1887
Volume 10, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1877-7031
  • E-ISSN: 1877-8798
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper investigates conversational actions accomplished by a knowing speaker who takes a non-committal epistemic stance using epistemic adverbs expressing uncertainty in Mandarin conversations. This study finds that adverbs of uncertainty such as , and , are used predominantly by knowing speakers, rather than unknowing speakers in Mandarin conversations. Moreover, most of these epistemically incongruent cases occur in sequence-initiating actions. Three most common practices are announcements involved in a request project, announcements of self-related positive news, and advice-giving actions. Adverbs of uncertainty are less frequently used by knowing speakers to take a non-committal stance in the sequence-responsive actions. A common practice observed is responses to information-seeking questions that have negative valence. Adverbs of uncertainty are adopted by knowing speakers to minimize disaffiliation caused by these dispreferred actions such as requests, self-praising of accomplishments, advice-giving, and informing with negative valence.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/cld.00017.zho
2020-01-15
2020-04-01
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aikhenvald, Aleksandra IUrevna ,
    2004Evidentiality. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Ann Weatherall
    (2011) I don’t know as a Prepositioned Epistemic Hedge, Research on Language & Social Interaction, 44:4, 317–337. doi:  10.1080/08351813.2011.619310
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2011.619310 [Google Scholar]
  3. Austin, John L.
    1962 “How to do things with words: The William James lectures.” Cambridge, MA.
  4. Biber, Douglas , Stig Johansson , Geoffrey Leech , Susan Conrad , and Edward Finegan
    1999 “Longman grammar of spoken and written English.” 89–110.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Biber, Douglas
    2006 “Stance in spoken and written university registers.” Journal of English for Academic Purposes5 (2): 97–116. 10.1016/j.jeap.2006.05.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2006.05.001 [Google Scholar]
  6. Brown, Penelope , Stephen C. Levinson , and Stephen C. Levinson
    . Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Vol.4. Cambridge university press 198710.1017/CBO9780511813085
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085 [Google Scholar]
  7. Chafe, Wallace
    1986 “Evidentiality in English conversation and academic writing.” Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology20. 261–272.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Curl, Traci S. , and Paul Drew
    2008 “Contingency and action: A comparison of two forms of requesting.” Research on language and social interaction41.2. 129–153. 10.1080/08351810802028613
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810802028613 [Google Scholar]
  9. Endo, Tomoko Koike
    2010Expressing stance in Mandarin conversation: Epistemic and non-epistemic uses of wo juede. University of California, Los Angeles.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Fraser, Bruce
    1980 “Conversational mitigation.” Journal of pragmatics4.4. 341–350. 10.1016/0378‑2166(80)90029‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(80)90029-6 [Google Scholar]
  11. Heinemann, Trine
    2006 “Will you or can’t you? Displaying entitlement in interrogative requests.” Journal of Pragmatics38.7. 1081–1104. 10.1016/j.pragma.2005.09.013
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.09.013 [Google Scholar]
  12. Hsieh, CL.
    2005 “Modal verbs and modal adverbs in Chinese: An investigation into the semantic source.” UST Working Papers in Linguistics, Graduate Institute of Linguistics1, no.National Tsing Hua University.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Heritage, John
    . “Oh-prefaced responses to inquiry.” Language in society27, no.3 (1998): 291–334. 10.1017/S0047404500019990
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500019990 [Google Scholar]
  14. Heritage, John , and Geoffrey Raymond
    2005 “The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction.” Social psychology quarterly68.1. 15–38. 10.1177/019027250506800103
    https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250506800103 [Google Scholar]
  15. Heritage, J.
    2012 Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 45(1), 1–29. 10.1080/08351813.2012.646684
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.646684 [Google Scholar]
  16. 2012 The epistemic engine: Sequence organization and territories of knowledge. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 45(1), 30–52. 10.1080/08351813.2012.646685
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.646685 [Google Scholar]
  17. Hutchby, Ian
    . “Aspects of recipient design in expert advice-giving on call-in radio.” Discourse processes19, no.2 (1995): 219–238. 10.1080/01638539509544915
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539509544915 [Google Scholar]
  18. Iwasaki, Shoichi , and Foong Ha Yap
    2015 “Stance-marking and stance-taking in Asian languages.” Journal of Pragmatics83. 1–9. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.04.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.04.008 [Google Scholar]
  19. Kinnell, Ann Marie K. , and Douglas W. Maynard
    . “The delivery and receipt of safer sex advice in pretest counseling sessions for HIV and AIDS.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography24, no.4 (1996): 405–437. 10.1177/089124196024004002
    https://doi.org/10.1177/089124196024004002 [Google Scholar]
  20. Leppanen, V.
    (1998) The straightforwardness of advice: Advice-giving in interactions between Swedish district nurses and patients. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 31(2), 209–239. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi3102_3
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi3102_3 [Google Scholar]
  21. Li, Wei , and Yue Li
    . “My stupid wife and ugly daughter’: the use of pejorative references as a politeness strategy by Chinese speakers.” Journal of Asian Pacific Communication7, no.3–4 (1996): 129–142.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Lim, Ni-Eng
    2011 “From subjectivity to intersubjectivity: Epistemic marker wo juede in Chinese.” Current issues in Chinese linguistics, 265–300.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Holmes, Janet
    1984 “Modifying illocutionary force.” Journal of pragmatics8, no.3. 345–365. 10.1016/0378‑2166(84)90028‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(84)90028-6 [Google Scholar]
  24. Kamio, Akio
    1994 “The theory of territory of information: The case of Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics21, no.1. 67–100. 10.1016/0378‑2166(94)90047‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)90047-7 [Google Scholar]
  25. Kärkkäinen, Elise
    2003Epistemic stance in English conversation: A description of its interactional functions, with a focus on I think. Vol.115. John Benjamins Publishing. 10.1075/pbns.115
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.115 [Google Scholar]
  26. Labov, William , and David Fanshel
    1977Therapeutic discourse: Psychotherapy as conversation. Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Levinson, Stephen C.
