Chapter 9
Discourse analysis
Focuses:
1. discourse
2. cohesion
3. coherence
4. schema
1. Discourse
Numerous approaches to study lge, two distinct perspectives: lge as system and lge as activity.
lge as system: try to describe the whole of it, which is made up of three layers (sub-systems): meaning (the semantic system), wording (the syntactical system and the morphological system) and sounding (the phonological system).
lge as activity: studying the way lge is used for real-life communication and social interaction (e.g. chatting, lecturing, writing an email).
They observe that there is an interaction between activity and system. 1) we need to draw on our knowledge of lge as a system to communicate; 2)we are constantly picking up new stuff , which we add to our store of that knowledge.
Lge as activity in social interaction is technically termed discourse. It is a general term for examples of lge use, i.e. lge which has been produced as the result of an act of communication. It refers to the larger units of lge such as paragraphs, conversations, and interviews.
The linguistic form (or record) of discourse is called text. The same text may function as different discourses in different situations.
E.g. “what a nice day” on a sunny spring day and saying so on a bitterly cold winter day are different discourses, yet they have the same text.
Discourse is:
lge above the sentence or above the clause
a continuous stretch of spoken lge larger than a sentence, often constituting a coherent unit
a stretch of lge perceived to be meaningful unified, and purposive; lge in use
(viewed) as social practice determined by social structures
Structural or textual definition of discourse:
Discourse is a particular unit of language (above the sentence).
Functional definition of discourse: Discourse is a particular focus of language use.
Structural approach to discourse
Find the constituents that have particular relationships with each other and that can occur in a restricted number of arrangements;
Problems: units in which people speak do not always look like sentences, or grammatically correct sentences. Example 1:
Jack is tall and kind and don't hardly say anything. Love children. Respect his wife, Odessa, and all Odessa Amazon sisters (Celie’s Diary)
(----“The Colour Purple”, Alice Wharton)
Example 2: Colourless green ideas sleep furiously (Chomsky);
Solving the problem: adopt Lyons’s distinction between system-sentences and text – sentences. SS are well-formed abstract theoretical sentences generated according to the existing grammar rules; TS are context-dependent utterances or parts of utterances which occur in everyday life.
The discourse analysis will be concerned with text-sentences.
Functional approach to discourse
Roman Jakobson: lge performs six functions:
Addressor(emotive);
Context (referential)
Addressee (conative);
Contact (phatic);
Message (poetic);
Code (metalinguistic).
Utterances may have multiple functions;
The major concern: discourse analysis can turn out into a more general and broader analysis of lge functions. Or it will fail to make a special place for the analysis of relationships between utterances.
2 . Discourse analysis
DA and pragmatics share the interest in lge use, yet they have different concerns. Pragmatics studies “intended speaker meaning”.
A: I have a fourteen-year-old son.
B: Well, that’s all right.
A: I also have a dog.
B: Oh, I’m sorry.
Pragmatics would tell us that both A and B are performing indirect speech acts: A makes a request, which B accepts; then A makes another request, which B declines. Although the conversation looks disconnected at first sight, we can make perfect sense of it by imagining a familiar dialog between a would-be tenant and a landlord.
If we change the conversation into this:
A: I have a fourteen-year-old son.
B: Nice day, isn’t it?
A: I also have a dog.
B: I’ m fine.
However hard you try, you probably cannot but give up and say, “ this doesn’t make any sense”.
In other words, the first conversation is coherent while the second one is not. The question is, how do you know this? Obviously, pragmatics cannot help you here.
Now let’s consider written language.
SLOW
CHILDREN
AT PLAY
You probably need not take much trouble to figure out that this sign is meant to caution car drivers to slow down so as not to endanger children at play. However, it is not altogether impossible to see “slow” as a modifier of “children”, meaning “mentally retarded”. But you will probably dismiss this interpretation as irrelevant even if it comes to your mind. Why?
So our question may be formulated like this: when you listen to or participate in a conversation, or when you read sth written (be it a road sign, a story, a letter, or a piece of news,) how do you “make sense of ” what you hear or read, i.e. how do you tell coherent discourse from disjointed gibberish(乱语)? to answer questions like this--- a thriving branch of linguistics: discourse analysis.
