臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

Brown 及 Levinson (1987) 認為請求語是威脅面子的行為。成功地與他人溝通包含維持人際關係和諧 (social harmony)、妥當之措辭 (proper linguistic expressions) 以及社會文化能力 (sociocultural competence) 三方面之考量。在台灣，國中生的行為經常被認定是叛逆的。本研究旨在探討台灣國中生如何提出請求。其措辭方面 [分析層面包括請求語本身 (head act request)、稱呼語(alerters)以及修飾語 (modifiers) ] 是否因為社會文化層面(探討包括：年齡、性別以及對話者 (interlocutors) 彼此間的熟悉度或社會地位關係) 而有不同。本研究包含62位國一生 (31女31男) 和61名國三生 (30女31男)，以問卷調查 (Discourse Completion Test) 收集資料並依卡方檢定 (chi-square) 做分析，研究發現：

1.在請求語本身，國三生顯然比較禮貌，其使用較少直接語言而使用更多間接語言；稱呼語方面，國一生明顯地使用更多禮貌性用語。但多數國中生以對方之職業或彼此相對關係作為稱呼語；修飾語部分，國一及國三生無顯著差異，多數傾向在句尾使用客氣的修飾語，如 ”請” 或 ”好嗎”。

2.男性及女性多數使用直接請求語，但女性因使用較多於男性的間接語，相較之下比男性客氣；女性明顯比男性更客氣地使用稱呼語及修飾語。

3.對話者間之熟悉度及社會地位關係顯著影響說話者之請求語策略，多數國中生面對社會地位較高或是不熟悉者使用比較客氣之間接語；稱呼語方面，熟悉度與否並無任何影響力，國中生僅因受話者社會地位之不同而有顯著之差別用語；修飾語方面，國中生傾向使用客氣用語面對高社會地位之受話者，但對社會地位較低之受話者，則較少客氣修飾語。

Brown and Levinson (1987) consider requests face-threatening acts (FTAs). Successful communications with others involves social harmony, proper linguistic expressions and sociocultural competence. In Taiwan, the behavior of junior high school students is often regarded rebellious. This study investigates the characteristics of how Taiwanese junior high school students make requests. Three aspects of requests are examined, namely head act strategies, alerters, and modifiers. Social factors include age, gender and familiarity and status relation between the interlocutors. This study includes 62 first grade students (31 females and 31 males) and 61 third grade students (30 females and 31 males). A DCT (Discourse Completion Test) is used to collect the data and Chi-square is used to analyze the data. The study reveals the following findings: In terms of head act strategies, the older subjects are significantly more polite as they make less use of direct strategies while making more use of non-conventional strategies. In terms of alerter strategies, the younger subjects use significantly more polite alerters and less intimate alerter strategies than the elders. Many subjects use occupations or relationship with the interlocutors as the addressing terms. There are no developmental differences in terms of modifier strategies. Generally subjects tend to use polite modifiers such as “qing/請” or “ok/好嗎”, in the final position as redress. Significant differences were also found in terms of gender. Both genders use direct head act strategies, but females use more CID strategies. Females are significantly more polite as they use more polite alerters and polite modifiers. Finally, significant differences were found in terms of status. Subjects tend to adopt CID strategies to unfamiliar hearers but direct strategies to familiar hearers. Subjects are also apt to use CID strategies to superior status hearers while more direct strategies to hearers of equal or lower status. Regardless of familiarity, subjects tend to use polite alerters to address superior hearers but no alerters to hearers of lower status. Subjects tend to use polite modifiers to superior hearers but use less polite modifiers for lower status hearers.

CHINESE ABSTRACT............................................................I
ENGLISH ABSTRACT.......................................................... II
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT........................................................... III
TABLE OF CONTENTS......................................................... IV
LIST OF FIGURES........................................................... VI
LIST OF TABLES...................................................VII

1. CHAPTER ONE：INTRODUCTION............................................... 1
1.1 Background..............................................................1
1.2 Motivation .............................................................2
1.3 Purpose of the Study ...................................................3
1.4 Definition of Terms.....................................................4
1.5 Organization of the Thesis..............................................5