    2013 “Action formation and ascription.” InThe handbook of conversation analysis, 103–130. Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Lü, Shuxiang
    1980 “Xiandai hanyu babai ci [Eight hundred words in modern Chinese].” Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan.
  29. Lyons, John
    1977 “Semantics (vols i & ii).” Cambridge CUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Nuyts, J. , & Auwera, J. van der
    2016The Oxford handbook of modality and mood.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Nuyts, Jan
    . “Modality: Overview and linguistic issues.” The expression of modality126 (2006).
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Ochs, Elinor
    1993 “Constructing social identity: A language socialization perspective.” Research on language and social interaction26, no.3. 287–306. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi2603_3
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi2603_3 [Google Scholar]
  33. Palmer, Frank Robert
    2001Mood and modality. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139167178
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139167178 [Google Scholar]
  34. Pomerantz, Anita
    1978 “Compliment responses: Notes on the co-operation of multiple constraints.” Studies in the organization of conversational interaction, 79–112. 10.1016/B978‑0‑12‑623550‑0.50010‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-623550-0.50010-0 [Google Scholar]
  35. 1980 “Telling my side:“Limited access’ as a “fishing” device.” Sociological inquiry50, no.3–4. 186–198. 10.1111/j.1475‑682X.1980.tb00020.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1980.tb00020.x [Google Scholar]
  36. 1984 “Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shaped.” 10.1017/CBO9780511665868.008
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511665868.008 [Google Scholar]
  37. Pomerantz, A. and Heritage, J.
    2013 Preference. InThe Handbook of Conversation Analysis (eds J. Sidnell and T. Stivers ). doi:  10.1002/9781118325001.ch11
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118325001.ch11 [Google Scholar]
  38. Pudlinski, C.
    (2005) The mitigation of advice. Calling for help: Language and social interaction in telephone helplines, 143, 109. 10.1075/pbns.143.09pud
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.143.09pud [Google Scholar]
  39. Robinson, J. D.
    (2013) Overall structural organization. The handbook of conversation analysis, 257–280.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Schegloff, E. A.
    2007 Sequence organization in interaction: a primer in conversation analysis. Igarss 2014.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Searle, John R.
    1969Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Vol.626. Cambridge university press. 10.1017/CBO9781139173438
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173438 [Google Scholar]
  42. Searle, J. R.
    (1976) A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in society, 5(1), 1–23. 10.1017/S0047404500006837
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500006837 [Google Scholar]
  43. Sheng, Lichun
    2008 “大概”,“也许” 和 “恐怕” 的语义, 语用分析 [Semantic meanings and Pragmatic Analysis of ‘dagai’ ‘yexu’ ‘kongpa’]“.” Chinese Language Learning. no.1. 45–51.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Stivers, T.
    2008 Stance, alignment, and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. 10.1080/08351810701691123
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810701691123 [Google Scholar]
  45. Stivers, Tanya , Lorenza Mondada , and Jakob Steensig
    eds. 2011The morality of knowledge in conversation. Vol.29. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511921674
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921674 [Google Scholar]
  46. Tao, Hongyin
    2003 “从语音, 语法和话语特征看 “知道” 格式在谈话中的演化 [Phonological, grammatical, and discourse evidence for the emergence of zhidao constructions].” Chinese Language4. 291–302.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. 2016 “Disputed memory and the social interactive functions of remembering/forgetting expressions in Mandarin conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics106. 184–202. 10.1016/j.pragma.2016.08.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.08.001 [Google Scholar]
  48. Wu, Ruey-Jiuan Regina
    2004Stance in talk: A conversation analysis of Mandarin final particles. Vol.117. John Benjamins Publishing. 10.1075/pbns.117
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.117 [Google Scholar]
  49. . “A conversation analysis of self-praising in everyday Mandarin interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics43, no.13 (2011): 3152–3176. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.05.016
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.05.016 [Google Scholar]
  50. Yang, Bei
    2016 “汉语认识情态表达“可能” “也许” “大概” “恐怕”用法对比分析 [A comparative study on Chinese epistemic modals ‘keneng’ ‘kexu’ ‘dagai’]‘kongpa’.” Journal of Guangdong University of Foreign Studies. 27, no.6. 33–41.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Yang, Ying , and Foong Ha Yap
    2015 “I am sure but I hedge”: Fear expression kǒngpà as an interactive rhetorical strategy in Mandarin broadcast talk.” Journal of Pragmatics83. 41–56. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.04.013
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.04.013 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/cld.00017.zho
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/cld.00017.zho
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): conversational action , epistemic adverbs and epistemic stance
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error