In technical terms, discourse analysis is the study of how sentences in spoken or written lge form larger meaningful units such as paragraphs, conversations, interviews, etc.
It deals with: how the choice of articles, pronouns, and tenses affects the structure of the discourse; the relationship between utterances in a discourse ,and the moves(话步) made by speakers to introduce a new topic, change the topic, or assert a higher role relationship to the other participants
3. Cohesion and Coherence
In text linguistics, a text is a communicative act, which can be either spoken or written. It is believed that there are certain standards by which we tell texts from non-texts. Some text linguists propose that there are as many as seven “constitutive principles of textuality” and three “regulative principles” which a text must fulfill. cohesion and coherence
3.1 Cohesion衔接
From the chapter on syntax we learn that components that make up a sentence must be connected according to syntactical rules. Similarly, there are certain rules that govern the way sentences are connected in a text. These rules are studied in terms of cohesion.
Cohesion：the grammatical and / or lexical relationships between the different elements of a text. This may be the relationship between different sentences or between parts of a sentence. Cohesion concerns the surface structure of a text. It can be defined as the network of lexical, grammatical and other relations that link various parts of a text.
Five cohesive devices:
Reference
Substitution
Ellipsis
Conjunction
Lexical cohesion
Reference
“reference ” in semantics： the relationship between a word and what it points to in the real world . In our discussion of cohesion, that sort of reference is called “presented reference”给出的指称 (i.e. it introduces sth new to the text), as distinct from “presumed reference”假定指称 (i.e. mentioned in such a way that we need to retrieve their identity from somewhere else in the text).
I have a daughter. (Daughter is a presented reference item, as the reader dose not need to have any precious knowledge about what I have.) She is very nice. (She is a presumed reference item, as the reader needs to retrieve the identity of she to follow the text.)
Only presumed reference creates cohesion in a text, as it creates ties between the presumed reference item and its referent.
The commonest presumed reference items are:
The definite article the;
Demonstrative pronouns this, that, these, those;
Pronouns he, she, they, it, etc.
Substitution
the replacement of one item with another. It is often used to avoid repetition.
---Do you like playing the guitar?
--- I do.
Substitution can be
Nominal, e.g. one, ones, the same.
This watch doesn’t work. Go and fetch me another one.
I’m going to keep those boxes. The ones I want to get rid of are in the garage.
John resigned and started his own company. I’d do the same if I had the chance.
Verbal, e.g. do, does
Clausal, e.g. so, not
A: Will it be a fine day tomorrow?
B: I think so.
Ellipsis
a special form of substitution (substitution by zero). Something is left unsaid, yet it is readily understood.
nominal ellipsis: Take one of these tickets. I still have seven left.
verbal ellipsis:
John bought some chocolates, and Joan some biscuits.
A: Are you watching TV?
B: Yes, I am.
clausal ellipsis:
A: Why are you leaving?
B: Because it’s late.
Conjunction
the logical relations between parts of the text. It is often realized in the form of conjunctive items.
It can express four types of logical relation :
Additive添加 (and , or, also, furthermore, in addition, besides, likewise, similarly, incidentally, by the way, by contrast, for instance, in other words, etc.)
Adversative相反 (but, yet, however, though, instead, on the other hand, nevertheless, at any rate, as a matter of fact, rather, etc.)
Causal因果 (so, consequently, hence, it follows, for, because, that being so, under the circumstances, for this reason, etc.)
Temporals时间 (then, next, previously, finally, at last, after a moment, etc.)
Lexical cohesion
Lexical cohesion is cohesion through the use of words, i.e. the writer or speaker relates the text consistently to its area of focus through the selection of lexical items. A given lexical item cannot be said to have cohesive function per se, but it may enter into a cohesive relation with other lexical items in a text.
two types: reiteration and collocation.
Reiteration重现：repetition of lexical items. A reiterated item may be a repetition of an earlier item, a synonym or near-synonym, a super-ordinate, or a general word.
There is a boy playing with fire.
