This study presents a corpus-based sociopragmatic investigation into apology responses (ARs) and gender differences in ARs in spoken British English. Using data taken from the recently released Spoken BNC2014, the investigation leads to an adjusted taxonomy of ARs which comprises five categories and several sub-categories. The investigation shows that ‘Lack of response’ is the most typical response, followed by ‘Acceptance’, ‘Rejection’, ‘Evasion’, and ‘Acknowledgement’. The results are discussed in relation to the process of attenuation that apologies have undergone (e.g. Jucker 2019), i.e. apologies are becoming more routinised and less meaningful. The proposed taxonomy is subsequently used to examine the extent to which male and female recipients respond to apologies differently. While the investigation suggests no significant differences in ARs across genders, it has been observed that there is some correlation between ARs and the gender of the apologiser. Finally, the implications and applications of the study are briefly discussed.
{"title":"Apology responses and gender differences in spoken British English","authors":"Yi An, Hang Su, Mingyou Xiang","doi":"10.1075/prag.19029.an","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.19029.an","url":null,"abstract":"This study presents a corpus-based sociopragmatic investigation into apology responses (ARs) and gender differences in ARs in spoken British English. Using data taken from the recently released Spoken BNC2014, the investigation leads to an adjusted taxonomy of ARs which comprises five categories and several sub-categories. The investigation shows that ‘Lack of response’ is the most typical response, followed by ‘Acceptance’, ‘Rejection’, ‘Evasion’, and ‘Acknowledgement’. The results are discussed in relation to the process of attenuation that apologies have undergone (e.g. Jucker 2019), i.e. apologies are becoming more routinised and less meaningful. The proposed taxonomy is subsequently used to examine the extent to which male and female recipients respond to apologies differently. While the investigation suggests no significant differences in ARs across genders, it has been observed that there is some correlation between ARs and the gender of the apologiser. Finally, the implications and applications of the study are briefly discussed.","PeriodicalId":46975,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2021-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86511509","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Based on longitudinal conversation data between a father and child collected over the period of eighteen months, this study examines “today narrative” where the father asks the child “how was your day” when they meet after being apart during the day. The routine provides a recurrent sequential structure, which is both located within and itself occasions further talk. Examining the talk between this father and child longitudinally reveals how the initial sequential structure, where the child lists activities in short run-on sentences, goes through transformation and elaboration. Indices for development include the emergence of three-part structure in the child’s list construction, more details incorporated in the list, story prefaces, and the emergence of assessment response (or personal voice). The overall sequential organization of the routine moves from heavy reliance on the father’s questions to more volunteered talk by the child. This paper considers the generalizability of longitudinal conversation analytic data.
{"title":"“How was your day?”","authors":"Younhee Kim, Andrew P. Carlin","doi":"10.1075/prag.19043.kim","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.19043.kim","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Based on longitudinal conversation data between a father and child collected over the period of eighteen months, this study examines “today narrative” where the father asks the child “how was your day” when they meet after being apart during the day. The routine provides a recurrent sequential structure, which is both located within and itself occasions further talk. Examining the talk between this father and child longitudinally reveals how the initial sequential structure, where the child lists activities in short run-on sentences, goes through transformation and elaboration. Indices for development include the emergence of three-part structure in the child’s list construction, more details incorporated in the list, story prefaces, and the emergence of assessment response (or personal voice). The overall sequential organization of the routine moves from heavy reliance on the father’s questions to more volunteered talk by the child. This paper considers the generalizability of longitudinal conversation analytic data.","PeriodicalId":46975,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2021-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79501580","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper offers an analysis of well-prefaced constructed dialogue as a stance-taking resource in written discourse on abortion. Drawing from four corpora collected from editorials, blogs, Twitter, and Reddit, I demonstrate that writers use the discourse marker well to indicate a stance of disalignment and convey negative attitudinal information when there is tension between the writer’s beliefs and those expressed in the constructed dialogue; the discourse marker allows the writer to position and align themself to construct a specific identity that reinforces a positive-self, negative-other evaluation.
{"title":"Well-prefaced constructed dialogue as a marker of stance in online abortion discourse","authors":"Kristen Fleckenstein","doi":"10.1075/prag.20063.fle","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.20063.fle","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This paper offers an analysis of well-prefaced constructed dialogue as a stance-taking resource\u0000 in written discourse on abortion. Drawing from four corpora collected from editorials, blogs, Twitter, and Reddit, I demonstrate\u0000 that writers use the discourse marker well to indicate a stance of disalignment and convey negative attitudinal\u0000 information when there is tension between the writer’s beliefs and those expressed in the constructed dialogue; the discourse\u0000 marker allows the writer to position and align themself to construct a specific identity that reinforces a positive-self,\u0000 negative-other evaluation.","PeriodicalId":46975,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2021-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76463400","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the ten years from 2008 onwards the banking sector was constantly in the spotlight. Blame for the financial crisis and concern regarding controversial government bailouts were followed by public outrage about inflated bonuses, money laundering and false reporting. Over this period, banks deployed a range of legitimation strategies to salvage their reputation. This paper proposes a modified typology of legitimation strategies based on previous research (van Leeuwen and Wodak 1999; Vaara, Tienari and Laurila 2006), and examines how these are used by in the “letter to shareholders” published by the chairs of the five main UK-based banks over the ten years following the crisis. The strategies are analysed in terms of their object, target and interdiscursive features, and the particular persuasive roles of narrative and emotion are underlined.
