcher'sclear skill in avoidingor deflecting by toughquestions. Frum's use of indirect requestsis increased six percent overall. of invocations hearer-orientedfelicity fu I haveargued,certain of these requests, and so factor in redressto conditions, function as prompts rather than provocations the hearer's as cothe hearer'snegativeface as a strategicmeansof encouraging conversationalist "say more," and of course say more that is interesting.The to as provocative forms which rely more on useof assertions indirect requestsnot only the hearer'snegativeface but also have the function of threatening do not redress the hearer'spositive face even when positive in denotation and so provoking what happensin Frum's interview response new information. This is precisely as with Thatcherand which makesthis interviewfar more interestingand informative thanthat of King.

Conclusion journalists who employ direct of Interviewing the calibreof Frum's and other serious and indirect requests strategicallygoes beyond being simply a game. Frum's linguistically her own nature and her provocations causeThatcher to acknowledge ownmotives. Somethingabout Thatcher is revealedin Frum's interview,whereas it is concealed King's. Such interviewsdraw back the curtain and allow both the in interviewer and the intervieweeto gain insightor knowledgein the processof the there is not only for the exchange. more skilledthe interviewer, more possibility The dramabut also for understandingand for communication.Asking to ask is a for competence.Indirect requests information significant aspectof an interviewer's are not by definition politenessforms, although indirect requestsas prompts do is encorporate But politeness not the issuebetweenspeakers negativeface redress. in interviews since the interview is by definition an asymettricalexchangewhere poweris to the interviewer and not the interviewee.The issue of negative face to redress the intervieweris encouragment the interviewee "saymore" and say of for more that is salient and interesting.To this end the interviewer momentarily the relationsor meaningpotential in the exchange. modifies existinginterpersonal The illusion of equality between speaker and hearer facilitates requests for information which are highlyface threatening both in a negativeand positivesense. Indirect which are speake conditions requests r-oriented, formedby invokingsincerity or assertions A-,B-or D-Events,function, even when positive in denotation, to of threaten interviewee's positiveface and act as provocations not simply more of the information new information and as such enhancethe quality of the interview but itself.

508

Marcia Macaulav

References Athanasiadou, Angeliki (1990)The discourse functionof questions. hagmaticsl.I:107-122. Athanasiadou, Angeliki (1994)The pragmatics answers. of hagmatics4.4:56I-574. Baumert,Michael (1977)Classification Englishquestion-answer of structures. Iournal of hagmatics 1: 85-92. Bell, Allan (1991) TheLanguage NewsMedia.Oxford:Blackwell. of Bellinger,David (1979)Changes the explicitness mothers'directives children age. in of as Journal of Child Language6: 443-458. Bernicot,Josieand Suzanne lrgros (1987)[,a comprdhension demandes les enfantsde 3 d des par 8 ans:lrs demandes directes les demandes et non conventionnelles. indirectes European Bulletinof CognitivePsychologt7.3: 267-293. Blum-Kulka,Shoshana (1983)The dynamics politicalinterviews. 3.2: 131-153. of Text Blum-Kulka, Shoshana (1987)Indirectionand politeness requests: in Sameor different? Journalof Pragmatics 1: 131-146. 1 Brouwer,Ddd (1982)The influence the addressee's on politeness language Linguistics of sex use. in 20:691-7lL Brown,Penelope and Steven lrvinson (1987) C. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress. yes-noquestions English.Linguistics 851-870. Bublitz, Wolfram (1981)Conducive in 19: Camras, Linda, Toni Pristo and Mari Brown (1985)Directivechoiceby childrenand adults:Affect, situation,and linguisticpoliteness. Merrill-Palmer 3l.l: 19-31. Quarterly Cuff, John Haslett (1995)(7 December) Tough interviewing becoming lost art. Globeand Mail. a Toronto: Globe and Mail Publishing. Hudson,Richard(1975)The meaning questions. of Langtage 51.1:1-31. Kegeyama,Taro and Ikuhiro Tamori (1975-6)JapaneseWhimperatives. Papers in Japanese Linguistics 13-53. 4: Kiefer, Ferenc (1988) On the pragmatics answers. Questions of ln and Questioning. Michel Ed. Meyer.New York: Walter de Gruyter. King, l.arry (1995) The bestof Larry King Live. Atlanta: Turner Publishing, Inc. l,abov, William and David Fanshell(1977)Therapeutic Discourse. New York: AcademicPress. Miltwoch, Anita (1979)Final parentheticals Englishquestionwith their illocutionaryfunctionand grammar. Journalof Pragmatics 401-412. 3: Parret, Herman (1988)The epistemics the question-answer of sequence its psycho-pragmatic and limitations.ln Questions Questioning. Michel Meyer.New York: Walter de Gruyter. and Ed. Pl6h, Csabaand Valeria Csato (1985) Indirect directivein Hungarian:An empirical study.Acta

Thestrategic function of indirectrequests information for -4: -3 LinguisticAcademiaeScientaium Hungaicae 35.3 299 12. a

509

Rundquist, Suellen(1992) Indirectness: genderstudy of flouting Grice's maxims.Jountal of A hagmatics 18:431-449. Schaffer, H.R., Anne Hepburn and G.M. Collis (1983)Verbal and nonverbalaspects morhers' of directives. Journalof Child Language 337-355. 10: 'rhetorical'questions. Schmidt-Radefeldt, Jiirgen(1977)On so-called Joumal of Linguistics 375l: 392. Searle, JohnR. (1991)"lndirectspeech acts.'In hagmaticsA Reader. Steven Ed. Davis.New York: Oxford University Press. Sperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson (1986)Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Cambridge, Mass.: HarvardUniversityPress. Stenstrdm, Anna-Brita(1988)Questioning conversation. Questions Questioning.Ed.. in In and Michel Meyer. NewYork: Walter de Gruyter. Tanz, Christine (1981)Asking children to ask;an experimental investigation the pragmatics of of relayed questions. Joumalof Child Language 187-194. l0: Yadugiri, M.A. (1986)Somepragmatic implications the useof YesandNo in response Yes-No of to questions. Joumal of hagmatics l0: 199-210.