This paper discusses the Routinicon, a new constructicographic resource for the description of conversational routines. Conversational routines are defined as conventional formulaic expressions that language speakers use in standard extralinguistic situations (cf. Bless you! as a reaction to sneezing or Who’s there? as a typical answer to a knock on the door). The Routinicon’s goal is to accumulate the routines that constitute the inventory of conventional expressions in Russian language and systematically describe them in a way that would enable future cross-linguistic comparison and typological research. Conceptually, the Routinicon is a natural extension of such projects as the Russian Constructicon and Pragmaticon. It inherits their approach to the systematization of phraseological units as well as to the data collection. At the same time, the new project focuses on a fundamentally different domain of units and hence offers a radically new structure of linguistic annotation. Its principles and challenges are addressed in the paper.

The paper presents a multilingual database aimed to be used as a tool for typological analysis of response constructions called discourse formulae (DF), cf. English ‘No way¡ or French ‘Ça va¡ ( ‘all right’). The two primary qualities that make DF of theoretical interest for linguists are their idiomaticity and the special nature of their meanings (cf. consent, refusal, negation), determined by their dialogical function. The formal and semantic structures of these items are language-specific. Compiling a database with DF from various languages would help estimate the diversity of DF in both of these aspects, and, at the same time, establish some frequently occurring patterns. The DF in the database are accompanied with glosses and assigned with multiple tags, such as pragmatic function, additional semantics, the illocutionary type of the context, etc. As a starting point, Russian, Serbian and Slovene DF are included into the database. This data already shows substantial grammatical and lexical variability.