从2008年开始的十年里，银行业一直是人们关注的焦点。对金融危机的指责和对有争议的政府救助的担忧，紧随其后的是公众对夸大奖金、洗钱和虚假报告的愤怒。在此期间，银行采取了一系列合法化策略来挽救自己的声誉。本文在前人研究(van Leeuwen and Wodak 1999;Vaara, Tienari和Laurila 2006)，并研究了在危机后的十年里，英国五大银行的董事长在“致股东信”中是如何使用这些信息的。分析了这些策略的目的、目标和语间特征，并强调了叙事和情感的特殊说服作用。
{"title":"Understandable public anger","authors":"Ruth Breeze","doi":"10.1075/prag.20065.bre","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.20065.bre","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000In the ten years from 2008 onwards the banking sector was constantly in the spotlight. Blame for the financial crisis and concern regarding controversial government bailouts were followed by public outrage about inflated bonuses, money laundering and false reporting. Over this period, banks deployed a range of legitimation strategies to salvage their reputation. This paper proposes a modified typology of legitimation strategies based on previous research (van Leeuwen and Wodak 1999; Vaara, Tienari and Laurila 2006), and examines how these are used by in the “letter to shareholders” published by the chairs of the five main UK-based banks over the ten years following the crisis. The strategies are analysed in terms of their object, target and interdiscursive features, and the particular persuasive roles of narrative and emotion are underlined.","PeriodicalId":46975,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2021-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84475779","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Framing involves how language users conceptualize what is happening in interaction for situated interpretation of roles, purposes, expectations, and sequences of action, thus show significant conceptual relevance to the analysis of routinized institutional communication. Having established a working definition of framing based on an intensive review of previous research, this study investigates university students’ and tutors’ framing behaviors in interactive small group talk. Two types of framing-in-interaction, -alternate framing of a single situation and co-framing within/beyond speaker role boundary-, are identified, examined, and characterized from a conversation-analytic perspective. The findings suggest that alternate framings co-occur with traceable interactional devices for sequential organization when the single situation at talk takes on divergent meaning potentials to be accessed. Co-framings happen when at least one (group) of participants is highly goal-oriented, showing conditional relevance to the prior courses of action and more explicit negotiation of epistemic stances. Framing, therefore, can be arguably taken as a global organization resource to characterize contextualization in institutional communication.
{"title":"Framing in interactive academic talk","authors":"Yun Pan","doi":"10.1075/PRAG.20028.PAN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/PRAG.20028.PAN","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Framing involves how language users conceptualize what is happening in interaction for situated interpretation of\u0000 roles, purposes, expectations, and sequences of action, thus show significant conceptual relevance to the analysis of routinized\u0000 institutional communication. Having established a working definition of framing based on an intensive review of\u0000 previous research, this study investigates university students’ and tutors’ framing behaviors in interactive small group talk. Two\u0000 types of framing-in-interaction, -alternate framing of a single situation and co-framing\u0000 within/beyond speaker role boundary-, are identified, examined, and characterized from a conversation-analytic perspective. The\u0000 findings suggest that alternate framings co-occur with traceable interactional devices for sequential organization when the single\u0000 situation at talk takes on divergent meaning potentials to be accessed. Co-framings happen when at least one (group) of\u0000 participants is highly goal-oriented, showing conditional relevance to the prior courses of action and more explicit negotiation\u0000 of epistemic stances. Framing, therefore, can be arguably taken as a global organization resource to characterize\u0000 contextualization in institutional communication.","PeriodicalId":46975,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2021-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79258532","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Studies on the development of interlanguage pragmatic markers (PMs) have attracted increasing interest recently. However, little research is available on the PM dynamic development in alignment with English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) classroom contexts. Given the lacuna, this article, based on the Complexity and the Alignment theories, investigates how PMs develop and how aligning with film-situated un/equal role relationships influences development. The study with eight data collection points tracks 28 EFL learners’ PM production over around 1.5 year. Results revealed: (1) the employed PM functions fluctuated but developed from singular to multiple, with the interpersonal function use being regressive and the structural and the cognitive, progressive; (2) the PM development manifested a significant gain in aligning with the equal role relationships; and (3) different proficiency learners had dissimilar PM development. These findings corroborate the view of context-dependent dynamic development and provide strong evidence for aligning EFL learning with various role relationships.
{"title":"The development of interlanguage pragmatic markers in alignment with role relationships","authors":"Hao Xiao, Chenjun Dai, Lianqi Dong","doi":"10.1075/PRAG.20013.XIA","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/PRAG.20013.XIA","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Studies on the development of interlanguage pragmatic markers (PMs) have attracted increasing interest recently. However, little research is available on the PM dynamic development in alignment with English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) classroom contexts. Given the lacuna, this article, based on the Complexity and the Alignment theories, investigates how PMs develop and how aligning with film-situated un/equal role relationships influences development. The study with eight data collection points tracks 28 EFL learners’ PM production over around 1.5 year. Results revealed: (1) the employed PM functions fluctuated but developed from singular to multiple, with the interpersonal function use being regressive and the structural and the cognitive, progressive; (2) the PM development manifested a significant gain in aligning with the equal role relationships; and (3) different proficiency learners had dissimilar PM development. These findings corroborate the view of context-dependent dynamic development and provide strong evidence for aligning EFL learning with various role relationships.","PeriodicalId":46975,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2021-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80734247","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Meaning More Than We Say","authors":"B. Clark","doi":"10.4324/9781003197263-2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003197263-2","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46975,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2021-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74086637","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：