1887
image of Speakers’ subjective evaluation of adversity
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Adversative passives like Mandarin Chinese passives are known to convey adversity, but what “adversity” means specifically for speakers of in conversational discourse remains unknown. Whereas previous studies examine adversity within the clause, this study uses the lens concept to investigate speakers’ subjective evaluations of the event attested by the larger context beyond the clause. Using a subjectivity coding scheme and the discourse adjacent alternation method, I analyzed 4,203 values of event valence of 1,401 utterances and 65 alternations in spontaneous talk show conversations. Results show that: (1) The same event that a speaker evaluates as “adverse” using - is sometimes evaluated as “non-adverse” using non- structures. (2) The same +verb phrase that previous studies may deem “adverse” can be evaluated as “adverse” or “positive” by actual speakers. (3) 84.5% (1,184/1,401) of the time, passive in conversation expresses speakers’ evaluation that a causative event is adverse for the affectee, regardless of what reality is. (4) Adversity means undesirable, disadvantageous, morally or socially wrong, empathy-deserving, and/or sympathy-deserving for speakers of . The findings indicate that the adversity that conveys is not an objective description of reality but a subjective evaluation independent of reality–the Adversity lens. This study sheds light on subjectivity and specific manifestations of adversity in conversational discourse.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/cld.22002.su
2022-09-15
2022-09-26
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Biber, Douglas, and Edward Finegan
    1989 “Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect.” Text9(1): 93–124.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Cao, Min
    2016 “The effect of English passive voice learning on the use of ‘bei’ structure: An empirical study.” International Journal of English Linguistics6(4): 197–206. 10.5539/ijel.v6n4p197
    https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v6n4p197 [Google Scholar]
  3. Chao, Yuan Ren
    1968A Grammar of Spoken Chinese. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Chappell, Hilary
    1986 “Formal and colloquial adversity passives in Standard Chinese.” Linguistics24(6): 1025–1052. 10.1515/ling.1986.24.6.1025
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1986.24.6.1025 [Google Scholar]
  5. Chappell, Hillary, and Dingxu Shi
    2016 “Major non-canonical clause types: ba and bei.” InA Reference Grammar of Chinese, ed. byChu-ren Huang and Dingxu Shi, 451–482. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139028462.016
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139028462.016 [Google Scholar]
  6. Cook, Angela
    2019 “The use of the passive marker bei in spoken Mandarin.” Australian Journal of Linguistics39(1): 79–106. 10.1080/07268602.2019.1542934
    https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2019.1542934 [Google Scholar]
  7. Deng, Xiangjun, Ziyin Mai, and Virginia Yip
    2018 “An aspectual account of ba and bei constructions in child Mandarin.” First Language38(3): 243–262. 10.1177/0142723717743363
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723717743363 [Google Scholar]
  8. Du Bois, John W.
    2007 “The stance triangle.” InStancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction, ed. byRobert Englebretson, 139–182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.164.07du
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.164.07du [Google Scholar]
  9. Englebretson, Robert
    (ed) 2007Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.164
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.164 [Google Scholar]
  10. Gentens, Caroline, María Sol Sansiñena, Stef Spronck, and An Van linden
    2019 “Irregular perspective shifts and perspective persistence, discourse-oriented and theoretical approaches.” Pragmatics29 (2): 155–169.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Goldberg, Adele E.
    1995Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. 2006Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Guo, Hongjie, and Daryl Chow
    2014 “A corpus-based variationist approach to bei passives in Mandarin Chinese.” Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory10(1): 139–173. 10.1515/cllt‑2013‑0017
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2013-0017 [Google Scholar]
  14. Iwasaki, Shoichi
    2013Japanese: Revised edition. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamin. 10.1075/loall.17
    https://doi.org/10.1075/loall.17 [Google Scholar]
  15. Jing-Schmidt, Zhuo, and Ting Jing
    2011 “Embodied semantics and pragmatics: Empathy, sympathy and two passive constructions in Chinese media discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics43: 2826–2844. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.005 [Google Scholar]
