4.1 Overall distribution of responses

In our data consisting of a total of 100,000 words, from 8 hours and 30 minutes of audio data, we found a total of 1,977 response tokens that fit the criteria described in Section 3.2 (see Figure 1). The vast majority of these tokens consisted of some combination of responses, used in unison by a speaker to create a single non-clausal utterance (e.g. mm ja okej ‘um yes okay’). Out of the total of 1,977 tokens, only 82 contained a combination or single use of an English-sourced pragmatic borrowing. Of these pragmatic borrowings from English, 29 exhibited evidence of stance-taking, as described in Section 2.2 (see Figure 2).

Figure 1. Response tokens in the podcast data occurring at least five times.

Figure 2. Stance-taking responses in the podcast data.

A full range of response tokens that occurred in the data 5+ times is shown in Figure 1. Note that single-token examples from the data are not shown in the figure. This is because of the ubiquity of the forms mm, ja, and jå (see Green-Vänttinen Reference Green-Vänttinen2001), which were so frequent that they render it impossible to show single-token forms in the same figure. While the vast majority of the responses in the data were Swedish and converged around three major forms mm, ja, and jå, it should be noted that even lesser-used forms were also Swedish-sourced. This demonstrates that overall, Finland Swedish interactions make use of Swedish heritage responses. Using English-sourced borrowings as responses is not a common occurrence, even in the media (podcast) data.

In the end, there were relatively few, 29, of the English-sourced pragmatic borrowings that fulfilled the criteria of our investigation: (i) they qualified as responses in interaction, and (ii) they demonstrated an interactional stance (see the middle bar in Figure 2).

The four most frequent tokens that fulfilled our criteria were jess ‘yes’ and okej ‘okay’, each used in seven responses, coolt ‘cool + Swe. neuter ending’, used in six responses, and wow, used in three responses. Of these qualifying tokens, our analysis was further narrowed to four instances that uniquely and optimally illustrate our research questions. The four examples we look at in detail for the remainder of this article include jess in a second position turn, jess in a third position turn, as well as men plis ‘but please’ and what as second position responses in direct reported speech. We chose these four examples because, first, they illustrate how the same response token (jess) interacts with position. The examples also illustrate how an English borrowing co-occurs with a Swedish element (men plis). Finally, the fourth example is a relatively new and innovative element which has not been explored. The more established borrowings cool and okej are already relatively entrenched and have been explored in other studies.

4.2 Analyses of four instances of pragmatic borrowing

The four examples of pragmatic borrowings appeared in three extracts (i.e. one extract contained two tokens). In (1) we show a pragmatic borrowing, jess ‘yes’, that is used in second position to respond to an informing utterance. In this podcast, three podcasters discuss current trends in popular culture in a humorous way. In the transcription, the regular member of the podcast is shortened to HOS, and the two (recurring) guests as GUE1 and GUE2.Footnote ³ One of the guests, GUE1, comments that it is now cool to be old (lines 1–6). This is a reported stance. The new information is received with enthusiasm by the host, saying jess ‘yes’ (line 7). After this response, GUE1 summarizes that they shall embrace this trend (line 8). The other guest, GUE2, receives the new information by asking whether one is super trendy if one has felt like an 80-year-old since the age of 10 (lines 9–11, 13). GUE1 laughs already after GUE2 has said the word ‘eighty’ (line 12) and then starts to answer the question (after the extract). GUE1 is thus treated as the person with the highest epistemic status regarding this topic, which can be because she raised the topic (see Heritage Reference Heritage2012). However, the topic is also treated as recognizable for the two other participants. There are two pragmatic borrowings in the extract, both with the form jess (lines 7, 8), but we focus on the first one on line 7 in our analysis.

The pragmatic borrowing jess (line 7) is used as a freestanding particle. Its scope is the piece of news GUE1 just has given, and more specifically the last part, ‘the hottest [person] you can be right now is a woman in her upper middle age’ (lines 5–6). As jess is used as a response to this new information given in the previous turn, it is oriented backwards in the conversation. Sequentially, it thus stands in second position in relation to the informing that itself includes a stance (see Schegloff Reference Schegloff2007:14, 22). The temporal placement is directly after the previous turn, with only a minimal gap (0.1 s) in between, which indicates that jess is a preferred response (see Pomerantz Reference Pomerantz, Maxwell Atkinson and Heritage1984).

