Request for confirmation sequences in Korean

Pub Date : 2024-07-09 DOI:10.1515/opli-2024-0010
Kyu-hyun Kim
{"title":"Request for confirmation sequences in Korean","authors":"Kyu-hyun Kim","doi":"10.1515/opli-2024-0010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As part of a cross-linguistic investigation of request for confirmation (RfC) sequences, this article provides an overview of distributional tendencies associated with Korean RfC sequences based on an examination of 200 tokens of RfC excerpted from audio- and video-recorded face-to-face ordinary conversations. Various grammatical and contextual features associated with RfCs are analyzed, e.g., as interactional resources for grounding RfCs in inferencing, rendering them modulated in action, or connecting them to prior talk/action. They include negative polarity markers, connective particles (e.g., -<jats:italic>nuntey</jats:italic> ‘circumstantial’), modal markers (e.g., -<jats:italic>keyss</jats:italic> ‘I suppose’), and sentence-ending suffixes (SESs) such as -<jats:italic>na</jats:italic> (‘dubitative), -<jats:italic>ney</jats:italic> (‘noticing’), and ‘pseudo-tags’ -<jats:italic>ci/cianha,</jats:italic> which are composed of -<jats:italic>ci</jats:italic> (‘committal’). Features of responses to RfCs are examined in terms of response type (e.g., confirmation, disconfirmation, or neither) with special reference to the form and distribution of response tokens, which include not only unmarked interjections such as <jats:italic>ung/yey</jats:italic> (‘yes’) and <jats:italic>ani(-yo)</jats:italic> (‘no’), but also <jats:italic>kule</jats:italic>-marked indexical forms (e.g., <jats:italic>ku(leh)ci</jats:italic> ‘certainly it is’). The findings shed light on the role of SESs, modal markers, and discourse particles as stance-marking resources that crucially shape the function of RfCs, and the compositional features of response turns that constitute or frame a responsive action to RfCs.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2024-0010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As part of a cross-linguistic investigation of request for confirmation (RfC) sequences, this article provides an overview of distributional tendencies associated with Korean RfC sequences based on an examination of 200 tokens of RfC excerpted from audio- and video-recorded face-to-face ordinary conversations. Various grammatical and contextual features associated with RfCs are analyzed, e.g., as interactional resources for grounding RfCs in inferencing, rendering them modulated in action, or connecting them to prior talk/action. They include negative polarity markers, connective particles (e.g., -nuntey ‘circumstantial’), modal markers (e.g., -keyss ‘I suppose’), and sentence-ending suffixes (SESs) such as -na (‘dubitative), -ney (‘noticing’), and ‘pseudo-tags’ -ci/cianha, which are composed of -ci (‘committal’). Features of responses to RfCs are examined in terms of response type (e.g., confirmation, disconfirmation, or neither) with special reference to the form and distribution of response tokens, which include not only unmarked interjections such as ung/yey (‘yes’) and ani(-yo) (‘no’), but also kule-marked indexical forms (e.g., ku(leh)ci ‘certainly it is’). The findings shed light on the role of SESs, modal markers, and discourse particles as stance-marking resources that crucially shape the function of RfCs, and the compositional features of response turns that constitute or frame a responsive action to RfCs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
以韩文申请确认序列
作为对请求确认(RfC)序列进行跨语言研究的一部分,本文基于对从音频和视频记录的面对面普通对话中摘录的 200 个 RfC 符号的研究,概述了与韩语 RfC 序列相关的分布趋势。研究分析了与 RfC 相关的各种语法和语境特征,例如,作为互动资源,RfC 在推理中具有基础性,在行动中具有调节性,或与之前的谈话/行动相联系。它们包括负极性标记、连接词(如-nuntey "旁证")、情态标记(如-keyss "我想")和句末后缀(SES),如-na("怀疑")、-ney("注意到")和由-ci("承诺")组成的 "伪标记"-ci/cianha。研究从反应类型(如确认、不确认或两者都不)的角度考察了对 RfCs 的反应特征,特别是反应标记的形式和分布,其中不仅包括 ung/yey('是')和 ani(-yo)('不是')等无标记的插入语,还包括 kule 标记的索引形式(如 ku(leh)ci'当然是')。研究结果揭示了 SES、情态标记和话语微粒作为立场标记资源的作用,它们对 RfCs 功能的形成起着至关重要的作用,同时也揭示了构成或框定对 RfCs 反应行动的反应转折的构成特征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1