The boy is going to burn himself if he doesn’t take care. (repetition)
The lad is going to burn himself if he doesn’t take care. (synonym)
The child is going to burn himself if he doesn’t take care. (super-ordinate)
The idiot is going to burn himself if he doesn’t take care. (general word)
collocation：the tendency of certain lexical items to co-occur.
A little fat man of Bombay
Was smoking one very hot day
But a bird called a snipe
Flew away with his pipe
Which vexed the fat man of Bombay
There is a strong collocation bond between “smoking” and “pipe”. Similarly, if you read the word “mouse” in text, you will not be surprised to come across such words as “cheese”, ”tail” and ”rodent” nearby in the text.
3.2 Coherence
Interestingly enough, the use of cohesive devices alone may not produce texts that “make sense”. Consider the following passage:
I bought a Ford. A car in which President Wilson rode down the Champs Elysees was Black. Black English has been widely discussed. The discussion between the presidents ended last week. A week has seven days. Every day I feed my cat. Cats have four legs. The cat is on the mat. Mat has three letters.
The passage appears to be strewn with cohesive ties (e.g. Ford-car, black, Black, my cat-cats), yet probably no one would call it a coherent text. From this example we see that there must be other factors than cohesion that enable us to judge if a stretch of a language makes sense. These factors are studied in terms of coherence.
Coherence: the relationships which link the meanings of utterances in a discourse or of the sentences in text. It concerns people’s ability to match the text with their experience or their understanding of the word. If a stretch of a ge is in line with some experience or their “common sense”, it will be recognized as a meaningful text.
When you read the conversation cited at the beginning of this chapter, for example, you will find yourself trying to imagine a situation that would fully accommodate it. IN other words, you try to fill in the “gaps” in texts by drawing on your experience or encyclopedic knowledge.
Coherence is sth underlying the text--- semantic connections, logical connections or temporal sequence. It is created by our real life knowledge. Cohesion is the verbal realization of coherence in the form of cohesive devices. As we see in the last sample passage.
George studied law in Cambridge. And he is now a lawyer.
George studied law in Cambridge. He is now a lawyer.
The absence of the conjunctions “and” in the second sentence does not affect coherence at all. We know from our experience that being a lawyer is a likely outcome of studying law.
In summary, there can be no meaning cohesion without coherence, but coherence without cohesion may be perfectly possible.
4 The schema theory
As mentioned above, we rely on our real life knowledge to interpret discourses. But how do we apply such knowledge to the perception of coherence? Some linguists have proposed the scheme theory as an answer.
A schema is a mental representation of typical instances of discourse. You may imagine it to be a video file stored in your brain.
“asking the way”: you say hello to a stranger, ask him or her the way to some place, get the answer and say thank you.
There are numerous video files like this, or numerous schemata, in your brain, which are activated when you encounter discourses. Though we may not be aware of it, the existence of schemata is a great help in our understanding of texts.
所谓图式是指围绕某一个主题组织起来的知识的表征和贮存方式。人的一生要学习和掌握大量的知识,这些知识并不是杂乱无章地贮存在人的大脑中的,而是围绕某一主题相互联系起来形成一定的知识单元,这种单元就是图式。比如,我们见到某种动物的图片,就能很快想起它的名称、性情、生活习性等很多有关该动物的知识。这说明该动物的外观特征是与它的名称、性情、生活习性等有关知识是联系在一起贮存在人的大脑中的。所以说,图式实际上是一种关于知识的认知模式。图式理论研究的就是知识是怎样表征出来的,以及关于这种对于知识的表征如何以其特有的方式有利于知识的应用的理论。
Consider the following instructions from a bottle of cough syrup:
Fill measure cup to line.
Repeat every 2 to 3.
Of course you do not have to keep filling the measure cup every two to three hours. Nor do you have to rub the syrup in your hair every two to three hours. You know you are supposed to drink it because you have a schema of such instructions on medicine bottles.
Schemata may also help to clear up ambiguity. For example, if we encounter the sentence
They caught many soles that day.
We know that sole here refers to a kind of fish, rather than a part of the foot/shoe, because the word “caught” activates the schema of fishermen catching fish.
However, schemata may also be a barrier to understanding when they have become stereotyped. Consider the following quiz item:
A woman is walking on the beach, but she has left no footprints behind her. Why?
