4.2 Style of speaking and asking

There are some general tips concerning the question of how to speak and ask questions. The first being that instead of using too formal or 'bookish' language, one should aim for a colloquial style as the informant is generally likely to adapt the interviewer's speech-style. Thus it is ensured that the interviewee maintains his/her natural manner of speaking (cf. Milroy 2001: 60; Tagliamonte 2006: 47). Next, one should always try to tailor his/her style to the situation and the speaker, while simultaneously maintaining a certain degree of naturalness (also see tapping into the vernacular). Also, one must be sure never to interrupt the informant or suddenly ask a question that has nothing to do with the respective subject at hand (cf. Tagliamonte 2006: 41, 46).

Something else to consider is how to ask questions. “[M]ost communities will have particular sensitivities that require you to pose questions in a specific way” (Tagliamonte 2006: 41). There are a number of general guidelines to consider:

Never directly ask how old an informant is, but rather in what year he/she was born.
Never directly inquire about an informant's educational background, but rather ask whether he/she had a chance to attend school.
Avoid imposing value judgments as in 'do you believe in…', but rather try asking indirectly as in 'I have heard that...' 'some people say that...' or 'a lot of people believe in … what about you?'.
Avoid asking yes or no questions or at least follow them up by a question as 'tell me about it' or 'would you explain it to me?'.
Do not ask leading questions such as 'this means … doesn't it?' as this will generate many unintended answers (cf. Vaux 1999: 17-18).
Be aware that in some cultures it is considered polite to acknowledge a person's opinion regardless of its truth-value.
Be careful not to ask questions about topics that may be considered too personal if the relationship to the interviewee has not yet reached a certain level of intimacy.
Instead of asking if a certain construction is either grammatically correct or incorrect, ask the informant for his/her acceptability judgment in the matter. The use of some constructions, for instance, despite being deemed grammatically correct, might be unusual in certain communities, which in turn might lead to a relatively low acceptability judgment. Alternatively, one could give a few options of which one should be chosen, or give a correct one if all are wrong (cf. Crowley 2007: 103, 106). But notice the so called 'priming effect' (cf. Vaux 1999: 18) which refers to the fact that when presented with different possibilities, the informant may become confused and unsure which may lead to him/her answering in an inappropriate way.
Avoid using too many linguistic terms in front of informants, as this might enhance the asymmetric power relationship between fieldworker and interviewee.

Finally, Milroy (1987b: 47-49) suggests to look at fieldwork and interviewing in the light of Homan's Exchange Theory (1958). This means that

“[m]essages which pass along network links can be seen as transactions, governed by the principle that the value gained by an individual in a transaction is equal to, or greater than, the cost. These transactions may consist of goods and services of many kinds, including greetings, civilities, jokes, information, as well as (for example) sex, child-minding services, or assistance in times of sickness or poverty.”

This structure should be employed to the interaction between fieldworker and informant. It should not just be a one way distribution. For examples of how such an exchange could be realized in a linguistic interview go to Compensation.

Created with the Personal Edition of HelpNDoc: Easy to use tool to create HTML Help files and Help web sites