机构语境下医保谈判话语的言语行为分析
An Analysis on Speech Acts in Healthcare Security Negotiation Discourse Based on Institutional Context
DOI: 10.12677/ml.2024.12111069, PDF,   
作者: 郭 芝:西北师范大学外国语学院,甘肃 兰州
关键词: 机构语境医保谈判言语行为Institutional Context Healthcare Security Negotiation Speech Acts
摘要: 医保谈判是指国家医保局代表与药企代表进行协商药物价格的会谈。医保谈判自实施以来一直备受关注。医保方与企业方两者都站在各自角度和立场进行商务会谈。目前我国学者从语用学角度对我国医保谈判话语的研究,以及机构语境如何制约谈判言语行为的系统研究较少。鉴于上述研究现状,本文以国家医保药品目录真实谈判为语料,以机构话语理论和言语行为理论为支撑,探讨医保谈判话语的言语行为特点,并且对影响和制约医保方和企业方言语行为的机构语境因素进行分析。研究发现,医保谈判的医保方和企业方主要实施直接言语行为,双方言语行为实施类别与机构语境直接相关。本文希望将机构语境与医保谈判言语行为研究联系起来,完善医保谈判话语研究方法。
Abstract: Healthcare security negotiation refers to a negotiable meeting of representatives of the National Healthcare Security Administration and the pharmaceutical enterprises on drug prices. The health-care security negotiations have been given serious attention since their implementation. Both the healthcare security side and the enterprise side stand their own perspectives and positions for business talks. At present, Chinese scholars have rarely studied the discourse of healthcare security negotiation in China from the perspective of pragmatics, and the way the institutional context restricts the speech acts in a negotiation. In view of the above research situation, this paper discusses and analyzes the characteristics of healthcare security negotiation discourse and institutional context factors that influence and restrict the speech acts between healthcare security side and the enterprise side based on institutional discourse theory and speech acts theory. The study found that the healthcare security side and the enterprise side mainly implement the direct speech acts, and the type of the speech acts used of both sides is directly related to the institutional context. This paper hopes to link the institutional context with the research of speech acts of healthcare security negotiation discourse, and improve the research method of healthcare security negotiation.
文章引用:郭芝. 机构语境下医保谈判话语的言语行为分析[J]. 现代语言学, 2024, 12(11): 716-725. https://doi.org/10.12677/ml.2024.12111069

参考文献

[1] 陈建平. 机构话语中的交往行为探索[J]. 现代外语, 2019, 42(2): 206-219.
[2] Bargiela-Chiappini, F., Nickerson, C. and Planken, B. (2007) Business Discourse. Palgrave Macmillan, 15.
[3] 谢群, 展悦. 国际商务谈判话语研究回顾及新进展——商务话语研究系列之四[J]. 外语学刊, 2018, 205(6): 68-73.
[4] William, P.A. (2000) Illocutionary Acts and Sentence Meaning. Cornell University Press, 35-50.
[5] Marsili, N. and Green, M. (2021) Assertion: A (Partly) Social Speech Act. Journal of Pragmatics, 181, 17-28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[6] Baider, F. (2019) Double Speech Act: Negotiating Inter-Cultural Beliefs and Intra-Cultural Hate Speech. Journal of Pragmatics, 151, 155-166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[7] Li, S., Wen, T., Li, X., Feng, Y. and Lin, C. (2022) Comparing Holistic and Analytic Marking Methods in Assessing Speech Act Production in L2 Chinese. Language Testing, 40, 249-275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[8] 刘畅. 蔑称的言语行为理论[J]. 现代哲学, 2022(5): 75-81.
[9] 崔希亮. 言语行为理论与语气词的功能意义[J]. 华文教学与研究, 2024(3): 58-65.
[10] 姜望琪. 语用学——理论及应用[M]. 北京: 北京大学出版社, 2009: 120.
[11] 辞海(缩影版) [M]. 上海: 上海辞书出版社, 2022: 825.
[12] Mumby, D.K. (1997) The Problem of Hegemony: Rereading Gramsci for Organizational Communication Studies. Western Journal of Communication, 61, 343-375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[13] Goffman, E. (1955) On Face-Work: An Analysis of Ritual Elements in Social Interaction. Psychiatry, 18, 213-231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[14] Levinson, S.C. (1992) Activity Types and Language. Linguistics, 17, 66-100.
[15] Thornborrow, J. (2002) Power Talk, Language and Interaction in Institutional Discourse. Pearson Education Ltd, 4.
[16] Habermas, J. (1984) Theory of Communication Action. Heinemann, 117-123.
[17] 冉永平, 杨璘璘, 刘平. 语用学的包容性及融合性[J]. 外国语(上海外国语大学学报), 2022, 45(4): 2-8.
[18] 陶明星. 语用原则与商务英语写作[J]. 湖南大学学报(社会科学版), 1998, 12(2): 4.
[19] 陶明星. 谈判言语行为研究[J]. 湖南大学学报(社会科学版), 2002, 16(1): 53-57.
[20] 关世杰. 跨文化交流学[M]. 北京: 北京大学出版社, 1995: 220-225.
[21] 孙艺玲, 刘永华. 言语行为构式的特征及语用研究[J]. 东北师大学报(哲学社会科学版), 2023(6): 157-165
[22] 段李敏. 基于机构话语的身份建构语用方式研究[D]: [博士学位论文]. 北京: 北京外国语大学, 2017.
[23] 向明友, 刘欣雅. 意义研究的策略互动观: 博弈语用学新进展[J]. 外语教学与研究, 2023, 55(6): 827-837, 958-959.
[24] 索振羽. 语用学教程[M]. 北京: 北京大学出版社, 2014: 31-32.