跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.235.185.78) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/07/27 18:21
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:慕傑
研究生(外文):JasonDemorest
論文名稱:成人初顯世代的兩個族群
論文名稱(外文):Friendship and Rivalry in Emerging Adulthood
指導教授:謝菁玉謝菁玉引用關係
指導教授(外文):Ching-yu Hsieh
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立成功大學
系所名稱:外國語文學系碩博士班
學門:人文學門
學類:外國語文學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2013
畢業學年度:101
語文別:英文
論文頁數:119
中文關鍵詞:友好關係敵對關係成人初顯世代親和感面子言談行為同理心的呈現
外文關鍵詞:friendshiprivalryemerging adulthoodrapportfacespeech actsempathetic disclosure
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:112
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:16
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:3
本論文探討成人初顯世代的兩個族群:從小說Paper Towns(Webber, 2012)與Easy (Green, 2008)看這兩本小說中初期階段與中期階段的初顯世代現象。本論文針對此兩本小說的長篇互動對話,以Spencer-Oatey’s關係管理之研究(2000, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2011)所設計出的關係架構加以修改後進行分析。本論文探討以下研究問題:(1)分析Paper Towns與Easy裡,好壞關係的互動模式如何呈現? (2)比較此兩本小說,何種言談行為較易聯想為友好關係或是敵對關係? (3)在這兩本小說中,以表達親疏關係為主的情境裡,同理心是如何呈現? (4)親疏相關研究所指出的互動模式是否與小說Easy和Paper Towns所發現的一致? 本研究所選用的分析體是以Spencer-Oatey的五大親疏關係研究領域為主:發語詞、言談分析、參域、非語言與文體。發語詞的分析是以Wierzbicka 的言談行為分類研究(1987)及Searle(1975)所發展出的言談行為中,更明確的分類學方法來分析。本研究試著就敵對關係的爭論情境,套用Traverso (2009)的爭論點核心理論去分析,以本研究中的一個範例與Yu(2011)的研究作比較,觀察Traverso的理論是否符合。
研究結果顯示(a)這兩本小說的互動情境中皆可觀察到友好關係與敵對關係有不同的互動模式:例如,在具挑戰的互動中,較常使用規避詞、也較有同理心的對話。另一方面,優化關係技巧性的大多透過笑話來呈現維持對話關係則常轉換話題或是使用回應句。(b) 一般來說,施壓最常作為表達敵對關係的策略,然而在研究中的此二成人初顯世代族群其言談行為的使用並不全然一致;但訊息告知則很一致的都出現在友好關係的情境裡。此發現強調朋友間資訊的分享是強化友好關係很重要的因素。(c)同理心的呈現則是意外的在挑戰的情境中較常出現,即便它是強化友誼的一種策略。(d) Yu(2011)的研究所發現的爭論模式與本研究所發現的與Traverso的核心爭論理論一致透過旁敲側擊人身攻擊的方式從旁抵毀對話者是作為反駁主要論點的方式。但本研究這兩個範例所進行分析的方式,就結構上有些許不同,例如本研究中有出現較長的爭論,明顯是因為有很多策略性的對話,其爭論結束的處理也不一樣。此二範例的結束方式皆可透過互動參與者的一方被動的提示結束點,且其中本研究的例子並又出現了互動參與的一方主要承擔了爭論對話反覆無常的責任。本研究試著觀察在成人初顯世代中不同年齡層所呈現的語言互動關係。結果透過研究方法指出成人初顯世代中互動的發展模式與了解互動潛在進行的可行性。如同透過敵友關係的呈現,有效的讓成人初顯世代可從較關注自我的青少年時期轉變為對外關注他人的成人期行為;這相當於幫助人們了解並逐漸適應社交行為,以期順暢的轉換至未來世代而至專業的生活領域。
關鍵字:友好關係、敵對關係、成人初顯世代、親和感、面子、言談行為、同理心的呈現
This thesis examines two groups of emerging adults: an early phase and a middle phase within two emerging adulthood novels: Paper Towns (Webber, 2012) and Easy (Green, 2008). Long interactional exchanges from both novels are analyzed using a modified version of the rapport framework designed by Spencer-Oatey’s rapport management (2000, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2011). This thesis answers the following research questions: (1) What patterns are observable in positive versus negative rapport encounters, analyzed in the novels: Paper Towns (Webber, 2012) and Easy (Green, 2008)? (2) In comparing the two novels which speech acts were most commonly associated with friendship and likewise rivalry? (3) How is empathetic disclosure responded to within the two novels across the rapport orientations? (4) Is interactional pattern research on emerging adulthood consistent with the findings observable in Easy and Paper Towns? The analytics chosen for this study are representative of Spencer-Oatey’s five rapport judgment domains: illocutionary domain, discourse domain, participation domain, non-verbal domain, and stylistics domain. The analytics representative of the illocutionary domain follow the speech act taxonomy by Searle (1975) with a closer taxonomical approach via Wierzbicka’s taxonomy (1987). In our attempt to compare our current research on emerging adults with existing research, we examined rivalry explicitly in arguments, using Traverso’s theory of core issues in arguments (2009). We compared an example from the current study with Yu (2011) to examine whether Traverso’s theory is supported.
