簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表
研究生： 林欣怡
Grace Shin-Yi Lin
論文名稱： 國語的回應標記：從網路即時通對話探討
Response Tokens in Mandarin Chinese: Evidence from MSN Talk
指導教授： 張妙霞
Chang, Miao-Hsia
學位類別： 碩士
Master
系所名稱： 英語學系
Department of English
論文出版年： 2006
畢業學年度： 94
語文別： 英文
論文頁數： 195
中文關鍵詞： 回應標記 、言談分析 、是喔 、喔 、真的喔 、真的嗎 、社會因素
英文關鍵詞： response token, discourse analysis, shi-o, o, zhende o, zhende ma, social factor
論文種類： 學術論文
相關次數： 點閱：231  下載：123 
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報

    • 中文摘要
    本研究旨在探討回應記號(response token)，包含「是喔」、「喔」、「真的喔」和「真的嗎」在中文即時通(Instant Messenger)的言談功能 ，利用長達126,462詞綴的語料庫來討論回應標記的異同。整體而言，去除在句首的回應標記「喔」(Initial response token)，其餘的回應標記總是在聽話者接收到出乎意外的訊息之後所出現的回應。同時和回應標記一起出現的詞語可以更進一步證實我們的論點。例如，所有的回應標記都可以和一短詞(statement)一起出現，但是「喔」和短詞一起出現的組合和其他回應標記很不一樣，因為在「喔」後面的短詞只會描述說話者的現在已接收到完整訊息的心理狀態，並且「喔」本身沒有顯示說話者對於正進行的話題有太多興趣。出現在「是喔」後面的短詞常會說話者負面情緒有相關連，但出現在「真的喔」和「真的嗎」後面的短詞卻不會有負面語意的關連性。這也是為何「喔」和「是喔」常可以用來中斷正在進行的話題，而轉移到另一個說話者比較有興趣的話題。另一個常常和回應標記一起出現的就是問句(question)，因為問句可以讓正在討論的話題繼續發展下去。但是問句比較少在「喔」後面出現，畢竟出現在「喔」前面的訊息通常不會讓聽者感到驚奇，相同的話題因此比較少繼續發展下去。另一方面，問句較易出現在「是喔」、「真的喔」、「真的嗎」之後，因為前面的訊息往往是令聽者感到驚奇而想讓前一說話者更進一步敘述正在討論的話題。
    本研究亦探討社會因素如性別和年齡以及回應標記的關連性。統計資料顯示社會因素大多和回應標記出現的頻率沒有太大關係，除了三個例外。第一，大學年齡的女性喜歡常用出現在句首的「喔」，雖然常常表示說話者的冷漠的句首「喔」比較可能是男性說話的特色，但可能因為在大學年齡的女性受試者都是關係親近的同儕，會比較傾向使用多一點男性用語，來增進彼此的關係。第二，本研究亦顯示整體女性比整體男性使用較多的「是喔」，這可能是因為「是喔」可以用來表示說話者的禮貌。在表示說話者對目前的話題沒興趣，或者是要表示反對意見，或者要轉移目前話題，說話者可以先用「是喔」預告接著的訊息。第三，統計資料顯示「是喔」和問句同時出現的頻率在三十一到三十九的年齡層特別容易出現，比起年輕人使用「是喔」預告相反意見時。這可能是因為年紀大一點的女性比起年輕的女性，傾向使用比較有禮貌的語言。

    ABSTRACT

    The present study aims to investigate the discourse functions of response tokens (RTs), shi-o, o, zhende o, and zhende ma in Mandarin Chinese in MSN talk. We draw on a databank consisting of 126,462 morphemes to explore the differences and similarities among the four tokens. Generally speaking, except for initial RT o, the other response tokens always occur after new and unexpected informing. However, their differences rely on the different degrees of surprise of the previous informing, with zhende ma ranking highest in its surprise tone, zhende o next, followed by shi-o and o last. This can be further supported by the following components after these response tokens. For instance, all RTs can be followed by a statement, but distinctive from the features of the other RTs, the statement after IRT o often displays the chatter’s informed state and o does not express much interest of the current speaker. Besides, the brief talk after o and shi-o are often related to negative feelings while the one after zhende o and zhende ma are not. Hence, o and shi-o may prevent the topic from advancing and initiate a new topic which attracts the speaker. Questions are another turn components that often follow RTs and they are used to maintain the continuation of the talk. Questions occur less after IRT o since the informing prior IRT o is usually not surprising. Questions emerge after shi-o, zhende o, and zhende ma more easily since their prior informing is usually new and unexpected and prompts the current speaker to pursue the topic.
    With respect to the relationship between social factors (gender and age) and these RTs, overall, most of the statistical results show that social factors do not correlate a lot to the frequency or the functional differences of these RTs, with only a few exceptions. First, females in college-age group use more IRT os than men do, although IRT o seems to be a less feminine expression since it signals the chatter’s indifference, often found in men’s talk. This may be accounted for by the fact that among close peers at this age, females use more masculine forms to establish solidarity. Second, significant relationship is found between chatters of different genders and the frequency of shi-o. That is, females use shi-o than men do. Such a result can be explained by the fact that shi-o is a device showing the chatter’s politeness to decrease the face-threatening behavior in offending the other interlocutor, such as showing disinterest to continue the topic, or prefiguring the coming of disagreement and another new topic. Third, there is significant relationship between age and different functions of shi-o. Further investigation shows that shi-o-plus-Q in 31-39 years-olds is used more than shi-o occurring before dispreferred responses in younger group, for older women who use more feminine show more politeness than younger women do.