If you fail to figure out that the woman is walking backward (or come up with such spooky answers as “she’s a ghost”), you probably have a schema in which one can only walk forward!
When things like this happen, the mind will adjust the old schema or create a new schema so as to adapt to the new experience.
5. Information structure: theme and rheme
Consider the following excerpt from a text:
The Greenwood Boys are a group of popular singers. At present, they are visiting all parts of the country. They will be arriving here tomorrow.
Of course the short passage reads smooth and natural. Now suppose we change it into this:
The Greenwood Boys are a group of popular singers. All parts of the country they are visiting at present. Tomorrow, here they will be arriving.
The sentences remain grammatical, yet the passage reads somewhat awkward, doesn’t it? Does that have something to do with word order in sentences?
it is often taken for granted that English has a fixed word order. Take the declarative sentence for example. its structure as “SVOA”----Subject + Verb + Object + Adverbial. However, this kernel sentence structure may be altered to bring elements to the front of the sentence (this movement is called “fronting”).
So, apart from Michael wrote a very good novel last year, we can create
A very good novel Michael wrote last year.
Last year Michael wrote a very good novel.
What Michael wrote last year was a very good novel.
Michael, he wrote a very good novel last year.
But why would we like to change the basic structure of a sentence? To answer question like this, we need to take a functional approach to English grammar. In this part, we shall discuss two of the most important terms in functional grammar: theme and rheme.
1) Clause, theme and rheme
Theme and rheme are usually discussed at the level of clause. A clause is a grammatical unit that contains a subject and a predicate. It may be a sentence or part of a sentence.
E.g. the clause she is very young can either stand alone as a simple sentence or be part of a complex sentence---- Although she is very young, she speaks three languages.
As shown by the above example of the variations of a sentence, a writer or speaker can decide where to start the clause. The beginning of each clause is its theme主位. It is the starting-point for the message. The rest of the clause tells the reader or hearer something about the theme.
That “rest of the clause” is called rheme述位. The theme is the framework or point of departure of a message. The rheme is what is speaker or writer wants to convey about the theme.
In English the theme is marked in intonation as a separate tone unit, frequently followed by a brief pause. It always occurs in the initial position of the clause. Theme and rheme are also discussed in terms of given and new information: usually, theme is given information, while rheme is new information.
In English, what is new tends to appear at the end of a clause. The following sentences have different themes:
I’m writing handouts for my students.
For my students, I’m writing handouts.
Handouts I’m writing for my students.
2) Types of theme
three types of theme:
Textual theme (discourse marks and conjunctions话语标记和连词), e.g.
However, she would not listen to me.
Now, that is something interesting.
Interpersonal theme (vocative呼语), e.g.
Dad, look at that cat!
Interpersonal theme (finite verb, modal adjunct情态动词, wh-theme,etc.),e.g.
Can you solve this mathematical problem?
Did you watch the new Hollywood movie?
Whose desk is this?
Ideational theme (subject, complement, etc.), e.g.
Tom Sawyer is the hero of a novel by Mark Twain.
Over the bridge flew the plane.
More than one of these types of theme may occur in the same sentence, forming what is called multiple themes.
When multiple themes occur, they usually follow the same order: textual + interpersonal + ideational. While the textual and interpersonal themes may be absent, the ideational theme is always present. In fact, the demarcation line between theme and rheme always fall at the end of the ideational theme.
