Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/86890
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisor詹惠珍zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisorChan, Hui-Chenen_US
dc.contributor.author張國斌zh_TW
dc.contributor.authorChang, Kuo-Pinen_US
dc.creator張國斌zh_TW
dc.creatorChang, Kuo-Pinen_US
dc.date1998en_US
dc.date.accessioned2016-04-28-
dc.date.available2016-04-28-
dc.date.issued2016-04-28-
dc.identifierB2002002194en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/86890-
dc.description碩士zh_TW
dc.description國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description語言學研究所zh_TW
dc.description83555007zh_TW
dc.description.abstract一個說話者在交談中做修護,不僅僅只是為了改變語句的句法結構,他會做修護是因為他所說出的語句,與他原本意欲表達的內容比較之下,出現了語意模糊、指涉太廣、或意有不足的地方。雖然修護可依照不同的詞彙與句法的改變來加以分類,但修護類別的產生也應把被修護語(Reparandum)與修護語(Reparan)之間的語意關係列入考量。此外,若修護的出現有一語用的目的,以語意的角度來區別各種不同的修護形式,有助於解釋修護類別與其語用功能之間的互動關係。zh_TW
dc.description.abstractA speaker does not repair just for a change of the syntactic structure of his current utterance. A speaker repairs because he finds something uttered may be vague, ambiguous, too general, or insufficient in the meaning of the message he intends to express. Although repairs can be classified according to various kinds of lexical or syntactic modification, categorization of repairs should take into consideration different semantic relationships between the reparandum and the reparan. Considering that each occurrence of repair must have a pragmatic function to serve, a semantic approach on the classification of conversational repair would be more helpful than a syntactic one in explaining the interaction between the repair strategies and their potential pragmatic functions. And the methodology for this study is to collect the instances of repair from nine conversations, including same-gender and cross-gender ones. Based on these repairs, it is closely examined how the semantic relationship between the reparandum and the reparan determines a pragmatic function and how that pragmatic function influences the choice of the available repair strategies.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontentsAcknowledgements-----iv\r\nList of Tables-----viii\r\nList of Diagrams-----ix\r\nList of Abbreviations-----x\r\nList of Conventions for Data Transcription-----xi\r\nChinese Abstract-----xii\r\nEnglish Abstract-----xiv\r\n\r\nCHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION-----1\r\n I. The Problem-----1\r\n II. General Goals and Scope-----1\r\n III. Repair Strategies: Semantic Categorization of Repair-----2\r\n\r\nCHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW-----5\r\n I. Definition of Repair-----5\r\n A. Repair in General Scope-----5\r\n B. Self-repair-----6\r\n II. Categories of Repair-----8\r\n A. Different Repair vs. Abandonment-----10\r\n B. Appropriateness Repair-----10\r\n C. Error Repair-----13\r\n D. Covert Repair-----13\r\n III. Pragmatic Functions of Repair-----17\r\n A. Clarification-----18\r\n B. Confirmation-----19\r\n IV. Social Significance-----22\r\n\r\nCHAPTER THREE: THE VARIABLES AND THE HYPOTHESES-----25\r\n I. Classification of Repair-----25\r\n A. Repetition and Completion-----28\r\n B. Interpretation: Paraphrase and Elaboration-----30\r\n C. Substantialization-----32\r\n D. Replacement-----32\r\n E. Addition-----35\r\n II. Pragmatic FTincticms of Repair-----36\r\n A. Content-oriented Repair-----37\r\n 1. Clarification-----37\r\n 2. Specification-----39\r\n 3. Confirmation-----41\r\n 4. Correction-----44\r\n B. Mechanism-oriented Repail-----44\r\n 1. Reformulation-----45\r\n 2. Message-organizing-----46\r\n III Social Significance-----48\r\n IV. Hypotheses-----49\r\n\r\nCHAPTER FOUR: METHODOLOGY-----51\r\n I. Variables-----51\r\n II. Corpus of Data-----51\r\n A. Types of Conversation and the Constraints of Its Collection-----52\r\n B. Sampling-----52\r\n 1. Source of Subjects-----53\r\n 2. Social Characteristics of Subjects-----53\r\n III. Date Transcription-----54\r\n IV. Data Analysis-----55\r\n\r\nCHAPTER FIVE: DATA ANALYSIS-----57\r\n I Types of Repair vs. Pragmatic Functions-----57\r\n A. General Differences among Features of Each Repair Strategy for\r\n Available Pragmatic Functions-----61\r\n B. The Preferential Order of Repair Strategies for Each Pragmatic Function-----68\r\n 1. Repair for Clarification-----69\r\n a. Process-----69\r\n b. Qualified types of repair for clarification-----70\r\n c. Explanations for the priority of repair types for clarification-----73\r\n 2. Repair for Specification-----78\r\n a. Process-----79\r\n b. Qualified types of repair for specification-----80\r\n\r\n c. Explanations for the priority of repair types for specification-----82\r\n 3. Repair for Confirmation-----84\r\n a. Process-----84\r\n b. Qualified types of repair for confirmation-----85\r\n c. Explanations for the priority of repair types for confirmation-----87\r\n II. Gender as a Social Variable infhiencing a Speaker`s Choice of Repair Types for Pragmatic Functions-----92\r\n III. Summary-----95\r\n\r\nCHAPTER Six: CONCLUDING REMARKS-----101\r\n\r\nBibliography-----109\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nList of Tables\r\nTable 1. Classifications of repair bv Levelt (1983) and Chui (1996)-----16\r\nTable 2. Classifications of repair by Levelt (1983), Chui (1996), and Chang-----26\r\nTable 3. Categories of repair by Chang and the respective semantic features of the leparandnm and the reparan-----27\r\nTable 4. Pragmatic functions of each repair type-----47\r\nTable 5. Selected types of repair and pragmatic functions in this study-----48\r\nTable 6. Social characteristics of the subjects-----54\r\nTable 7. Percentages of each repair strategy for each pragmatic function-----58\r\nTalde 8. Recalculated percentages of the five repair types Tised for three pragmatic functions-----60\r\nTable 9. Four characteristics of five repair types used for each of the three pragmatic functions-----63\r\nTable 10. Results of the independent samples test on each pair out of the three repair strategies for the pragmatic function of Clarification-----73\r\nTable 11. Results of the independent samples test on each pair out of the three repair strategies for the pragmatic function of Confirmation-----88\r\nTable 12. The respective percentages in the use of repair types for each pragmatic function by two sexes-----93\r\nTable 13. Recalculated percentages from. Table 11-----93\r\nTable 14. The results of Independent Samples Test on the differences between males and females in the five repair strategies for the three pragmatic functions-----94\r\n\r\nList of Diagrams\r\nDiagram 1. Model of repair for Clarification-----70\r\nDiagram 2. Model of repair for Specification-----79\r\nDiagram 3. Model of repair for Confirmation-----85zh_TW
dc.source.urihttp://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#B2002002194en_US
dc.subject語言學zh_TW
dc.subjectLinguisticsen_US
dc.title交談中選擇修護類別的語意與語用條件zh_TW
dc.titleChoosing repair types in conversation--semantic and pragmatic determinantsen_US
dc.typethesisen_US
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_46ec-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.openairetypethesis-
Appears in Collections:學位論文
Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat
index.html115 BHTML2View/Open
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.