Tag Phrases in Dialogues of Ben Jonson's Play
https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2026-15-3-113-129
Abstract
This article investigates constructions of spoken dialogical speech that contain brief structures composed of a personal pronoun combined with an auxiliary verb (modal, substitute, auxiliary, or copula). A general term proposed for such structures is tag phrase. Four models of constructions featuring tag phrases are examined: those where the tag phrase appears within one syntagmatic chain together with an adjoining clause, or forms an independent reactive utterance in dialogue unity. These include examples like (1) Peter will come, won't he? (2) “Peter will come.” “Won't he?” (3) Peter will come, he will. (4) “Will Peter come?” “He will.”
Through analysis of dialogues from Ben Jonson’s comedy Every Man in His Humour (1598), it is demonstrated how tag phrases contribute to conversational fluidity by adding naturalness and emotional nuances to character speeches, breaking up lengthy turns, highlighting specific words or combinations, making them more prominent for both audiences and readers, and conveying information about characters' social standing. It has been found that these functions are rendered in Russian translations via lexical-syntactic features of Russian sentences, as exemplified in P. N. Sokolova's translation published in 1933.
About the Author
N. Yu. Merkuryeva
Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Natalya Yu. Merkuryeva - PhD in Chemical, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the English Language Department № 3
Moscow
References
1. Belov, V. A., Belova, V. M. (2024). The problem of translation of discourse words (based on Russian and English languages). Technology and Language, 5(4): 84-102. DOI: 10.48417/technolang.2024.04.07. (In Russ.).
2. Belov, V. A., Belova, V. M. (2025). Functional approach to describing discursive words of the Russian language. Russistika, 23(2): 206-224. DOI: 10.22363/2618-8163-2025-23-2-206-224. (In Russ.).
3. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., Finegan, E. (2007). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Edinburgh: Longman. 1204 p.
4. Bychkova, P. A. (2020). Sources of pragmaticization of negative discourse formulas from a typological perspective: Russian and Slovenian. Philological Notes, 18: 187-211. (In Russ.).
5. Bychkova, P. A., Rahilina, E. V., Slepak, E. A. (2019). Discourse formulas, polysemy, and gestural marking. Proceedings of the Vinogradov Russian Language Institute, 21: 256-283. (In Russ.).
6. Carter, R., McCarthy, M. (1995). Grammar and the Spoken Language. Applied Linguistics, 16 (2): 141—158.
7. Chesnokova, T. G. (2013). On the aesthetic and moral-philosophical foundations of the category “humor” in English literary criticism of the XVII—XVIII centuries. Bulletin of the Moscow State Pedagogical University. Series: Philosophical sciences, 1 (7): 106—118. (In Russ.).
8. Hornby, A. S. (1982). Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English, 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 544 p. Ioanesyan, E. R. (2022). Discursive Formulas Derived from Propositional Predicates. Nauchnyi dialog, 11(8): 24-39. DOI: 10.24224/2227-1295-2022-11-8-24-39. (In Russ.).
9. Jucker, A. H. (1998). Discourse Markers: Description and Theory. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 366 p.
10. Khalitova, L. K. (2010). The role of discursive vocabulary in creating a harmonious dialogue (using the example of contact-fixing tools in Russian, English and Tatar languages). Scientific Notes of Kazan University. Series: Humanities, 152 (6): 95—105. (In Russ.).
11. Khalitova, L. K. (2012). Semantics and pragmatics of Russian contact-fixing particles and the English dividing question: a comparative aspect. Humanities, socio-economic and social sciences. Ser. Philological sciences, 5: 408—412. (In Russ.).
12. Lebedeva, I. S. (2019). “Dividing question” or a universal communicative move? In: Functional and cognitive aspects of actualization of grammatical forms and structures in synchrony and diachrony (based on the material of the English language); coll. Monograph. Moscow: FSBEI IN MGLU. 267—352. ISBN 978-5-00120-055-0. (In Russ.).
13. Litvinova, M. D. (2008). Shakespeare’s justification: [monograph]. Moscow: Vagrius. 655 p. ISBN 978-5-9697-0349-0. (In Russ.).