主位可以根据本身结构的复杂程度分成“单项主位”（simple theme）、“复项主位”（multiple theme）和“句项主位”（clausal theme）三种。如果主位是一个独立的整体，不可以再分成更小的功能单位，这就称为单项主位。复项主位是由多种语义成分构成的主位。它总是含有一个表示概念意义的成分，另外还可能含有表示语篇和人际意义的成分。如果这三种成分都出现在同一个主位中，它们的排列顺序通常是语篇成分先于人际成分，人际成分先于概念成分。句项主位指的是由整个小句充当主位。传统语法所说的主从复合句中的主句和从句都可以成为句项主位。
主位结构与信息分布的关系
语言是一种交际工具，它除能表情达意外， 还传递信息。但在语言信息传递过程中，各语言成份的信息价值是不同的，构成句子的成份虽然都是信息的载体，但荷载的信息值不同。信息结构是把语言组织成为“信息单位”（information unit）的结构，也可以说是已知信息与新信息相互作用从而构成信息单位的结构。对于听话者来说，有些信息内容是已知的，即已知信息（Given）；有些则是未知的，即新信息（New）。这些荷载已知的、新的信息的语言单位在语言的线性排列中不是任意的，其分布能体现不同的交际价值。在话语/语篇交际中，人们传递信息的顺序是从已知到未知，即将新的信息内容置于句末的语调群核心，而已知信息的交际价值较小，大多放到句子的前面。句末是信息中心的中性位置。
正由于此，人们在说话或写作中倾向于将新的或比较重要的内容放在句子的末尾。这就是人们在话语交际中遵循的“尾重原则”。“尾重原则”是对说话者和作者运用语言而言。对于交际对象即听者或读者来说，语句的末尾部分赋予听者或读者较高的注意价值。语言学家称其为“无标记焦点”（又称“末尾焦点（end-focus）”）。在话语使用中，处于句子末尾的内容往往得到一定强调或突出，或借助一定语调能唤起听或读者的某种情感，或表达说话者的某种态度，产生某种特定的效果。
主位结构与信息分布具有紧密的联系，主位所载的信息往往是已知信息。但是，由于主位与已知信息、述位与新信息并没有绝对的对应关系，因而我们不能把语言成分出现的前后顺序看作研究信息分布的唯一标准。
但是在实际翻译中，很多人不注意这些问题，从而使译文与原文的信息侧重点发生了改变。以下例子中，“T”表示主位，“R”表示述位。
在实际翻译中，主位部分出现的问题。
(1) 原文：Giu: What’s that awful noise upstairs?
Beth: It woke me up at five o’clock in the morning.
译文：吉尔：楼上是什么声音那么吵啊？
贝丝：我早上五点就被吵醒了。
解析：首先，对贝丝的话进行主位、述位分析：
Beth: It (T) [Given] // woke me up at five o’clock in the morning (R) [New].
在原文中，处于句首的是单项主位 (simple theme)，即上文已经出现过的已知信息“it (noise声音)”，而述位部分是新信息。
译文：贝丝：我(T) // 早上五点就被(它) [已知信息]吵醒了。
在译文中，原文单项主位已知信息“它”被放到句子后面述位部分，得到了进一步的强调，这与原文的语意侧重点明显不同。
因此，在翻译的时候最好根据原文把信息值最低的已知信息“it (noise声音)”放在句子主位的位置，作为话题的出发点。改译如下：
改译：贝丝：早上五点就把我吵醒了。
（分析：（它）(T) [已知信息] // 早上五点就把我吵醒了(R) [新信息]。）
(2) 原文：Kevin: Do you still have those documents I emailed you from China?
David: The ones I never read. Yes, I have them.
译文：凯文：我从中国用电子邮件寄给你的那些文件，你还留着吗？
大卫：我一直没读那些。有啊，我留着呢。
解析：首先，对大卫的原话进行主位、述位分析：
David: The ones (T) [Given] // I never read (R) [New]. Yes, I have them.
在原文中，处于句首的是有标记性单项主位 (marked simple theme)，即上文已经出现过的已知信息“the ones (those documents那些文件)”，而述位中置于句尾焦点（end-focus）的是新信息“never read(一直没读)”。
译文：大卫：我(T) // 一直没读那些[已知信息]。有啊，我留着呢。
在译文中，“那些”被放到句尾重心的位置，被当作是新信息起到了强调作用，会让读者产生误解，以为只有没读的文件还留着，而读过的文件可能就没有留下来。[点评：分析有一定道理，原译确实在衔接上不自然，有歧义]
因此，在翻译的时候，应该把原文单项主位，即信息值最低的已知信息“the ones (those documents那些文件)”放到主位的位置，作为话题的出发点，把新信息“一直没读”放到句尾重心来加以强调。因此，改译如下：
改译：大卫：那些啊，我一直没读。有啊，我留着呢。
（分析：大卫：那些啊[已知信息] // 我一直没读[新信息]。有啊，我留着呢。）
可修订为：那些文件啊，我没看过。不过，我可留着呢。
（3）她三天才来看我一次，你一天就来三次
译文：You come to see me three times a day, but she only comes once every three days
解析：首先，对原文进行分析：
她三天才来看我一次 (T)，// 你一天就来三次 (R)。
本句所含的信息有两个，所强调的应该是后面“你一天就来三次”，含有责怪你来的太多，而不是她来太少。
译文：You come to see me three times a day (T), // but she only comes once every three days (R).