    Table of Contents Lists of Tables and Figure i Key to Transcription Convetions and Abbreviations ii Chapter 1 Introduction 11 1.1 Motivation and Purpose 1 1.2 Research Questions 2 1.3 Organization of the Present Study 3 Chapter 2 Literature Review and Methodology 55 2.1 Terminology 5 2.1.1 Response Tokens 5 2.1.2 Discourse Markers and Response Tokens 10 2.2 Oh in English 13 2.3 Shi in Mandarin Chinese 17 2.4 O in Mandarin Chinese 20 2.5 Shi-o in Mandarin Chinese 26 2.6 Methodology 33 2.6.1 Characteristics of MSN Talk 33 2.6.2 Data and Participants 35 2.7 Framework of Analysis 39 2.7.1 Turn-taking procedures and Sequence Structures 39 2.7.2 Preference Organization 41 Chapter 3 The Functions of the Response Token Shi-o 4343 3.0 Introduction: Shi-o as a response token to new information 43 3.1 With a Statement 44 3.2 With a Question 53 3.3 Free-standing Shi-o 63 3.4 Prefacing a Dispreferred Response 74 3.5 Change-of-Activity Uses 77 3.6 Summary and Discussion 82 Chapter 4 The Functions of the Response Token O 86 4.0 Introduction 86 4.1. Discourse Functions of Initial RT O 86 4.1.1 With a Statement 87 4.1.2 Free-standing O 96 4.1.3 With a Question 102 4.1.4 Change-of-Activity Uses 106 4.1.5 Summary of IRT O 109 4.2 Discourse Functions of FRT O 110 4.2.1 Reception of Information 111 4.2.2 Other-initiated Topic 117 4.2.3 Mitigator 119 4.2.4 Requesting for Clarifications 122 4.2.5 Summary of FRT O 126 4.3 Summary and Discussion 127 Chapter 5 130 Functions of Zhende o and Zhende ma 130 5.0 Introduction 130 5.1 Discourse Functions of Zhende o 130 5.1.1 Free-standing Zhende o 131 5.1.2 With a Statement 132 5.1.3 With a Question 135 5.1.4 Summary 138 5.2 Discourse Functions of Zhende ma 138 5.2.1 Free-standing Zhende ma 139 5.2.2 With a Statement 144 5.2.3 With a Question 146 5.2.4 Summary 150 5.3 Summary and Discussion 151 Chapter 6 153 Comparison of O, Shi-o, Zhende o, Zhende ma 153 6.0 Introduction 153 6.1 Comparison of O, Shi-o, Zhende o, and Zhende ma 153 6.1.1 Degree of Unexpectedness 154 6.1.2 Additional Moves 156 6.1.3 Degree of Speaker’s Interest 159 6.2 Distribution of Common RTs in Oral Conversations and MSN Talk 160 6.3 Social Factors and RTs 163 6.3.1 Social Factors and IRT o 164 6.3.2 Social Factors and Frequency of FRT o 167 6.3.3 Social Factors and Frequency of Shi-o 169 6.4 Summary and Discussion 174 Chapter 7 177 Conclusion 177 7.1 Summary and Implication of Findings 177 7.2 Limitations and Suggestions 178 BIBLIOGRAPHY 180 Appendix One 186 Appendix Two 187 Appendix Three 189 Appendix Four 191 Appendix Five 192 Appendix Six 194

    BIBLIOGRAPHY

    Aijmer, Karin. 1987. Oh and ah in English Conversation. In W. Meijs ed., Corpus Linguistics and Beyond, 61-86. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

    Beach, Wayne A. 1993. Transitional Regularities for Causal “Okay” Usages. Journal of Pragmatics 19: 325-52.
    Button, G., N. Casey. 1985. Topic nomination and pursuit. Human Studies 9: 3-55
    Brown Penelope and Stephen Levinson. 1978. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Cameron, Deborah, Fiona MaAlinden and Kathy O’Leary. 1989. Lakoff in context: the Social and Linguistics Functions of Tag Questions. In J. Coates and D. Cameron ed., Women in Their Speech Communities, 74-93. London: Longman.

