English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 11 |  Items with full text/Total items : 88866/118573 (75%)
Visitors : 23552060      Online Users : 308
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/35979


    Title: 中文交談中修復之社會語言學分析
    Socio-pragmatic Analysis of Repair in Mandarin Conversation
    Authors: 魏詩婷
    Sze-ting Wei
    Contributors: 詹惠珍 博士
    Dr. Hui-chen Chan
    魏詩婷
    Sze-ting Wei
    Keywords: 社會語言學
    交談分析
    語用學
    修復
    Sociolinguistics
    Conversation Analysis
    Pragmatics
    Repair
    Date: 2002
    Issue Date: 2009-09-18 16:40:58 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 國立政治大學研究所碩士論文提要
    研究所別:語言學研究所
    論文名稱:中文交談中修復之社會語言學分析
    指導教授:詹惠珍 博士
    研究生:魏詩婷
    論文提要內容:
    在交談情境中,當說話者(Interlocutor)無法清楚表達其訊息時就必須進行修復(Repair)。修復的種類不僅止於句法結構,在說話者發現語意不足時,就有做語意修復的必要性。而修復的種類也會依其所行使的語用功能(Pragmatic Function)而有所不同。修復的方式更有可能因交談者雙方的年齡差距大小而改變。因此,本研究針對說話者行使的語用功能及交談者的年齡差距來探討修復的語言形式與使用情形。
    本研究所使用的語料來自十份日常生活會話。其中,三份來自於20-30歲的說話者,三份來自於40-55歲的說話者;其餘四份來自於跨年齡層的交談者。另外,交談者的關係若非好友則為親戚,因此較沒有距離感。每份語料長約三十至四十分鐘,主題均與日常生活相關,以便蒐集到最自然的語料。
    語料又根據修復的方式分為句法層次(Syntactic Level)及語意層次(Semantic Level)。其中句法層次又包含刪除(Deletion與添加(Addition)兩重種策略;語意層次則包括替換(Replacement)及添加(Addition)兩個策略。語用功能則分為釐清(Clarification)、確認(Confirmation)、解釋(Explanation)、贊成(Agreement)、強調(Emphasis)及弱化(Alleviation)六種。
    所有語料先經分類後,再加以統計檢定。研究結果發現:(一)說話者使用語意修復的頻率顯著高於句法修復,(二)在語意修復中,又以縮限(Narrowing)的使用情形最多。(三)修復大多用來行使釐清語意的功能。(四)說話對象的年齡對修復的使用有部分顯著的影響。(五)年紀小的說話者較少對年紀大的聽話者進行修復。除了量化分析之外,本研究亦追加訪談,以便雨量話分析的結果做初步比對。訪談內容發現,大部分的說話者認為他們的確會因為不同的語用目的而使用不同的修復,但交談者的年齡並不會完全影響修復的使用情形。

    關鍵字:社會語言學,交談分析,語用學,修復
    Abstract

    Perfect utterances do not occur all the time during the conversation. An unclear message is usually repaired to maintain the clarity of meaning. Repair forms at Syntactic and Semantic levels are examined in this study. Also, it is proposed that formal distribution of repair forms are conditioned by pragmatic and social factors. On pragmatic aspect, the principles of Clarity and Expressivity are conformed. For social constraint on repair forms, the influence of interlocutors’ age is suggested.
    Data analyzed in this study are collected from ten dyadic, face-to-face daily conversations, with each lasting more than 30 minutes. Subjects in the ten conversations share the same ethnic background—Taiwanese. In addition, they are from two different age groups, with half of them at the age between 20 to 30 and the other half between 40 to 55. Among the ten conversations: three of them are conducted by both interlocutors being old, three by both interlocutors being young, and four by interlocutors from different age groups.
    Repair forms found in the data are categorized into two linguistic categories. In Syntactic aspect, repairs are derived from Deletion and Addition strategies, the former consists of Word-Deletion, Ellipsis, and Marker Deletion, and the latter Modal Addition, Addition of Marker for Focus Changing, and Addition of Marker for Attitudinal Adjustment. As for Semantic repairs, they are those resulted from strategies of Replacement and Addition. The former includes Synonyms, Substantializatoin, Hyponymy, and Hypernymy; while the latter is composed of Narrowing.
    Results of quantitative analysis yield several patterns. First, repair forms at Semantic level score significantly higher than those on Syntactic level. Moreover, within the Semantic realm, Narrowing is the strategy most frequently used. Second, there seems to be a significantly stronger preference for repairs to conform Clarity principle than to comply Expressivity principle. Among pragmatic functions under Clarity principle, Clarification is the pragmatic function that recieves first priority. Interlocutors’ age is only partially influential to a speaker’s choice of repair forms with interlocutors from younger age group being noticed to be putting more emphasis on the importance of hearers’ age than those from older age group.
    Follow-up interviews suggest that interlocutors manifest repair differently for certain purposes. However, most interviewees point out that the consideration of both interlocutors’ age does not influence the choice of repair forms. Instead, it is hearers’ age, solely, that lay significant effects on the use of repairs for pragmatic functions.