The results show that (a) there are observable patterns that point to a difference in interactions within friendship and rivalry dynamics throughout the two novels: e.g., the frequency of hedging is noticeably higher in the challenge orientation, challenge also had a higher rate of empathetic disclosures, on the other hand, enhancement statistically held a higher margin of jokes, and maintenance demonstrated the largest number of topic shifts and back-channels. (b) Stress is the most common rivalry strategy overall, but there were some inconsistencies in speech act use between the two groups of emerging adulthood; however tell is fairly consistently used as a friendship strategy. This consistency reaffirms that information-sharing between friends is paramount to reinforcing friendships, regardless the difference in age within the two emerging adulthood groups. (c) Empathetic disclosure surprisingly occurs most often within the challenge orientation, even though it is a friendship enhancing strategy. (d) Patterns of argumentation found in Yu’s example (2011) and the one from our present research were consistent with Traverso’s theory of core issues in arguments. Tangent micro-arguments occurred peripherally to the core issues in the form of personal attacks meant to discredit the interlocutors. The two examples examined in this study differed to a slight degree in terms of structure. For example, our study exhibited an extended argument phase. This was apparent in the extra number of strategic relations, as well as the difference in the the argument closures. The conclusions to the arguments for the two examples both end via one participant passively signaling a close, but in the case of our example the participant accepts primary responsibility for the volatility of the argument. The present thesis attempted to view rapport within the age phase emerging adulthood: specifically looking at friendship and rivalry dynamics. The results of the study demonstrate the potential viability of the research methods in attempting to understand the development pattern of emerging adulthood interactional strategies. As friendships and rivalries make up the economies that move emerging adults from the self-focused adolescence towards the outward-looking adulthood, it is tantamount that we better understand the connections that lead people towards socialization adaptability, in order to better prepare future generations for smoother transitions into their professional lives.
Contents
摘要 2
Abstract 3
Acknowledgements 5
List of Tables 8
Conventions 8
Chapter 1 Introduction 9
1.1 Motivation 9
1.2 Research Questions 10
1.3 Structure of Thesis 11
Chapter 2 Literature Review 13
2.1 Friendship 13
2.1.1 Rapport 15
2.1.2 Face 17
2.2 Interactional Goals 20
2.2.1 Behavioral Expectations 22
2.2.2 Interactional Principles 24
2.2.3 Chapter Summary 25
Chapter 3 Methodology 26
3.1 Data Sources 26
3.1.1 Paper Towns 29
3.1.2 Easy 31
3.1.3 Novel Comparison 32
3.2 The five Domains 33
3.2.1 Illocutionary Domain 34
3.2.2 Discourse Domain and Non-verbal Domain 40
3.2.3 Participation Domain 41
3.2.4 Stylistic Domain 42
3.3 Handling of Data 43
3.4 Chapter Summary 43
Chapter 4 Micro level Analysis of Friendship and Rivalry 45
4.1 Negative Rapport Orientations 46
4.1.1 Rapport Neglect Orientation 46
4.1.2 Rapport Challenge 51
4.2 Positive Rapport Orientations 56
4.2.1 Rapport Maintenance 56
4.2.2 Rapport Enhancement Orientation 63
4.2.3 Chapter Summary 65
Chapter 5 Macro Level Analysis of Friendship and Rivalry 67
5.1 Negative Rapport Orientations 68
5.1.1 Rapport Neglect 68
5.1.2 Rapport Challenge 71
5.1.3 Negative Rapport Analytics Cross-Comparison 75
5.2 Positive Rapport Orientations 79
5.2.1 Rapport Maintenance 80
5.2.2 Rapport Enhancement Orientation 83
5.2.3 Positive Rapport Analytics Cross-Comparison 86
5.3 Results 89
5.3.1 Research Question 1, Observable Patterns 89
5.3.2 Research Question 2, Speech Acts 91
5.3.3 Research Question 3, Empathetic Disclosures 93
5.4 Chapter Summary 95
Chapter 6 Argument Structure Comparison 97
6.1 Argument Research in relation to Current Study 97
6.2 Research Question 4, Arguments in Interaction 102
6.3 Chapter Summary 103
Chapter 7 Conclusion 105
7.1 Summary of Major Findings 104
7.2 Contribution of the Thesis 107
7.3 Limitations and Further Studies 109
7.4 Final Notes on the Current Study 110
References 111
Appendix 1 Discourse Analytics 117
Appendix 2 Speech Act Rates in the Novels 120
Ädel, A. (2011). Rapport building in student group work. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(12), 2932-2947.