2. CHAPTER TWO：LITERATURE REVIEW...........................................7
2.1 Speech Act of Request...................................................7
2.1.1 The Segmentation and Classification of a Request.....................10
2.1.2 Summary of CCSARP’s Coding Framework................................32
2.2 The Perspectives of Conversational Politeness..........................35
2.2.1 Social-norm View.....................................................35
2.2.2 Conversational-maxim View............................................36
2.2.3 Face-Saving View.....................................................40
2.2.4 Conversational-contract View.........................................44
2.2.5 Summary..............................................................46
2.3 Chinese Face...........................................................46
2.3.1 Chinese Face and Politeness..........................................48
2.4 Related Works..........................................................50

3 CHAPTER　THREE：METHODOLOGY .............................................60
3.1 Pilot Study ...........................................................60
3.2 The Present Study .....................................................61
3.2.1 Subjects.............................................................61
3.2.2 Materials............................................................62
3.2.3 Procedures...........................................................67
3.2.4 Summary of the Coding Scheme Used in this Study .....................67

4. CHAPTER FOUR：RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS...................................72
4.1 Results of Head Act Strategy Analyses..................................72
4.1.1 Analysis of Gender Variable .........................................76
4.1.2.Analyses of Social Variables.........................................77
4.1.2.1 Variation of Familiarity...........................................77
4.1.2.2 Variation of Social Status.........................................81
4.2. Results of Alerters Analyses .........................................83
4.2.1 Analyses of Gender Variable..........................................87
4.2.2 Analyses of Social Variables.........................................88
4.2.2.1 Variation of Familiarity...........................................88
4.2.2.2 Variation of Social Status.........................................91
4.3 Results of Modifiers Analyses..........................................94
4.3.1 Analyses of Gender Variable..........................................97
4.3.2 Analyses of Social Variables.........................................97
4.3.2.1 Variation of Familiarity...........................................97
4.3.2.2 Variation of Social Status........................................100
4.4 Discussion of Major Findings....................,.....................103
4.4.1 Age Variable........................................................103
4.4.2 Gender Variable ....................................................106
4.4.3 Social Variables....................................................108

5. CHAPTER FIVE：CONCLUSION...............................................116
5.1 Review of Each Chapter ...............................................116
5.2 Summary of Major Findings.............................................118
5.3 Suggestions for Further Research......................................122

REFERENCES................................................................124
APPENDIX I QUESTIONNAIRE .................................................130
APPENDIX II STATISTIC RESULTS.............................................136

Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Bach, K. (1979). Linguistic communication and speech acts. Cambridge Mass. :The MIT Press
Bate, Elizabeth & Silvern Louise. (1977). Social adjustment and politeness in preschoolers. Journal of Communication, 27(2), 104-111.
Bharuthram, Sharita. (2003). Politeness phenomena in the Hindu sector of the South African Indian English speaking community. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1532-1544.
Bilmyer, K. & Varghese, M. (2000). Investigating instrument-based pragmatic variability: effects on enhancing discourse completion tests. Applied Linguistics, 21(4): 517-552.
Blum-Kulka, S. (1987). Indirectness and politeness in requests: Same or different?
Journal of Pragmatics, 11, 131-146.
Blum-Kulka, S., and Elite, O. (1984). Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural
study of speech act realization patterns (CCSARP). Applied Linguistics, 5 (3),
196-213.
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (Eds.) (1989). Cross-cultural pragmatics:
requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ:Ablex, 123-154.
Brown, P. & Levinson, S. (1987). Universals in language usage: Politeness
phenomena. New York : Cambridge University Press.
Byon, Andrew S. (2004). Sociopragmatic analysis of Korean requests:
pedagogical settings. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 1673-1704.
Chang, May. (2001). Complaints in Chinese: the case of elementary school, junior
high school, high school, and college students. Unpublished master’s thesis,
National Tsing Hua Universality.
Chang, Yu-Ying. (2003). Responding to English requests: a study on speech act of
EFL junior high school students in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis,
National Tapei Teacher’s College.
Cohen, A., & Olshtain, E. (1981). Enveloping a measure of sociocultural
competence: the case of apology. Language Learning, 1, 113-134.
Craig, R., Tracy, K., & Spisak, F. (1986). The discourse of request: assessment of
a politeness approach. Human Communication Research, 12(4), 437-468.
Cutting, Joan. (2001). The speech acts of the in-group. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 1207-1233.
Dacies, Eirlys E. (1987). A contrastive approach to the analysis of politeness
formulas. Applied Linguistics, 8, 75-88.
Fraser, Bruce. (1990). Perspectives on politeness. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 219–236.
Fukushima, Saeko. (1996). Request strategies in British English and Japanese. Language Sciences, 18, 671-688.
Garcia, Carman. (1993). Making a request and respond to it: a case study of Peruvian Spanish speakers. Journal of Pragmatics, 19, 127–152.
Gibbs, Raymond W. (1981). Your wish is my command: convention and context in interpreting indirect requests. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 431-444.
Gibbs, Raymond W. (1986). W
hat makes some indirect speech acts conventional? Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 181-196.
Green, Georgia M. (1996). Pragmatics and natural language understanding. Mahwah, N.J. :Erlbaum
Gu, Yueguo. (1990). Politeness phenomena in modern Chinese. Journal of
Pragmatics, 14, 237-257.
Hassall, Tim. (2003). Requests by Australian learners of Indonesian. Journal of
Pragmatics, 35, 1903-1928.
Hong, Gao. (1999). Features of request strategies in Chinese. Lund Universality, Dept. of Linguistics. Working Papers, 47, 73-86.
House, J. & Kasper, G. (1981). Politeness markers in English and German. In
Florian Coulmas (ed.), Conversational Routine. 157-185. The Hague: Mouton.
Hsu, Y. & Chen, S. (2001). A pilot study on young Chinese EFL learners’ request
strategies. In Proceedings of the nineteenth conference on English teaching
and learning in the Republic of China, 417-423. Taipei, Crane.
Hsu, Y. (2003). The Development of Taiwanese EFL Children's Speech Act Performance: Social Variables and Request Strategies. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taipei Teachers College.
Hu, Chin Hu. (1944). The Chinese concepts of “face”. American Anthropologist,
46(1), 45-64.
James, Sharon L. (1978). Effect of listener age and situation on the politeness of
children’s directives. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 7(4), 307-317.
Jary, Mark. (1998). Relevance theory and the communication of politenss. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 1-19.
Kleinke, C. L., MacIntire, S. C. & Riddle, D. M. (1978). Sex differences in compliance with legitimate and illegitimate requests. Journal of Social Psychology, 105(1), 153-154.
Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. New York : Longman.
Lefebvre-Pinard, M., Bouffard-bouchard, T. & Feider, H. (1982). Social cognition
and verbal requests among preschool children. Journal of Psychology, 110(1), 133-143.
Mao, Lu Ming Robert. (1994). Beyond politeness theory: ‘Face’ revisited and
renewed. Journal of Pragmatics 21:451-486.
Marcos, H. & Bernicot, J. (1997). How do young children reformulate assertions? A comparison with requests. Journal of Pragmatics, 27, 781-798.
Mulken, Margot Van. (1996). Politeness markers in French and Dutch requests. Language Sciences, 18, 689-702.
Nwoye, Onuigbo G. (1992). Linguistic politeness and socio-cultural variations of the notion of face. Journal of Pragmatics, 18, 309–328.
Papafragou, Anna. (2000). On speech-act modality. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 519-538.
Pilegaard, Morten. (1997). Politeness in written business discourse : a textlinguistic perspective on requests. Journal of Pragmatics, 28, 223-244.
Reiter, R. M., Rainey, I. & Fulcher, G. (2005). A comparative study of certainty and conventional indirectness: evidence from British English and Peninsular Spanish. Applied Linguistics, 26(1): 1-31.
Searle, J R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language.
Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. R. (1975). A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society 5:
1-23.
Searle, J. R. (2001). Expression and meaning: studies in the theory of speech
acts. Beijing: Foreign Lauguage Teaching and Research Press
Spencer-Oatey, H. & Jiang, W. (2003). Explaining cross-cultural pragmatic
findings: moving from politeness maxims to sociopragmatic interactional principles (SIPs). Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1633-1650.
Spolsky, B. (1998). Sociolinguistics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Tracy, K., Craig, R. T., Smith, M., & Spisak, F. (1984). The discourse of requests: ”assessment of a compliance-gaining approach”. Human Communication Research, 10(4), 513-538.
Upadhyay, S. R. (2003). Nepali requestive acts: linguistic indirectness and
politeness reconsidered. Journal of Pragmatics 35, 1651-1677.
Vanderveken, Daniel& Kubo, Susumu. (Eds.) (2002). Essays in speech act theory. Amsterdam: Benjamins Pub. Co.
Yang, T. C. (2003). A study of refusals to requests of Taiwanese elementary school children. Unpublished master’s thesis, Providence Universality.
Yu, Ming-chung. (2003). On the Universality of Face: evidence from Chinese compliment response behavior. Journal of Pragmatics 35, 1679–1710.