Prosodically, jess is auditorily salient in this utterance as it is long (380 ms), longer than any syllable in the preceding TCU by the other speaker (see Figure 3). Also, the speaker alters her voice by doing a break, which results in an impression of her being playful and speaking with someone else’s voice. In addition, jess rises over a wide pitch span (12.7 STs) and ends relatively high in the speaker’s voice range. In Finland Swedish, similar prosodic characteristics have in other types of turns been described to have affective functions (Huhtamäki Reference Huhtamäki2015, Levälahti et al. Reference Levälahti, Henricson, Huhtamäki and Lindström2023). However, also the beginning of the preceding TCU, de hetaste, rises and falls over a wide pitch span (12.9 STs). Both de hetaste and jess are loud, the first even louder. This means that even if jess is salient, so is also the beginning of the previous TCU. Thus, jess is not clearly upgraded in relation to previous turn (see Ogden Reference Ogden2006), but it prosodically matches the beginning of the previous TCU. Thus, the speaker of jess aligns prosodically with the previous speaker. The two speakers together create a moment to celebrate in a playful way over the piece of good news (lines 5–6; see Goodwin & Goodwin Reference Goodwin, Goodwin, Duranti and Goodwin1992). Sharp (Reference Sharp2001) describes similar ways of marking what she refers to as code-switches with voice-altering in Swedish conversations.

Figure 3. The waveform and pitch trace of the preceding TCU by GUE1, the particle jess by HOS, and the overlapping continuation by GUE1.

Functionally, this jess is used to respond in second position to a positive piece of news. The speaker of the first turn has epistemic access to the information, but with jess, the second speaker shows her epistemic access to the topic. It shows a humorous and somewhat ironic stance to the piece of news. By giving the response that the first turn builds up to, HOS is aligning with the stance provided by GUE1 (see Du Bois Reference Du Bois and Englebretson2007). In Sharp’s (Reference Sharp2001:177–178) study of Sweden Swedish, yes (on its own or in the beginning of longer utterances) made up a third of all flagged non-standardized tokens. In their studies on Finland Swedish, Fremer (Reference Fremer2000) and Green-Vänttinen (Reference Green-Vänttinen2001:95) mention that it can be used as a response particle. Jess could be classified as a response particle, like ja ‘yes’ and jaha ‘a-ha’, as it can form a turn of its own (Lindström Reference Lindström2008:81, dialogpartikel ‘dialogue particle’ in Swedish). In a functional classification, it could be described as a response particle (responsiv, Lindström Reference Lindström2008:82). In this extract, it signals that the speaker has received new information (see Lindström Reference Lindström2008:84, 120 on jaha; in extract (2), there is no such aspect). However, jess is doing more than just receiving new information in a neutral way, as it is also evaluating the information and showing alignment with the previous speaker. For English, Fuller (Reference Fuller2003) found that yeah was used in interviews to receive information, confirm, and invite a new turn. None of these definitions includes stance-taking. The function of jess in this example is more like javisst in Swedish, which is defined as ‘precis så som uttryck för instämmande el. bekräftelse med ett visst eftertryck’ ‘exactly, as an expression for agreement or confirmation with a certain degree of emphasis’ (Svensk ordbok 2021). However, this definition does not cover the humorous and joyful aspects of jess.

Regarding sociolinguistic aspects, the use of the pragmatic borrowing is also connected with the topic the podcasters are discussing at this point. Throughout the podcast they are discussing current trends from popular culture, and, after this excerpt, they begin to list ‘cool’ older woman celebrities, for example Drew Barrymore, Diane Keaton, and Dolly Parton, all iconic women from Anglo-American culture. By producing this strong jess, the speaker – playfully – identifies with this group of people, ‘cool older women’. In this way, the pragmatic borrowing has identity-related functions. By using English borrowings, the podcasters also borrow the culture where the language is spoken, and in that way sound trendy and cool (Peterson Reference Peterson, Määttä and Hall2022). With jess, the speaker thus evokes positive and somewhat ironic sociocultural values tied to Anglo-American culture.

In extract (2), there is another jess, but this one is used in third position after an understanding check and a confirmation. This is also from an episode of the same podcast as extract (1), although the speakers are different. One of the trends that GUE1 has brought up in discussion is ‘sober curious’, that is, to try out how one’s life changes if one does not drink alcohol. First, the term is presented in English, but with the Swedish translation nykterhetsnyfiken, and then the three podcasters discuss what ‘sober curious’ means, taking diverging stances towards it (not shown here). After that, GUE1 begins telling about an occasion when HOS has engaged in ‘sober shaming’ GUE1, and after a while, HOS herself takes over the story telling. In extract (2), we see how HOS concludes the story, that she did not previously believe that she was a person who would comment on other people’s drinking habits (lines 1, 3–4, 6–7). Subsequently, GUE1 produces a possible interpretation of the host’s story, that she has educated HOS (lines 8–9). The initial particle så connects her turn with the host’s story and signals an understanding check (see Heritage Reference Heritage, Maxwell Atkinson and Heritage1984, Huhtamäki Reference Huhtamäki2014). HOS confirms the understanding check by repeating GUE1’s turn in overlap, with changed pronouns, dropped particles, and adding the recipient’s first name (line 10). After that, GUE1 responds with a jess (line 11), which is the item we focus on. GUE1 playfully continues that then she has accomplished something in life (line 12). The host adds a playful comment in overlap with that and laughs (line 13). Then GUE2 asks if that is what is called ‘sober shaming’ (lines 14–15), which results in laughter by the two others (lines 16, 17).

