分歧研究回顾和我的羞怯分歧

Lingling Xu
{"title":"分歧研究回顾和我的羞怯分歧","authors":"Lingling Xu","doi":"10.22158/selt.v5n4p679","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Through reviewing and combing the previous studies on linguistic disagreement over the past three decades from four dimensions or research hotspots—definitions of disagreement, classifications of disagreement, factors affecting the ways of raising disagreement, and strategies to present disagreement, this study shows that disagreement has experienced the transformation from being regarded as a marginal impolite phenomenon to an important, common socio-pragmatic phenomenon catching a mounting number of linguists’ attention. They define disagreement via directions or discoveries of corresponding studies, but the vague boundary between the synonymous concepts restrains the definition progress. The criteria of taxonomies, with their respective merits and demerits, contain the forms, functions and levels of disagreement. As to the factors affecting the disagreement raising, contextualization becomes the trend. But the overlaps of the specific factors’ scopes leave space for scrutinization. It is found that, given significant multi-perspective findings, disagreement literature often rents ideas from Impoliteness Theory, conducive to the discount of objectivity and pertinence of their elaboration. The disagreement-response or disagreement-reaction part, overtly rarely studied, makes a breakthrough for further research.","PeriodicalId":112359,"journal":{"name":"Studies in English Language and Teaching","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Disagreement Studies Reviewed and My Coy Disagreements\",\"authors\":\"Lingling Xu\",\"doi\":\"10.22158/selt.v5n4p679\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Through reviewing and combing the previous studies on linguistic disagreement over the past three decades from four dimensions or research hotspots—definitions of disagreement, classifications of disagreement, factors affecting the ways of raising disagreement, and strategies to present disagreement, this study shows that disagreement has experienced the transformation from being regarded as a marginal impolite phenomenon to an important, common socio-pragmatic phenomenon catching a mounting number of linguists’ attention. They define disagreement via directions or discoveries of corresponding studies, but the vague boundary between the synonymous concepts restrains the definition progress. The criteria of taxonomies, with their respective merits and demerits, contain the forms, functions and levels of disagreement. As to the factors affecting the disagreement raising, contextualization becomes the trend. But the overlaps of the specific factors’ scopes leave space for scrutinization. It is found that, given significant multi-perspective findings, disagreement literature often rents ideas from Impoliteness Theory, conducive to the discount of objectivity and pertinence of their elaboration. The disagreement-response or disagreement-reaction part, overtly rarely studied, makes a breakthrough for further research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":112359,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in English Language and Teaching\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-11-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in English Language and Teaching\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22158/selt.v5n4p679\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in English Language and Teaching","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22158/selt.v5n4p679","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

本研究通过从分歧的定义、分歧的分类、影响分歧产生方式的因素和提出分歧的策略这四个维度或研究热点对近三十年来关于语言分歧的研究进行回顾和梳理,发现分歧经历了从被视为边缘不礼貌现象到被视为重要的不礼貌现象的转变。一种常见的社会语用现象,引起了越来越多语言学家的关注。他们通过相关研究的方向或发现来定义歧义,但同义概念之间模糊的界限制约了定义的进展。分类学的标准包含了分歧的形式、功能和程度,并有其各自的优缺点。在影响分歧产生的因素中,语境化成为趋势。但具体因素范围的重叠为审查留下了空间。研究发现,在多视角研究的基础上,不同意见的文献往往借用不礼貌理论的观点,从而降低了其阐述的客观性和针对性。反对-回应或反对-反应部分的研究很少,但它为进一步的研究提供了突破口。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Disagreement Studies Reviewed and My Coy Disagreements
Through reviewing and combing the previous studies on linguistic disagreement over the past three decades from four dimensions or research hotspots—definitions of disagreement, classifications of disagreement, factors affecting the ways of raising disagreement, and strategies to present disagreement, this study shows that disagreement has experienced the transformation from being regarded as a marginal impolite phenomenon to an important, common socio-pragmatic phenomenon catching a mounting number of linguists’ attention. They define disagreement via directions or discoveries of corresponding studies, but the vague boundary between the synonymous concepts restrains the definition progress. The criteria of taxonomies, with their respective merits and demerits, contain the forms, functions and levels of disagreement. As to the factors affecting the disagreement raising, contextualization becomes the trend. But the overlaps of the specific factors’ scopes leave space for scrutinization. It is found that, given significant multi-perspective findings, disagreement literature often rents ideas from Impoliteness Theory, conducive to the discount of objectivity and pertinence of their elaboration. The disagreement-response or disagreement-reaction part, overtly rarely studied, makes a breakthrough for further research.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
L2 Expository Text Reading Instruction: A Graphic Organiser-Based Methodology Digital Technology in University Language Courses: Project Letras 2.0 at UFRJ The Relationship of Teaching, Social and Cognitive Presence with Course Satisfaction in a TESL Programme Course in a Public University in Sabah, East Malaysia Partnership with Librarians: A Strategy to Improve Secondary School Students’ English Literacy Investigation into the Negative Factors in English Vocabulary Acquisition of College Students
×
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