  16. Langacker, Ronald W.
    2007 “Cognitive Grammar.” InThe Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, ed. byDirk Geeraerts and Hubert Cuyckens, 421–462. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Li, Charles N., and Sandra A. Thompson
    1981Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Liu, Feng-Hsi
    2011 “The bei passive and its discourse motivations.” Chinese Language and Discourse2(2): 198–231. 10.1075/cld.2.2.03liu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cld.2.2.03liu [Google Scholar]
  19. Liu, Haiyong
    2011 “Expletive negation in Mandarin cha-dian-mei “miss-bit-not” + v structure.” Journal of Chinese Linguistics39(1): 123–148.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Local, John, and Gareth Walker
    2008 “Stance and affect in conversation: On the interplay of sequential and phonetic resources.” Text & Talk28 (6): 723–747. 10.1515/TEXT.2008.037
    https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2008.037 [Google Scholar]
  21. Markee, Numa
    2017 “Are replication studies possible in qualitative second/foreign language classroom research? A call for comparative re-production research.” Language Teaching50(3): 367–383. 10.1017/S0261444815000099
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444815000099 [Google Scholar]
  22. Ochs, Elinor, and Bambi Schieffelin
    1989 “Language has a heart.” Text9: 7–25.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Oshima, David Y.
    2006 “Adversity and Korean/Japanese passives: Constructional analogy.” Journal of East Asian Linguistics15: 137–166. 10.1007/s10831‑005‑4915‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-005-4915-6 [Google Scholar]
  24. Peyraube, Alain
    1989 “History of the passive constructions in Chinese until the 10th century.” Journal of Chinese Linguistics17(2): 335–372.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Shi, Dingshu
    1997 “Issues on Chinese passive.” Journal of Chinese Linguistics25(1): 41–70.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Su, Danjie
    2017 “Significance as a lens: Understanding the Mandarin ba construction through Discourse Adjacent Alternation.” Journal of Pragmatics117: 204–230. 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.06.019
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.06.019 [Google Scholar]
  27. 2019The M. Chinese Video Corpus (MCVC). UCLA, Los Angeles & University of Arkansas, Fayetteville.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 2022a “Early evidence of the Pareto Principle in grammatical distribution: Causative situations in Chinese conversational discourse.” Journal of Chinese Linguistics50(2): 443–474. 10.1353/jcl.2022.0017
    https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2022.0017 [Google Scholar]
  29. 2022b “Factuality lens: Choosing the unmarked passive construction in Chinese conversation.” Chinese Language and Discourse13(2): 242–274. 10.1075/cld.21005.su
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cld.21005.su [Google Scholar]
  30. Su, Danjie, and Jianming Lu
    2010 “The construction-chunking approach for syntactic analysis and second language teaching.” Shijie Hanyu Jiaoxue [Journal of Chinese Teaching in the World] 24(4): 557–567.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Sun, Chaofen
    1996Word-order Change and Grammaticalization in the History of Chinese. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Stubbs, Michael
    1986 “A matter of prolonged field work: Notes towards a modal grammar of English.” Applied Linguistics7(1): 1–25. 10.1093/applin/7.1.1
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/7.1.1 [Google Scholar]
  33. Tao, Hongyin, and Yaqiong Liu
    2010 “From register differences to grammatical differences: Grammatical constructions in natural speech and the media.” (Part one). Contemporary Rhetoric157(1): 37–44.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Wu, Haiping, and Hongyin Tao
    2018 “Expressing (inter)subjectivity with universal quantification: A pragmatic account of plural NP + dou expressions in Mandarin Chinese.” Journal of Pragmatics128: 1–21. 10.1016/j.pragma.2018.02.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.02.003 [Google Scholar]
  35. Wu, Ruey-Jiuan Regina
    2004Stance in Talk: A Conversation Analysis of Mandarin Final Particles. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.117
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.117 [Google Scholar]
  36. Xiao, Richard, Tony McEnery, and Yufang Qian
    2006 “Passive constructions in English and Chinese: A corpus-based contrastive study.” Languages in Contrast6(1): 109–149. 10.1075/lic.6.1.05xia
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.6.1.05xia [Google Scholar]
  37. Zhang, Yi
    2020 “Non-canonical passives in Chinese: A mental space account.” Chinese Language and Discourse11(1): 84–106. 10.1075/cld.19001.zha
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cld.19001.zha [Google Scholar]
  38. Zheng, Weiqi, Ye Liu, Chang Hong Liu, Yu-Hsin Chen, Qian Cui, and Xiaolan Fu
    2019 “The influence of event valence and emotional states on the metaphorical comprehension of time.” Frontiers in Psychology10: 410. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00410
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00410 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/cld.22002.su
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/cld.22002.su
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: grammar ; lens ; adversity ; discourse ; subjectivity
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