    Key Words: Sociolinguistics, Conversation Analysis, Pragmatics, Repair
    Reference: Bibliography
    Bernardi, Bernardo. (1985). Age class system. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 27-28.
    Brown, Roger and Albert, Gilman. (1960). The pronouns of power and solidarity. In Thomas Sebeok, ed., Style in language. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press, 253-276.
    Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth. (1992). Contextualizaing Discourse: The Prosody of Interactive Repair. In The Contextualization of language, P. Auer and A. di Luzio (eds.), 337-364. Amsterdam: Santa Barbara.
    Chui, Kawai. (1996). Organization of Repair in Chinese Conversation. Text, 16.3:343-372.
    Diamond, Julie. (1996). Status and power in verbal interaction: A study of discourse in a close-knit social network. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 11-15.
    Fox, Barbara A., Makoto Hayashi, and Robert Jasperson. (1996). A Cross-linguistic study of syntax and repair. Interaction and Grammar, ed. By Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff.
    Geluykens, Ronald. (1994). The pragmatic of discourse anaphora in English: evidence from conversational repair. Mouton de Gruyter: Berlin; New York.
    Labov, William. (1966). The social stratification of English in New York city. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
    Leech, Geofferey. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman.
    Levelt, Willem. (1983). Monitoring and self-repair in speech. Cognition 14:41-104
    Levinson, Stephen C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Merrit, Marilyn. (1982). Repeats and reformulations in primary classrooms as window on the nature of talk engagement. Discourse process, 5:127-45.
    Milroy, J. (1978). Belfast: change and variation in an urban vernacular. In P. Trudgill (ed.), Sociolinguistic patterns in British English. London: Arnold.
    Milroy, J. and Milroy L. (1985). Authority in language. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
    Moerman, Michael. (1997). The preference for self-correction in a Tai conversational corpus. Language 53:872-882.
    Nakatani, Christine H. (1994). A corpus-based study of repair cues in spontaneous speech. Acoustical Society of America. 95.3:1603-16.
    Norrick, Neal R. (1987). Functions if Repetition in Conversation. Text 7.3:245-264.
    Ochs, Elinor. (1979). Planned and unplanned discourse. In Discourse and syntax, Talmy Givon (ed.), 51-80. New York: Academic Press.
    Schegloff, Emanuel. (1979). The relevance of repair of syntax-for-conversation. In Syntax and Semantics, T. Givon (ed.), 261-286. New York: Academic Press.
    ----------------(1987). Recycled turn beginnings: A precise repair mechanism in conversation’s turn-taking organization. In Talk and Social organization, G. Button and J.R.E. Lee (ed.), 70-85. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
    Schegloff, Emanuel., Sacks, H. and Jefferson, G. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organizaion of repair in conversation. Language 53(2):361-382.
    --------------------------(1992). Repair after Next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. AJS. 97:1295-1345.
    Schegloff, A. Emanuel, Gail Jefferson, and Harvey Sacks. (1977). The Preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language 53:361-382.
    Slobin, D. I. (1975). The more it changes…..on understanding language by watching it move through time. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development 1-30. University of California, Berkley.
    Tannen, Deborah. (1986). Conversational Style: Analyzing Talk among Friends. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
    -------------------(1987a). Repetition in Conversation: Toward a Poetics of Talk. Language:63.3:574-601.
    ------------------(1987b). Repetition in conversation as spontaneous formulacity. Text:7.3:215-43.
    ------------------(1989). Talking voices: repetition, dialogue, and imagery in conversational discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    -------------------(1993). The relativity of linguistic strategies: rethinking power and solidarity in gender and dominance. In Gender and Conversational Interaction, ed. By Deborah Tannen. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    -------------------(1994). Gender and discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Wardhaugh, Ronald. (1986). An introduction to sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    語言學研究所
    89555007
    91
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0089555007
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[語言學研究所] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    index.html0KbHTML491View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback