中文美容用品廣告詞之社會語用分析

Abstract

本論文探討在女性時尚雜誌中，美容用品廣告所使用的社會語用策略及語言手段。在本研究中，以Cook (2001)的廣告方法，Searle (1969)的適切條件，Grice (1975)的合作原則，以及Leech (1983)的禮貌原則做為分析的準則。\n 研究中分析的資料來自兩本女性時尚雜誌，Beauty和Elle。在語料量化分析方面，收錄了200條廣告詞，均分為兩類美容用品：化妝品和保養品。此外，在訪談質化分析方面，有12位女性受訪，以便評量4條選定的廣告詞之可信度。\n 語料的量化分析顯示：(1) 不同種類的美容用品有偏好的廣告方式。(2) 合作原則和禮貌原則的分配情形不同。(3) 以女性意識形態來說，化妝品廣告和保養品廣告有相異之處。(4) 不同的語言手段被用來廣告這兩類美容用品。\n 訪談的質化分析顯示：(1) 受訪者的社會背景(教育程度和年齡)影響她們對廣告的態度。(2) 不同的廣告方式影響受訪者對廣告的態度。(3) 廣告的類別不影響受訪者在適切條件、合作原則、以及禮貌原則上對廣告的態度。基於以上的分析，可以發現潛在消費者對說服力的認知與廣告主不吻合。也就是說，消費者不認為所分析的廣告有說服力，這顯示廣告無法滿足消費者的需求。本研究建議廣告主應該從消費者的觀點出發並補救這個問題。

This study aims at exploring the sociopragmatic strategies and the linguistic devices employed in the beauty product advertisements in women’s fashion magazines. In this study, Cook’s advertising approach (2001), Searle’s Felicity Conditions (1969), Grice’s Cooperative Principle (1975), and Leech’s Politeness Principle (1983) are the criteria for analyses.\n This study takes both quantitative analyses and qualitative analyses. For quantitative analyses, 200 pieces of advertisements were collected from two women’s fashion magazines, Beauty and Elle. These data are equally distributed to two types of beauty products: cosmetic products and skin-care products. In addition, for qualitative analyses, twelve women were interviewed to evaluate the effectiveness of the elements contained in four pieces of advertisements selected.\n Results of quantitative analyses show (1) that hard-sell approach is preferred on beauty products; (2) that the distribution of the maxims of Cooperative Principle is that Quality Maxim and Manner Maxim are obeyed most frequently, but Quantity Maxim is violated most often; (3) that the distribution of the maxims of Politeness Principle is that Tact Maxim and Modesty Maxim are implemented the most frequently; (4) that cosmetic ads and skin-care ads emphasize on different components of woman ideology; (5) different linguistic devices are used to advertise the two types of beauty products. \nThe qualitative analyses of the data show (1) that the subjects’ social backgrounds (in this case, education level and age) do affect their attitudes of persuasiveness toward advertisements; (2) that different advertising approaches do influence the subjects’ attitudes toward the advertisements; (3) that advertisements of different types of beauty products do not influence the subjects’ attitudes toward the advertisements no matter by Felicity Conditions, by Cooperative Principle, or by Politeness Principle. Based on the analyses given above, it is found that the subjects’ perception of persuasiveness does not match with that of the advertiser’s. To these potential consumers, those advertisements analyzed are not persuasive, which indicates that the advertisements fail to satisfy the consumer’s demands. It is suggested that the advertiser takes the consumer’s perspective to promote the persuasiveness of advertisements and the consumer’s acceptance of the commodities to be sold.