Andrew, M. (2006). The ‘inner side’ of the transition to adulthood: how young adults see the process of becoming an adult. Advances in Life Course Research, 11, 225-251.
Arnett, J. (2000). Emerging Adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. Jensen American Psychologist, 55(5), 469-480.
Arnett, J. (2005). The developmental context of substance use in Emerging Adulthood. Journal of Drug Issues, 35(2), 235-254.
Arnett, J. (2007). Socialization in Emerging Adulthood. Handbook of Socialization: Theory and Research. 208-227. NY, US: Guilford Publications.
Austin, J. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Bach, K. and Harnish, R. (1979). Linguistic communication and speech acts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Barry, C. (2009). Friendship and romantic relationship qualities in Emerging Adulthood: Differential associations with identity development and achieved adulthood criteria. Journal of Adult Development 16(4): 209-222.
Berndt, T. (2002). Friendship Quality and Social Development. Current Directions in Psychological Science 11(1):7-10.
Brown, P. and Levinson, S.C. (1978) ‘Universals in Language Usage: Politeness Phenomena’, in E. Goody (ed.) Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction, pp. 56–311. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, P., and Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics, vol 4 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Duncan, T. and Moriarty, S. (1998). A communication-based marketing model for managing relationships. Journal of Marketing: 62(2): 1-13.
Dwyer, F. (1987). Developing buyer-seller relationships. Journal of Marketing: 51(2): 11-27.
Everts, E. (2003). Identifying a particular family humor style: A sociolinguistic discourse analysis. Humor 16(4): 369-412.
Goddard, C. (2011). Semantic analysis: A practical introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Goffman, E. (1955). On face-work: An analysis of ritual elements in social interaction. Psychiatry: Journal for the Study of Interpersonal Processes 18(3): 213-231.
Goffman, E. (1967). On face-work. Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-to-Face Behavior NJ, US: Transaction Publishers.
Green, John. (2008a, November 23). author interview. Retrieved June 7, 2013 from Scholastic.com
Green, J. (2008b). Paper towns. NY, US: Dutton Books.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation in P. Cole and Morgan, eds., Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts: 41-58. NY, US: Academic Press.
Grice, H. P. (1978). Further notes on logic and conversation. In P. Cole, eds., Syntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics: 113-128. NY, US: Academic Press.
Grundy, P. (2008). Doing pragmatics, NY, US. Oxford University Press.
Grusec, J. E. and P. D. Hastings (2008). Handbook of socialization: Theory and research NY, US: Guilford Press.
Hambling-Jones, O. and A. J. Merrison (2012). Inequity in the pursuit of intimacy: An analysis of british pick-up artist interactions. Journal of Pragmatics 44(9): 1115-1127.
Heath, C. (1984). Participation in the medical consultation - The coordination of verbal and nonverbal behavior between the doctor and patient. Sociology of Health & Illness 6(3): 311-338.
Hogg, M. A., & Simon, B. (2004). Identity in modern society: A social psychological perspective. European Psychologist, 9(4), 284-285.
Kasper, G. (1990). Linguistic politeness: Current research issues. Journal of Pragmatics 14(2):193-218.
Kong, K. (2003). Are you my friend? Negotiating friendship in conversations between network marketers and their prospects. Language in Society 32:487-522.
Lakoff, R. T. (1973). The logic of politeness: Or, minding your P's and Q's. in Corum, C., Smith, T., and Weiser, A. eds., Papers from the 9th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society: 292-305 Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, R. T. (1979). Stylistic strategies within a grammar of style. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 327(1): 53-78.
Laursen, B. and Collins W. (1994). Interpersonal conflict during adolescence. Psychological Bulletin 115(2): 197-209.
Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London, UK: Longman.
Leech, G. (2005). Politeness: Is there an east-west divide. Journal of Foreign Languages 6(3).
Li, W. (2009). Different communication rules between the English and Chinese greetings. Asian Culture and History 1(2): 72.
Maddux, W. (2008). Chameleons bake bigger pies and take bigger pieces: Strategic behavioral mimicry facilitates negotiation outcomes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 44(2): 461-468.
Myers, F. L., Bakker, K., St Louis, K. O., & Raphael, L. J. (2012). Disfluencies in cluttered speech. Journal of fluency disorders, 37(1), 9-19.
Luyckx, K. (2006). A developmental contextual perspective on identity construction in Emerging Adulthood: Change dynamics in commitment formation and commitment evaluation. Developmental Psychology 42(2): 366.
Park, B. (2010). The persistence of implicit behavioral associations for moms and dads. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 46(5): 809-815.
Rawlins, W. K. and Holl M. R. (1988). Adolescents' interaction with parents and friends: Dialectics of temporal perspective and evaluation. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 5(1): 27-46.