    Chafe, Wallace. 1994. Discourse, Consciousness, and Time. London: The University of Chicago Press.

    Coates, Jennifer. 1989. Gossip Revisited: Language in All-Female Groups. In J. Coates and D. Cameron ed., Women in Their Speech Communities, 94-121. London: Longman.

    Cheng, Robert (ed.), co-translated by Hsun-hui Chang, Shu-fen Fujitani and Lianying Wu. 1989. Mandarin Function Words and Their Taiwanese Equivalents. Taipei, Taiwan: The Crane Publishing Co., Ltd.

    Chao, Yuan-Ren [趙元任]. 1968. Mandarin Grammar: A Grammar for Chinese [國語語法: 中國話的文法]. Taipei: Xuehai [台北: 學海].

    Chu, Chauncey C. 1999 A Cognitive-Functional Grammar of Mandarin Chinese. Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co.

    Clancy, Patricia, Thompson, Sandra, Suzuki, Ryoko and Tao, Hongyin. 1996. The Conversational Use of Reactive Token in English, Japanese, and Mandarin. Journal of Pragmatics 26: 355-87.

    Crystal, David. 2001. Language and the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Drummond, Kent and Hopper, Robert. 1993. Some Uses of Yeah. Research on Language and Social Interaction 26 (2): 203-12.

    Erman, Britt. 2001. Pragmatic Markers Revisited with a Focus on you know in Adult and Adolescent Talk. Journal of Pragmatics 33: 1337-59.

    Fellegy, Anna. 1995. Patterns and Functions of Minimal Response. American Speech 70 (2): 186-99.

    Fishman, Pamela. 1983. Interaction: The Work Women Do. In Barry Throne Cheris Kramarae and Nancy Henley ed., Language, Gender and Society, 89-101. Rowley: Newbury House.

    Fox Tree, Jean E. and Josef C. Schrock. 1999. Discourse Markers in Spontaneous Speech: Oh What a Difference an Oh Makes. Journal of Memory and Language 40: 280-95

    Fraser, Bruce. 1999. What are Discourse Markers? Journal of Pragmatics 31: 931-52.

    Gardner, Rod. 2001. When Listeners Talk: Response Tokens and Listener Stance. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Pub. Co.

    Goffman, Erving. 1981. Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Goodwin, Charles. 1986. Between and Within: Alternative Sequential Treatments of Continuers and Assessments. Human Study 9: 205-17.

    Greenfield P. Marks and Kaveri Subrahmanyam. 2003. Online Discourse in a Teen Chatroom: New Codes and New Modes of Coherence in a Visual Medium. Applied Developmental Psychology 24: 713-38.

    Heritage, John. 1984. A Change-of State Token and Aspects of its Sequential Placement. In Atkinson, J Maxwell and Heritage John ed., Structures of Social Action, 299-347. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Herring, Susan. 1999. Interactional Coherence in CMC. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication 4 (4).

    Holmes, Janet. 1992. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. London: Longman.

    Jefferson, Gail. 1984. Notes on a Systematic Deployment of the Acknowledgement Tokens Yeah and Mm hm. Papers in Linguistics 17 (1-4): 197-216.

    Kedndall, Shari and Deborah Tannen. 1997. Gender and Language in the Workplace. In R. Wodak ed., Gender and Discourse, 81-105. London: Sage Publications.

    Levinson, Stephen. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Leech, Geoffrey. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.

    Li, Charles N. and Thompson, Sandra A. 1981. Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar. Taipei: The Crane Book Co., Ltd.

    Li, Ing Cherry. 1999. Utterance-final Particles in Taiwanese: A Discourse-pragmatic Analysis. Taipei: The Crane Book Co., Ltd.

    Lilly Lee Chen. 1995. The Linking Verb System in Taiwanese. Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Languages: 442-52. National Taiwan University, Taiwan

    Lin, Shin-Yi. 2004. Shi o as a Discourse Marker: Evidence from Dialogue in MSN. Paper presented at NCL (Proceedings of 2004 National Conference on Linguistics). Jiayi, Taiwan.

