台語對話中極致程度詞的語用功能
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2011/08-2012/07
Authors
張妙霞
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
本文旨在研究台灣閩南話自然對話中極致程度詞的語用功能及其所出現的前後 序列型態。極致詞乃指如「都」、「真的」、「每個」、「大部分」、「完全是」、「最少」 等等表極致語意之用語。說話者通常使用極致程度詞來為某一命題做強烈的斷 言、辯護、推斷等；並可用來表示承諾、同意、評價、抱怨等。換言之，藉由極 致詞，說話者可表達對談話對象的支持或暗示諷刺語意，用來表達正面或負面立 場。由於極致程度詞表達強烈的語意，因此不論聽話者是否挑戰極致程度詞所隱 含的誇大語意，說話者常需要在後序談話中修正或撤回原來的極端主張，改以較 溫和的用語來做讓步及修正。本研究採用行動為主體的研究方法，將含極致程度 詞話語及其引出的後序談話活動分別視為不同行動，來研究是否極致程度詞使用 時所出現的上下文有固定的序列模式，並與現有對英文研究的結果作比較，了解 台灣閩南語對話中與極致程度詞使用相關的互動及對話模式。目前文獻中，少有 對台語的自然語料中的極致程度詞的語用功能及對話序列模式研究。本研究所獲 得的成果將增進漢語語言學者在此方面的認識。
This study aims to investigate the semantic-pragmatic functions of extreme case formulations (ECFs henceforth) and their sequential context in Taiwanese Southern Min conversation. ECFs are expressions with extreme terms such as all, none, really, most, every, least, absolutely, and completely used by speakers to defend or justify a description or an assessment. They are used in a wide variety of contexts from showing commitment or agreement, arguing for one’s case, to making negative evaluations and complaints. With ECFs, speakers either voice their support for a co-participant’s stance, legitimize their claims or imply ironies and thus display their stance toward a current state of affairs. Due to the strong assertive force of ECFs, they may invite concessive repair to retract the overstatement. Since conceding an action/overstatement in conversation is presented in more than one utterance, we will follow an action-based approach under the framework of conversation analysis to investigate the sequential pattern of ECFs in Taiwanese conversations. Specifically, we aim to answer three questions. First, how do extreme case formulations pattern in Taiwanese natural conversation? Is there a fixed pattern or are they found in various patterns? Second, are there any semantic or pragmatic features associated with the use of ECFs? Can some ECFs be found in concessive patterns recurrently? What pragmatic functions does concession serve in discourse? Third, what are the preferences of sequences for Taiwanese speakers to make concessive repair? The significance of this study lies in its exploration into the rhetorical pattern of ECFs in Taiwanese and the sequential patterns that underlie these formulations, in particular, how Taiwanese speakers retract their claims and negotiate their meanings. The results would be a significant addition to the sparse literature in the interactional aspect of natural Taiwanese conversation.
This study aims to investigate the semantic-pragmatic functions of extreme case formulations (ECFs henceforth) and their sequential context in Taiwanese Southern Min conversation. ECFs are expressions with extreme terms such as all, none, really, most, every, least, absolutely, and completely used by speakers to defend or justify a description or an assessment. They are used in a wide variety of contexts from showing commitment or agreement, arguing for one’s case, to making negative evaluations and complaints. With ECFs, speakers either voice their support for a co-participant’s stance, legitimize their claims or imply ironies and thus display their stance toward a current state of affairs. Due to the strong assertive force of ECFs, they may invite concessive repair to retract the overstatement. Since conceding an action/overstatement in conversation is presented in more than one utterance, we will follow an action-based approach under the framework of conversation analysis to investigate the sequential pattern of ECFs in Taiwanese conversations. Specifically, we aim to answer three questions. First, how do extreme case formulations pattern in Taiwanese natural conversation? Is there a fixed pattern or are they found in various patterns? Second, are there any semantic or pragmatic features associated with the use of ECFs? Can some ECFs be found in concessive patterns recurrently? What pragmatic functions does concession serve in discourse? Third, what are the preferences of sequences for Taiwanese speakers to make concessive repair? The significance of this study lies in its exploration into the rhetorical pattern of ECFs in Taiwanese and the sequential patterns that underlie these formulations, in particular, how Taiwanese speakers retract their claims and negotiate their meanings. The results would be a significant addition to the sparse literature in the interactional aspect of natural Taiwanese conversation.