{"title":"两种不同层次的韩语祈使句","authors":"M. Kim","doi":"10.1075/prag.20060.kim","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Korean imperatives are differentiated by speech levels or levels of honorification. Accordingly, most research on\n Korean imperatives examines them from the perspective of politeness and interpersonal relations. This study takes a different\n approach, focusing on two types of non-honorific imperative turn design: one with the intimate speech level imperative\n e/a and the other with the plain speech level imperative ela/ala. Close examination of the\n forms in naturally occurring conversation provides a clearer picture of when and how the use of these imperatives is warranted by\n specific interactional configurations and contexts in everyday Korean talk-in-interaction. This study shows that alternate\n imperatives do not simply index politeness or social status, but are important resources for implementing separate action formats\n that pursue divergent interactional trajectories.","PeriodicalId":46975,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Korean imperatives at two different speech levels\",\"authors\":\"M. Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/prag.20060.kim\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Korean imperatives are differentiated by speech levels or levels of honorification. Accordingly, most research on\\n Korean imperatives examines them from the perspective of politeness and interpersonal relations. This study takes a different\\n approach, focusing on two types of non-honorific imperative turn design: one with the intimate speech level imperative\\n e/a and the other with the plain speech level imperative ela/ala. Close examination of the\\n forms in naturally occurring conversation provides a clearer picture of when and how the use of these imperatives is warranted by\\n specific interactional configurations and contexts in everyday Korean talk-in-interaction. This study shows that alternate\\n imperatives do not simply index politeness or social status, but are important resources for implementing separate action formats\\n that pursue divergent interactional trajectories.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46975,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pragmatics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pragmatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.20060.kim\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"N/A\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.20060.kim","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Korean imperatives are differentiated by speech levels or levels of honorification. Accordingly, most research on
Korean imperatives examines them from the perspective of politeness and interpersonal relations. This study takes a different
approach, focusing on two types of non-honorific imperative turn design: one with the intimate speech level imperative
e/a and the other with the plain speech level imperative ela/ala. Close examination of the
forms in naturally occurring conversation provides a clearer picture of when and how the use of these imperatives is warranted by
specific interactional configurations and contexts in everyday Korean talk-in-interaction. This study shows that alternate
imperatives do not simply index politeness or social status, but are important resources for implementing separate action formats
that pursue divergent interactional trajectories.