Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Socio-pragmatic Analysis of Repair in Mandarin Conversation
Dr. Hui-chen Chan
|Issue Date:||2009-09-18 16:40:58 (UTC+8)|
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。
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
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.
|Appears in Collections:||[語言學研究所] 學位論文|
Files in This Item:
All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.