研究生: |
何亦翎 Ho, Yi-Lin |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
政治質詢中規避語「其實」的使用與性別的關聯:以高雄市議會質詢為例 Male and Female Council Members' Use of Qishi as Hedging: An Analysis of the Interpellations in Kaohsiung City Council |
指導教授: |
蘇席瑤
Su, Hsi-Yao |
口試委員: |
徐嘉慧
Chui, Ka-Wai 張妙霞 Chang, Miao-Hsia 蘇席瑤 Su, Hsi-Yao |
口試日期: | 2021/08/09 |
學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
系所名稱: |
英語學系 Department of English |
論文出版年: | 2021 |
畢業學年度: | 109 |
語文別: | 英文 |
論文頁數: | 119 |
中文關鍵詞: | 規避語 、性別 、其實 、面子威脅 、議會質詢 、社會語言學 |
英文關鍵詞: | hedge, gender, qishi, face threatening act, interpellations, Sociolinguistics |
研究方法: | 主題分析 、 觀察研究 、 敘事分析 |
DOI URL: | http://doi.org/10.6345/NTNU202101454 |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:186 下載:0 |
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 |
本文旨在探討高雄市議員在議會質詢,規避語「其實」的語用功能,並以Lakoff(1975)性別理論為基礎,探討規避語「其實」的使用是否跟性別相關。口語中規避語的使用,主要是說話者積極面子(positive face)跟消極面子(negative face)的保護以避免面子威脅的行為(face threatening acts)發生。本文收集三十二名男性議員跟二十四名女性議員在質詢中使用「其實」的語料。首先,我們使用AntConc 搜集語料,再用Python進行卡方檢定(Chi-square)。研究結果顯示,在質詢中「其實」有六個語用功能,分別是: (1)批評政府官員的回應,(2)議員給予官員可行的辦法,(3)對於官員的看法表示同意,(4)保護議員自己的積極面子,(5)避免過於彰顯議員自己的努力,(6)質詢內容涉及死亡相關的內容,研究結果顯示,只有一個語用功能跟性別相關。
另外,根據Hsieh and Huang (2005)所提出「其實」的架構(qishi construction),說話者用「其實」表達不同意(disalignment)之後,會用「因為」或是「可是」,更進一步說明不同意的理由;在議會質詢,議員也使用相同的模式,表達不同意官員的回答。不論是在充滿面子威脅的質詢,或是口語言談或訪問,規避語都扮演著重要的角色。而對於議員,在質詢中使用規避語的目的,除了表達他們同意或是不同意的態度,更進一步表達他們的立場跟建議,以達到代表民意監督政府的責任。
This corpus-based study investigates how a single linguistic hedge ‘qishi’ is employed by Kaohsiung council members in interpellations. Gender is examined in this study and is hypothesized as a factor affecting council members’ use of hedge ‘qishi’. There are 32 male council members and 24 female council members under examination in the present study. First, we use the AntConc tool to undergo data extraction and six pragmatic functions of qishi are identified. After running Chi-square in Python, the result shows only one pragmatic function is affected by gender.
In the present study, our analytical framework follows Lakoff’s (1975) theory of women’s language and hedging. Our findings in the present study are as follows. First of all, hedging, regarded as a feature of “women’s language” by Lakoff (1975), is not a way of expressing submissive attitudes but a way of showing disapproving attitudes and stances. In our study, there are six pragmatic functions of qishi. The six pragmatic functions we investigate are: criticizing government officials responses, providing workable plans for government officials, showing agreement with government officials’ responses, protecting the council member’s positive face, mitigating an overemphasis on the council member’s efforts, and involving in social taboo. The result of Chi-square shows that gender only affects the function of criticizing politicians’ responses. Moreover, according to the ‘qishi construction’ proposed by Hsieh and Huang (2005), in daily conversations or radio interviews, when people use qishi to express disagreement, they also use yinwei (因為) or keshi (可是) to elaborate on what they have said .We also find that council members also use this pattern in interpellations. To put it another way, when expressing disalignment in utterances, the ‘qishi construction’ can not only be applied to less face-threatening contexts (e.g., daily conversations or radio interviews) but also intense face-threatening contexts (e.g., interpellations).
Anthony, L. (2014). AntConc (Version 3.4.4) [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. Available from http://www.laurenceanthony.net/
Akman, Varol and Carla Bazzanella. 2003. The complexity of context: guest editors’ introduction. Journal of Pragmatics 35: 321-329.
Biq, Yung-O. 1991. The multiple uses of the second person singular pronoun in conversational Mandarin. Journal of Pragmatics 16:307-321.
Blum-kulka, Shoshana. 1987. Indirectness and politeness in requests: same of different. Journal of Pragmatics 11: 131-146.
Becker, Ernest, 1973. The Denial of Death. Free Press, New York.
Brain, James Lewton, 1979.The Last Taboo: Sex and the Fear of Death. Anchor Press/Doubleday, Garden coty.
Brown, Penelope and Levinson, Stephen C. 1987. Politeness: some universal in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chang, Miao-Hsia. 2008. Discourse and grammaticalization of contrastive markers in Taiwanese Southern Min:A corpus-based study. Journal of Pragmatics, 40, 2144-2149.
