汉语打断现象的识别研究
Study on the Perception of Chinese Interruption Phenomenon
摘要: 本研究探究了汉语母语者对打断现象的识别程度。采用问卷调查法对打断时间点(早打断、晚打断、无打断)和打断类型(话题转换型、同意型、异议型和澄清型)进行了研究。结果发现,在汉语语境下:1) 打断比无打断更容易识别,早打断比晚打断容易识别;2) 话题转换和异议型打断比同意型和澄清型打断更容易识别;3) 关于打断时间点,在早打断上,话题转换型和异议型打断识别程度高于同意型和澄清型识别程度;在晚打断上,话题转换型识别程度比同意型、异议型和澄清型识别程度更高。汉语母语者更多地依赖打断点而不是打断类型来识别打断现象。
Abstract: This paper studied the degree to which Chinese native speakers perceive interruption. Point of interruption (Early, Late, No interruption) and Types of interruption (Change of subject, Agreement, Disagreement and Clarification) were studied by questionnaire. In the Chinese context, the results showed that: 1) Interruption is perceived more easily than No interruption, and the early interruption is easier to perceive than the late interruption; 2) Type of change of subject and disagreement are easier to perceive than agreement and clarification; 3) About the point of interruption. In the early point, degree of perception of change of subject and disagreement are higher than agreement and clarification. In the late point, degree of perception of change of subject is higher than other three types of disagreement, clarification and agreement. Chinese native speakers rely more on the point of interruption than on the type of interruption to perceive interruption.
文章引用:张水云, 石俊萧. 汉语打断现象的识别研究[J]. 现代语言学, 2022, 10(2): 290-297. https://doi.org/10.12677/ML.2022.102037

参考文献

[1] Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A. and Jefferson, G. (1974) A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation. Language, 50, 696-735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[2] Roger, D., Bull, P. and Smith, S. (1988) The Development of a Comprehensive System for Classifying Interruptions. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 7, 27-34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[3] Murata, K. (1994) Intrusive or Cooperative? A Cross-Cultural Study of Interruption. Journal of Pragmatics, 21, 385-400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[4] Gnisci, A., Sergi, I., De Luca, E. and Errico, V. (2012) Does Frequency of Interruptions Amplify the Effect of Various Types of Interruptions? Experimental Evidence. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 36, 39-57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[5] Kempson, R., Gargett, A. and Gregoromichelaki, E. (2007) Clarification Requests: An Incremental Account. Proceedings of the 11th Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue (DECALOG), Rovereto, 30 May-1 June 2007, 62-75.
[6] West, C. and Zimmerman, D.H. (1983) Small Insults: A Study of Interruptions in Cross-Sex Conversations between Unacquainted Persons. In: Thorne, B., Kramarae, C. and Henley, N. (Eds.), Language, Gender, and Society, Rowley, Newbury, 102-117.
[7] Coon, C.A. and Schwanenflflugel, P.J. (1996) Evaluation of Interruption Behavior by Naïve Encoders. Discourse Process, 22, 1-24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[8] Gnisci, A., Graziano, E., Sergi, I. and Pace, A. (2018) Which Criteria Do Naïve People Use for Identifying and Evaluating Different Kinds of Interruptions? Journal of Pragmatics, 138, 119-130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[9] Brown, P. and Levinson, S.C. (1978) Universals in Language Usage: Politeness Phenomena. In: Goody, E.N. (Ed.), Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 63-70.
[10] 蒋婷, 李美奇, 杨郁梅. 仲裁庭审中仲裁员的打断策略与权力研究[J]. 外语教学, 2016(2): 24-28.
[11] 张晶. 言语打断中的权势因素分析[J]. 语言教学与研究, 2017(4): 104-112.
[12] 顾曰国. 礼貌、语用与文化[J]. 外语教学与研究, 1992(4): 10-17+80.
[13] Zhou, L. and Zhang, S.J. (2018) Reconstructing the Politeness Principle in Chinese: A Response to Gu’s Approach. Intercultural Pragmatics, 15, 693-721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[14] Leech, G. (1983) Principles of Pragmatics. Longman, London.