而译文正好相反，把原文的主、述位正好弄反了，强调了她。众所周知，英文里转折词BUT后面才是新信息，是作者所要表达的真正意图。
改译：She comes to see me only every three days, but you do three times a day.
（分析：She comes to see me only every three days (T), but you do three times a day (R).）
在实际翻译中，述位部分出现的问题。
原文：B：Yoga, developed by the ancient sages of India, is a system of personal development encompassing body, mind and spirit that dates back more than 5000 years.
A：“瑜伽”从印度演化而来，那这个词是不是有特殊的含义呢？
译文： A：Does the word “Yoga” itself carry a certain special meaning, with its evolution from India?
解析：首先，根据上下文，对原文进行分析：
A：“瑜伽”从印度演化而来[已知信息]，那这个词是不是有特殊的含义呢[新信息]？
在原文中，根据上下文可以看出：“‘瑜伽’从印度演化而来”是已知信息，其信息价值较低，因此不应该被放在句尾重心部分；而新信息是“是不是有特殊的含义”，其信息价值最高，通常情况下翻译后应该被放在句尾重心加以强调。
译文：A：Does the word “Yoga” itself carry a certain special meaning [New], with its evolution from India [Given]?
在译文中，在译文中，主位和原文主位相一致。但述位部分出现了差异： “‘瑜伽’从印度演化而来(with its evolution from India)”被放到述位中末尾焦点的位置，当作是新信息起到了强调作用；相比之下，真正应该得到强调的新信息“是不是有特殊的含义(carry a certain special meaning)”却放到了已知信息的前面。原文和译文的侧重点存在明显差异。
因此，在翻译的时候，应该把信息值最低的已知信息“‘瑜伽’从印度演化而来”提前，把新信息“是不是有特殊的含义”放到句尾重心来加以强调。因此，改译如下：
改译：A：Does the word “Yoga” with its evolution from India [Given] carry a certain special meaning [New]?
修订为：Does the word “Yoga” ，with its evolution from India ，carry a certain special meaning [New]?
原文：下刘姥姥听见这般音乐，且又有了酒，越发喜的手舞足蹈起来。
译文: Now the music, on top of the wine, set Granny Liu waving her arms and beating time with her feet for cheer delight.
解析：原文里刘姥姥是话题，“越发喜的手舞足蹈起来”是描述她高兴的情形，属于新信息，给大家一种视图，脑海里内视她高兴的情形。有动态在里面。
译文: Now the music, on top of the wine (T), // set Granny Liu [Given] waving her arms and beating time with her feet for cheer delight (R).
而译文里music 成了话题，Granny Liu 成了间接宾语，没有了动态的感觉在内。
改译：Granny Liu, listening to the beautiful music, drinking the delicious wine, delights [G？]to wave her arms and beat time with her feet.
（分析：Granny Liu, listening to the beautiful music, drinking the delicious wine (T), // delights to wave her arms and beat time with her feet (R).）
Another important distinction is that between “unmarked” and “marked” ideational themes. Unmarked ideational themes are: subject in a declarative; finite verb plus subject in a yes/no question; wh-element in a wh-question; lexical verb (together with you or let’s if present) in an imperative. Sometimes other constituents are “promoted” to the theme position, forming marked ideational themes. The most common type of marked ideational theme is the adjunct (adverb or adverbial clause or sentence to modify the meaning of the verb).
For instance:
Unmarked themes in declarative sentences (ideational theme = subject):
No, I think it is pretty easy.
Marked themes in declarative sentences (ideational theme ≠ subject)
And when you get down there you find he hasn’t actually got any.
Inside him was rising an urge to do something, take some action.