Chang, Miao-Hsia, Yu-Wen Luo, and Yueh-Kuei Hsu. 2012. Subjectivity and Objectivity in Chinese Academic Discourse: How Attribution Hedges Indicate Authorial Stance. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics 38, 2, 293-329.
Chen, Yi-Ting. 2008. A Corpus-based Study of Hedges in Mandarin Spoken Discourse. MA thesis, National Taiwan University, Taiwan.
Crompton, Peter. 1997. Hedging in academic writing: some theoretical problems. English for Specific Purpose, 16(4), 271-287.
Goffman, Erving, 1967. Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. Pantheon Books, New York.
Goffman, Erving, 1981. Forms of Talk. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.
Huang, Li-Yi . 2004. Methodology in contrastive linguistics: A case study of adverbs in English and Chinese. Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on the Methodology in Linguistics (sponsored by National Chengchi University). Taipei, 91-103.
Hsieh, Fuhu and Shuanfan Huang. 2005. Grammar, construction and social action: A study of the qishi construction. Languages and Linguistics 6.4:599-634, 2005.
Hyland, Ken. 1998b. Boosting, hedging and the negotiation of academic knowledge. Text, 18(3), 349-382.
Hyland, Ken. 1998c. Persuasion and context: the pragamtics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 437-455.
Hyland, Ken. 1999. Disciplinary discourses: writer stance in research articles. In Candlin. Christopher N. and Hyland, Ken. (eds.), Writing: text, process, and practices, 99-121. London: Longman.
Kuo, Chih-hua. 1999. The Use of Personal Pronouns: Role Relationships in Scientific Journal Articles. English for Specific Purposes 18(2), 121-138.
Lakoff, George. 1973. Hedges: a study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Journal of Philosophical logics, 2(4), 458-508.
Lakoff, Robin. 1975. Language and woman’s place. New York: Harper and Row.
Leech, Geoffery, 1983.Principle of Pragmatics .Longman, London.
Lin, Huey Hannah. 2005. Contextualizing Linguistic Politeness in Chinese—A Sociopragmatic Approach with Examples from Persuasive Sales Talk in Taiwan Mandarin. Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, Ohio.
Lin, Wan-Hua. 2014. Hedges in Medical Discourse: A Comparison between the Spoken and the Written Genres in Taiwan’s Medical Setting. Doctoral dissertation, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Liu, Yi-Chun. 2006. Euphemistic Speech of Mandarin in Taiwan- Pragmatic Strategies and Linguistic Structure.MA thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Lo, Yu-Wen. 2010. Hedges in Chinese Academic Texts: How Authors Qualify Their Argument. MA Thesis. National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Ma, Wei-Yun and Keh-Jiann Chen, 2003, "Introduction to CKIP Chinese Word Segmentation System for the First International Chinese Word Segmentation Bakeoff", Proceedings of ACL, Second SIGHAN Workshop on Chinese Language Processing, pp168-171
Hsieh, Fuhu and Shuanfan Huang. 2005. Grammar, construction and social action: A study of the qishi construction. Languages and Linguistics 6.4:599-634, 2005.
Markkanen, Raija and Schroer, Hartmut. 1997. Hedging: a challenge for pragmatics and discourse analysis. In Markkanen, Raija and Schroer, Hartmut (eds.), Hedging and discourse analysis: approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomena in academic texts, 3-18. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter.
Meyer, Paul Georg. 1997. Hedging strategies in written academic discourse: strengthening in argument by weakening the claim. In Markkanen, Raija and Schroer, Hartmut (eds.). Hedging and discourse: approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts, 21-41. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter.
Kasper, Gabriele. 1990. Linguistic politeness: Current research issues. Journal of Pragmatics 14: 193-218.Kubler-Ross, Elizabeth, 1970.On Death and Dying. Tavistock, London.
Kurzon, Dennis. 1998. The speech act status of incitement: perlocutionary acts revisited. Journal of Pragmatics 29: 571-596.
Tsai, Mei-Hui, 2010.Managing topics of birth and death in doctor-patient communication. J. Pragmat. 42(5),1350-1363.
Varttala, Teppo. 1990. Remarks on the communicative functions of hedging in popular and scientific and specialist research articles on medicine. English for Specific Purpose, 18(2), 177-200.
Varttala, Teppo. 2001. Hedging in scientific oriented discourse: exploring variation according to discipline and intended audience. Doctoral dissertation, University of Tampereen Yliopisto, Finland.
Wang, Peihan. 2005. A functional comparison between Actually and Qishi in spoken discourse. M. A. Thesis of Graduate Program of the Department of English Language at Providence University, Taiwan.
Wang, Yu-Fang*, Pi-Hua Tsai and Ya-Ting Yang. 2010. Objectivity, Subjectivity and Intersubjectivity: Evidence from Qishi (‘actually’) and Shishishang (‘in fact’) in Spoken Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics 42:705-727.
You, Jian-Yuan. 2014. A study on Question Types, Replying Strategies and Interruptions in the Parliamentary Question Time in Taiwan. MA Thesis. National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.