    Lin, Yi-Yi. 2002. The Pragmatic Marker Shi-ou in Mandarin Chinese. (MS)

    Liu, Yue-hua, Wen-yu Pan, and Wei-hua Gu [劉月華,潘文娛,故韋華]. 1983. Practical Contemporary Chinese Grammar [實用現代漢語語法]. Beijing: Shangwu Yinshu Guan [北京: 商務印書館]

    Maltz, Daniel N., and Ruth A. Broker. 1982. A Cultural Approach to Male-Female Miscommunication. In John Gumperz ed., Language and Social Identity, 196-216. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

    Mey, Jacob. 1993. Pragmatics: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Miao-Hsia Chang, 2001. A Corpus-based Study of Contrastive Markers in Taiwanese, The Symposium on Selected NSC Projects in General Linguistics from 1998-2000. NSC89-2411-H-163-001, June 9-10, 2001. National Taiwan University, Taiwan.

    Miracle, W. C. 1991. Discourse markers in Mandarin Chinese. Ph. D. thesis, The Ohio State University.

    Okamoto, Shigeko. 1995. “Tasteless” Japanese: Less “Feminine” Speech among Young Japanese Women. In K. Hall and M. Bucholtz ed., Gender Articulated: Language and the Socially Constructed Self, 297-325. New York and London: Routledge.

    Parrish, R. 2002. Conversational Analysis of Internet Chat Rooms. Available: http://www.polisci.wisc.edu/~rdparrish/Chat%20Rooms%20for%20Web%20Site.htm

    Pilkington, Jane. 1998. ‘Don’t Try and Make out that I’m Nice!’ The Different Strategies Women and Men Use when Gossiping. In J. Coates ed., Language and Gender, 100-20. Oxford Blackwell.

    Pomerantz, Anita. 1978. Compliment Responses: Notes on the Cooperation of Multiple Constraints. In Jim Schenkein ed., Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction. New York: Academic Press.

    Pomerantz, Anita. 1984. Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes. In Atkinson, J Maxwell and Heritage John ed., Structures of Social Action, 299-347. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Poole, B.J., Axmann, M., Calongne, C.M., Cox, D. 2003. To Chat or to Chatter: Marking Online Sense of the Chat Room Environment. Paper presented at TCC 2003 Online Conference. Available:
    http://www.makahiki.kcc.hawaii.edu/tcc/2003/conference/presentation/poole_p.html.

    Pudlinski, Christopher. 2005. Doing Empathy and Sympathy: caring responses to troubles tellings on a peer support line. Discourse Studies 7(3): 267-88.

    Reid, Julie. 1995. A Study of Gender Differences in Minimal Responses. Journal of Pragmatics 24: 489-512

    Sacks Harvey and Emanuel A. Schegloff and Gail Jefferson. 1974. A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn- taking for Conversation. Language 50:696-735.

    Schiffrin, Deborah. 1987. Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University
    Press.

    Schourup, Lawrence. 1999. Discourse Markers. Lingua. 227-65.

    Schegloff Emanuel. 1993. Reflections on Quantification in the Study of conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction 26 (1): 99-128.

    Shie,Chi-chiang. 1991. A Discourse-Functional Analysis of Mandarin Sentence-Final Particles. M.A. thesis, Taipei: National Chengchi University.

    Stubbe, Maria. 1998. Are You Listening? Cultural Influences on the Use of Supportive Verbal Feedback in Conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 29: 257-89

    Tagliamonte, Sail. 2005. So Who? Like How? Just What? Discourse Markers in the Conversation of Young Canadians. Journal of Pragmatics 37:1896-1915.

    Tannen, Deborah. 1984. Conversational Style: Analyzing talk among friends. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex Pub. Co.

    Thomas, Jenny. 1995. Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. London: Longman.

    Tsai, Hsiu-Chun. 2001. The Discourse Function of the Dui Receipt in Mandarin Chinese. M.A. Thesis, Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University.

    Wang, Chi-chiang [王自強]. 1984. A Dictionary on Function Words in Modern Chinese [現代漢語虛詞用法小辭典]. Shanghai: Cishu Pub.Co [上海詞書出版社].

    Wang, Li. 1987. Contemporary Chinese Grammar [中國現代語法]. Beijing: Shangwu Yinshu Guan [北京: 商務印書館].

    Wang, Li-Ya. 2004. The Polysemy and Grammaticalization of 'Hao' in Mandarin Chinese. M.A. Thesis, Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University.

    White, Sheida. 1989. Backchannels across Cultures: A Study of American and Japanese. Language in Society 18:59-76.

    Yule, George. 1996. Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Zimmerman, Don. 1993. Acknowledgement Tokens and Speakership Incipiency Revisited. Research on Language and Social Interaction 26 (2): 179-94

    QR CODE