Regarding discourse-structural and syntagmatic aspects, this jess is not freestanding like that in extract (1), but is used in the beginning of a responsive turn which continues with a clause. It is not syntactically part of that clause, but partly prosodically integrated (see below). Its scope is the whole previous turn, which also means that it is oriented backwards in the conversation. Sequentially, it stands in third position, after an understanding check and a confirmation, taking a stance to that (see Schegloff Reference Schegloff2007:123). As the speaker of jess continues with a humorous comment (line 12), she advances the sequence and makes more talk on the topic relevant (see Schegloff Reference Schegloff2007:148). The temporal placement of jess is in overlap with the end of the previous turn, where the ending is recognizable: the name of the recipient.

Prosodically, this jess is auditorily salient in its context (see Figure 4). The beginning [j], like the entire word, is very long, and the pitch rises somewhat during the turn. GUE1 alters her voice quality as she utters the word. The pitch in jess goes a bit higher (190–331 Hz) than in HOS’s previous turn (160–307 Hz), although its pitch range is narrower (9.6 ST vs. 11.3 ST). However, GUE1’s own previous turn is even higher in pitch and has a wider pitch span. This means that the conversation overall has a varied pitch span, going relatively high. GUE1 continues the turn without a pause after jess, but steps down in pitch, which marks some kind of prosodic break (see Barth-Weingarthen Reference Barth-Weingarthen2016, Lindström et al. Reference Lindström, Henricson and Huhtamäki2022).

Figure 4. The waveform and pitch trace of the preceding turn by HOS and the particle jess by GUE1. The pitch trace in HOS’s turn is shown in the picture, not the end of GUE’s turn -tra dej.

Functionally, this jess is used to evaluate the confirmation of the speaker’s own understanding check in a positive way, which makes it differ from the information receiving jess in extract (1). In the discussion before this utterance, there is evidence that this is not the first time GUE1 and HOS tell this story, which means that epistemically, GUE1 is not reacting to it as news, but instead, staging the supposed response that took place when the event occurred. One way of achieving this retelling is through an exaggerated phonetic realization, as well as the playful comment following jess. By celebrating that she has brought HOS up, GUE1 is potentially treating HOS’s face. It might be safer to do this in an exaggerated way, thereby creating an ironic distance to her stance.

With regard to the sociolinguistic aspects, it is important that this story is first and foremost told for the audience of the podcast, and the understanding check, confirmation, and evaluation are acted out for this audience (see Thompson Reference Thompson1995:102). Here, we see how a pragmatic borrowing from English, produced with salient prosody, is used to stage a humorous and ironic response (see Sharp Reference Sharp2001). The extract in general is playful, and the stressed jess suits well in this sequential context. The sociocultural value that the stance-taking evokes is about teaching somebody something which is potentially delicate.

Extract (3) includes two pragmatic borrowings used as direct reported speech in a narrative. The extract is from a podcast about culture, and one of the three regular hosts, HOS1, is talking about how interesting it is that two people may perceive a movie in different ways. To illustrate her point, HOS1 tells a story she readFootnote ⁴ about the movie The Piano by Jane Campion from 1993. She says that the author of the book, Sara, loves the movie, while HOS1 herself detests it (lines 1–2). This is followed by laughter by the two others (lines 3–6). HOS1 adds that she and Sara are the same age, and that one should love this movie at the time it came out (lines 7–9). She is citing her own reaction at that time (lines 9–10) and then continues to tell how the author’s daughter reacted to the movie (lines 12–16). The daughter’s reaction is rendered with the English borrowing what followed by laughter (line 16). HOS3 laughs in overlap with what (line 17), and HOS1 continues to draw more general conclusions (lines 18–23): a movie that somebody loves may for another person be men plis ‘but please’ (line 21). In the analysis of extract (3), we focus on the borrowings what and men plis.