14. Lugovskaya, E. G. (2023). Text-forming function of dividing constructions (tag questions): problems of translation and adequate interpretation (based on the material of the film text). Multilingualism in the educational space, 15 / 3 (18): 336—345. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35634/2500-0748-2023-15-3-336-345. (In Russ.).
15. Lugovskaya, E. G. (2024). Cognitive and pragmatic aspects of the translation of standard dividing questions (tag-questions) in the film text. Multilingualism in the educational space, 16 / 1 (20): 115—125. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35634/2500-0748-2024-16-1-115-125. (In Russ.).
16. Melikyan, V. Yu. (2014). Models of constructing interrogative English language communicemes. Language. Text. Discourse, 12—2: 158—168. (In Russ.).
17. Pribytok, I. I. (2013). Representatives of sentences in English. Proceedings of the Saratov University. A new series. Series: Philology. Journalism, 13 (4): 5—11. (In Russ.).
18. Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., Svartvik, J. (2000). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman. 1779 p. ISBN 0-582-51734-6.
19. Rogatin, V. A. (2020). An attempt to combine the chronicle genre with the techniques of classicism in the works of Ben Johnson. Foreign languages in higher education, 1 (52): 26—33. DOI: 10.37724/RSU.2020.52.1.004. (In Russ.).
20. Selezneva, V. V., Evsikova, E. A., Tarverdyan, A. Sh. (2019). English Tag Question as Linguo-Ecological Phenomenon of Interpersonal Communication. Nauchnyi dialog, 7: 107—123. https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2019-7-107-123. (In Russ.).
21. Sharonov, I. A. (2017). Communicators in natural and artistic dialogues. Ecology of Language and Communication Practice, 3: 114-127. (In Russ.).
22. Shilikhina, K. M., Smirnova, V. V. (2021). Discursive markers of problematic reliability in TED Talks presentations: corpus analysis. Bulletin of Voronezh State University. Series: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, 3: 30-38. DOI: 10.17308/lic.2021.3/3577. (In Russ.).
23. Shustova, S. V., Tsarenko, N. M. (2019). Pragmatic potential of discursive markers. Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, 5(4): 163-170. (In Russ.).
24. Storozhenko, N. I. (1893). Johnson, Benjamin. In: The encyclopedic dictionary. St. Petersburg: Semenovskaya Typograph by I. A. Efron. 960 p. (In Russ.).
25. Talyzov, S. N. (2019). Fencing — history and modernity. Physical culture. Sport. Tourism. Motor recreation, 4 (1): 56—60. (In Russ.).
26. Tottie, G., Hoffmann, S. (2006). Tag Questions in British and American English. Journal of English Linguistics, 34 (4): 283—311.
27. Tottie, G., Hoffmann, S. (2009). Tag Questions in English. The First Century. Journal of English Linguistics, 37 (2): 130—161.
28. Varcher, S. A. (1886). Literary opponent of Shakespeare. “Russian thought”, 8. Available at: http://az.lib.ru/w/warsher_s_a/text_1886_lit_protivnik_shekspira_oldorfo.shtml (accessed 17.05.2025). (In Russ.).
29. Wells, J. C. (2007). English intonation. Cambridge: Cambridge university press. 276 p.
30. Yashina, E. V. (2004). Representatives of English sentences and clauses. Author’s abstract of PhD Diss. Saratov. 26 p. (In Russ.).
31. Zabludovsky, M. D. (1945). Ben Johnson. In: History of English Literature, 1. Moscow— Leningrad: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences. 655 p. (In Russ.).
32. Zhukova, S. Y., Orekhov, B. V., Rahilina, E. V. (2019). Diachronic approach to discourse formulas of the Russian language. Proceedings of the Vinogradov Russian Language Institute, 21: 142-164. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Merkuryeva N.Yu. Tag Phrases in Dialogues of Ben Jonson's Play. Nauchnyi dialog. 2026;15(3):113-129. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2026-15-3-113-129
Views:
103
JATS XML
Email this article 