Unmarked themes in yes/no questions, wh-questions and imperatives:
Would you like a cup of tea?
But don’t you see it’s impossible to get there in time?
Now that you’ve done your homework, why not go out and play with your friends?
Look at that funny man!
Let me have a look.
6 Conversation Analysis
Conversation analysis (CA) is an important branch of discourse analysis. It is the analysis of natural conversation in order to discover what the linguistic characteristics of conversation are and how conversation is used in ordinary life. It includes the study of how speakers decide where to speak during a conversation, how the utterances of two or more speakers are related, and the different functions that conversation is used for. Of interest are such issues as turns, adjacency pairs and preferred second parts.
1 ) Turn-taking话轮
It is typical for people who engage in conversation to take turns at speaking. Usually only one person speaks at a time; when more than one person wants to talk at the same, one of them usually stops until the other person(s) has/have finished. Thus the turn is considered the basic unit of conversation.
Each turn has a completion point, also know as the transition relevance place, at which the right to speak may be relayed to the next speaker. The next speaker may either be selected by the previous speaker or self-selected. Self-selection may occur when the current speaker chooses to continue to speak at the transition relevance place.
Speakers may indicate that their turns are “complete” in various ways. They may pause at the end of a complete phrase or sentence or use certain words or phrases, say a tag question, to encourage other participants to take part in the conversation. Other participants may indicate that they want to take the speaking turn, also in a number of ways. They can make repeated short sounds, or use body language and facial expressions.
Sometimes they may simply cut in, causing overlapping of their turns and the turn of the current speaker, for example,
A: Didn’t you 〔know wh-
B: 〔But he must’ve been there by two
A: Yes, but you knew where he was going.
(The symbol “〔 ” indicates simultaneous talk.)
2) Adjacency pairs相邻语对
a sequence of two related utterances by two different speakers. The second utterance is always a response to the first. For example, question-answer, greeting-greeting, offer-acceptance, apology-minimization, complaint-apology, accusation-denial.
An adjacency pair is a pair of conversational turns by two different speakers such that the production of the first turn (called a first-pair part) makes a response (a second-pair part) of a particular kind relevant. For example, a question, such as "what's your name?", requires the addressee to provide an answer in the next conversational turn. A failure to give an immediate response is noticeable and accountable.
Many actions in conversation are accomplished through adjacency pair sequences, for example:
offer-acceptance/rejection
greeting-greeting
complaint-excuse/remedy
request-acceptance/denial
Sometimes, an adjacency pair may be embedded into another adjacency pair, like this,
Son: Can I watch TV, Dad?
Father: Have you finished your homework?
Son: No.
Father: Then you can’t.
In this example, the father delays his answer to his son’s question until he has checked if the necessary condition exists.
Given the limit of human memory, the number of embedded pairs cannot be infinite. Three or four embedded pairs may be common. e.g
A: Could you lend me a few bucks?
B: What for?
A: I need to take a trip to San Francisco to see my girlfriend.
B: How much do you want?
A: Well … uh … 50 dollars is ok.
B: When are you gonna return?
A: Next Monday.
B: All right. Wait for me. I’ll be right back.
3) Preferred second parts 优先结构
An adjacency pair may have different second parts. For instance, a question may not be followed by a direct answer, but by another question, a partial answer, a statement of ignorance, or a denial of the relevance of the question. An invitation may either be followed by acceptance or refusal. However, some second parts are preferred and some are dispreferred.
4) Pre-sequence前序列
Certain speech acts performed in conversation, such as invitation, request and announcement, are usually preceded by what is called pre-sequences. Pre-sequence refers to the specific turn that has the function of prefiguring the coming action. The following is a pre-invitaion:
A: Are you free tonight?
B: Yeah, why?
A: Come over to my birthday party.
B shows that he knows it is a pre-invitation by asking “why”.
The next example is a pre-request:
A: Do you have some hot chocolate?
B: Mhm.
A: Can I have hot chocolate with whipped cream?
B: Sure.
Also common are pre-announcements, for example,
A: I forgot to tell you the two best things that happened to me today.
B: Yeah? What were they?
A: I got a B+ on my math test … and I got an athletic award. |
收藏
点赞!
反对!
楼主