Both borrowings are part of a longer TCU, constituting the final element. Grammatically, they are obligatory elements in their clauses, as they are complements to the clauses å dottern e (helt såhär att) ‘the daughter is totally like that’ and kan för en annan vara helt ‘may for another be totally’. In both clauses the verb vara ‘be’ is used (e respectively kan vara) as a marker of direct reported speech, and in the former it is combined with the subordination conjunction att (see Henricson Reference Henricson2009, Reference Henricson, Falk, Nord and Palm2010). The scope of the borrowings is the evaluation of movies. They are oriented backwards in the conversation, as they qualify the previous turns. As a line in the referred dialogue, what is freestanding, while the borrowing plis is combined with a Swedish men. Sequentially, they are produced during a narrative; while the first one gets laughter as a response (line 17), the second one does not.

Both borrowings are auditorily salient. They have long duration and prolonged sounds as well as a wide pitch span. While what is loud and starts higher than the previous turn (see Figure 5), the borrowing men pli:s starts at the same pitch level (see Figure 6). These prosodic features contribute to the expression of surprise and opposition to the other person’s evaluation of the movie (see Holt Reference Holt1996:223ff., Lindström et al. Reference Lindström, Henricson and Huhtamäki2022) as well as to the climax of the story (see Selting Reference Selting2017). Also, the laughter after what marks the borrowing and indicates the speaker’s distancing stance (see Sharp Reference Sharp2001:178–179).

Figure 5. The waveform and pitch trace of the preceding TCU and the borrowing what of extract (3) and the overlapping laughter by another speaker (pitch trace in what only from that word).

Figure 6. The waveform and pitch trace of the preceding TCU and the borrowing men pli:s of extract (3) (female speaker).

Functionally, both what and men plis are examples of (imagined)Footnote ⁵ direct reported speech, which can be used to dramatize the interaction and show the stance of the reported speaker (Holt Reference Holt1996, Tannen Reference Tannen2007:39–40). The borrowing what is used by HOS1 to dramatize the daughter’s stance towards the movie and realizes the punchline of the story. The stance is both epistemic, as it expresses incredulity, and affective, as it shows the rendered speaker’s emotions towards the movie. The daughter’s negative stance contrasts with the mother’s positive one, thus creating disalignment between them (Du Bois Reference Du Bois and Englebretson2007). HOS1 in various ways builds up the expectations for the punchline; she uses extreme formulations such as avskyr ‘detests’, älska ‘love’, and mästerverk ‘masterpiece’, stresses, e.g. on avskyr (line 2) and just (line 7), and she anticipates the daughter’s negative stance with a lively description of how good the mother thinks the movie is (lines 14–15; Selting Reference Selting2017). The simultaneous laughter with what (line 17) shows that HOS3 predicted a punchline at that point, and it is the preferred response to the story (see Selting Reference Selting2017). The use of what in this sequence resembles that of what in Icelandic conversations (Hilmisdóttir, this issue; see Huhtamäki & Hilmisdóttir Reference Huhtamäki and Hilmisdóttir2021).

The use of men pli:s contrasts with the positive stance älskar ‘loves’ and thus illustrates a negative stance. The Swedish particle men strengthens the action performed with please. This turn is the core of HOS1’s reasoning, that different people may have very different opinions about the same movie. It is not followed by any reaction from the other hosts, but HOS1 completes her multi-unit turn with a sweeping formulation (line 23). After this, HOS2 gives minimal feedback (line 24). In a study of please in the British English corpus, Wichmann (Reference Wichmann2005) found this disapproving use of please to be rare, but it does occur. She described it as ‘an affective overlay’, characterized by high pitch accents. The similar prosodic features as in our example also exhibit exclamation and disapproval (compare to Wichmann Reference Wichmann2004).Footnote ⁶

To sum up, these pragmatic borrowings are used as freestanding responses, as short responses integrated in longer turns, or as reported responses in direct reported speech. They are used in both second and third position to first pair parts, and to dramatize a (fictional) dialogue in direct reported speech. In the analyzed extracts, the pragmatic borrowings used as response tokens by another speaker are temporally placed in slight overlap with the previous turn or with a minimal pause before, which implies that they are performing a preferred action (see Pomerantz Reference Pomerantz, Maxwell Atkinson and Heritage1984). They are prosodically salient, having high pitch and wide pitch span as well as being loud and long, and sometimes the speaker alters her voice quality (see Sharp Reference Sharp2001). These are all prosodic features that previous research on Finland Swedish have shown to have affective functions (Huhtamäki Reference Huhtamäki2015, Huhtamäki et al. Reference Huhtamäki, Lindström and Londen2020, Huhtamäki & Grahn Reference Huhtamäki and Grahn2022). Functionally, the use of the borrowed particles resembles their use in English, but they generally have a noticeably stronger aspect of affective stance in Finland Swedish. When we look closer at the stance-taking we see that in some of the examples, the epistemic stance is foregrounded, for example what (extract 3), while sometimes the affective stance is central (see Du Bois Reference Du Bois and Englebretson2007), for example men plis ‘but please’ (see extract 3).