Redeker, G. (1990). Ideational and pragmatic markers of discourse structure. Journal of Pragmatics 14(3): 367-381.
Robles, J. S. (2012). Troubles with assessments in gifting occasions. Discourse Studies 14(6): 753-777.Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in experimental social psychology, 25(1), 1-65.
Schwartz, S. H., Melech, G., Lehmann, A., Burgess, S., Harris, M., & Owens, V. (2001). Extending the cross-cultural validity of the theory of basic human values with a different method of measurement. Journal of cross-cultural Psychology, 32(5), 519-542.
Searle, J. R. (1975). Indirect speech acts. Syntax and Semantics 3: 59-82.
Searle, J. R. (1976). A taxonomy of illocutionary acts. Linguistic Agency. Trier, DE: University of Trier.
Searle, J. R. (1979). What is an intentional state. Mind 88:74-92.
Shiner, R. (2002). A developmental perspective on personality in Emerging Adulthood: Childhood antecedents and concurrent adaptation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 83(5): 1165-1177.
Spencer-Oatey, H. and Xing J. (2000). A problematic Chinese business visit to Britain: Issues of face. Culturally Speaking: 272-289.
Spencer-Oatey, H., & Xing, J. (2003). Managing rapport in intercultural business interactions: A comparison of two Chinese-British welcome meetings. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 24(1), 33-46.
Spencer-Oatey, H (2005). (Im)politeness, face and perceptions of rapport: Unpackaging their bases and interrelationships. Journal of Politeness Research 1 (1):95-119.
Spencer-Oatey, H. (2007). Theories of identity and the analysis of face. Journal of Pragmatics. 39(4):639–656.
Spencer-Oatey, H. (2011). Conceptualising ‘the relational’ in pragmatics: Insights from metapragmatic emotion and (im)politeness comments. Journal of Pragmatics 43:3565.
Swan, M (2005). Practical English usage. NY, USA: Oxford University Press.
Traverso V. (2009). The dilemmas of third-party complaints in conversation between friends. Journal of Pragmatics 41(12):2385-2399.
Webber, T. (2012). Easy. London, UK: Penguin.
Wentzel, K. R., et al. (2010). Social supports from teachers and peers as predictors of academic and social motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology 35(3): 193-202.
Wierzbicka, A. (1987). English speech act verbs: A semantic dictionary. Sydney, AU: Academic Press.
Yu, C. (2011). The display of frustration in arguments: A multimodal analysis. Journal of Pragmatics 43(12):2964-2981.
Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關論文
 
1. 游慧雯、蔡素如、曾繁斐、黃玉慧、施盈如 &; 畢柳鶯 (2006)•脊髓損傷患者長期併發症之回溯性研究•臺灣復健醫學雜誌,34(3), 167-174。
2. 游慧雯、蔡素如、曾繁斐、黃玉慧、施盈如 &; 畢柳鶯 (2006)•脊髓損傷患者長期併發症之回溯性研究•臺灣復健醫學雜誌,34(3), 167-174。
3. 周淑華、陳筱瑀、賴嘉祥(2008)•脊髓損傷者憂鬱程度及其相關因素之探討•實證護理,4(4),318-326。
4. 周淑華、陳筱瑀、賴嘉祥(2008)•脊髓損傷者憂鬱程度及其相關因素之探討•實證護理,4(4),318-326。
5. 周淑華、陳筱瑀、賴嘉祥(2008)•脊髓損傷者憂鬱程度及其相關因素之探討•實證護理,4(4),318-326。
6. 游慧雯、蔡素如、曾繁斐、黃玉慧、施盈如 &; 畢柳鶯 (2006)•脊髓損傷患者長期併發症之回溯性研究•臺灣復健醫學雜誌,34(3), 167-174。
7. 黃子珍、鄭宏志、吳振嫺、廖婉雯 (2003)•脊髓損傷治療新觀 - 神經再生術•榮總護理,20(2),142-148。
8. 黃子珍、鄭宏志、吳振嫺、廖婉雯 (2003)•脊髓損傷治療新觀 - 神經再生術•榮總護理,20(2),142-148。
9. 黃子珍、鄭宏志、吳振嫺、廖婉雯 (2003)•脊髓損傷治療新觀 - 神經再生術•榮總護理,20(2),142-148。
10. 蔡春金、黃瓊玉 (2007)•脊髓損傷者憂鬱症狀及其相關因素之探討•志為護理,6(2),64-73。
11. 蔡春金、黃瓊玉 (2007)•脊髓損傷者憂鬱症狀及其相關因素之探討•志為護理,6(2),64-73。
12. 蔡春金、黃瓊玉 (2007)•脊髓損傷者憂鬱症狀及其相關因素之探討•志為護理,6(2),64-73。