跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.200.77.92) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/03/01 10:18
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

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:陳乃禎
研究生(外文):CHEN, NAI-CHEN
論文名稱:漢語道歉語使用策略之年齡差異研究
論文名稱(外文):A Socialpragamatic Study of Apology Strategies in Chinese on Age Differences
指導教授:許洪坤許洪坤引用關係
指導教授(外文):Dr. Joseph H. Hsu
口試委員:劉小梅朱曼妮
口試委員(外文):LIU, HSIAO-MEICHU, MAN-NI
口試日期:2014-07-28
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:輔仁大學
系所名稱:跨文化研究所語言學碩士班
學門:人文學門
學類:語言學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2014
畢業學年度:102
語文別:英文
論文頁數:123
中文關鍵詞:道歉策略年齡差異
外文關鍵詞:ApologyApologiesStrategyAge differences
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:337
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
  道歉是日常生活中對於冒犯的行為藉由表達歉意來恢復雙方關係平衡的一種言語交際行為。許多學者研究主要在比較不同文化的道歉策略,或是針對大學生在使用漢語道歉策略上的性別差異,對於以中文為母語的年齡差異研究卻顯不足,因此本研究旨在探討以不同年齡層的中文母語者在道歉策略的使用上是否有所差異,研究變項除了年齡因素以外,也同時考量雙方的親密程度、冒犯嚴重程度以及冒犯行為情境的不同來進行討論。
  本研究採用問卷調查法,研究對象為一百八十位中文母語者,依年齡十五至六十四歲分成三個年齡層,每個年齡層為六十人。研究結果顯示,不同年齡層在漢語道歉策略的使用上有顯著性的差異,並規納以下五項結果:
(一)最高年齡層的人比中間年齡層和最小年齡層的人使用更少的道歉策略,但是中間年齡層的人比最小年齡層的人使用更多的道歉策略。
(二)普遍來說,三個年齡層皆傾向於先使用直接道歉策略。
(三)在不同的冒犯情境下,只有最小年齡層的人會使用不同的道歉策略,中間年齡層和最高年齡層的人幾乎使用同一種道歉策略,其中,中間年齡層的人使用較多的“解釋”策略,最高年齡層的人使用較多的“承認”策略。
(四)若冒犯者和受害者的關係越疏遠,三個年齡層使用直接道歉的頻率越高。
(五)冒犯嚴重程度的輕重並不會影響道歉策略的選擇,且三個年齡層皆最常使用直接道歉的策略。

Apology, like acknowledgement, request, command or promise, is an important speech act which is closely connected with our daily life. In the last decades, a number of researchers have investigated apology from the perspective of cross-culture comparison. There are also studies which discussed apology strategies in Mandarin, but most of them focused on gender differences of undergraduate students. Therefore, the purpose of this study aims to explore whether people in different age group employ different apologetic strategies in Mandarin Chinese. The intimacy of subjects and severity of offence are taken into consideration. In this study, the five common situations related to “violating space, wasting time, violating possessions, breaching social etiquette, and offensive physical contact” are discussed. In order to understand complex apology speech act, a questionnaire is mainly used to collect data from Discourse Completion Task (DCT). Subjects in this study are Chinese native speakers in Taiwan, including three different age groups. Based on the collected data, the frequencies, percentages and Chi-square are used.
The results demonstrate that different age groups employ significantly different apology strategies. Also, the findings show that older age group employs the least apology strategies based on the respectfulness and the power from the younger people. Moreover, all three age groups are prone to use frequently direct apology strategy than indirect apology strategy because apology explicitly is the most powerful way to express regret. Considering the politeness of Chinese, people use direct apology the most to avoid conflict, cooperate with others and maintain their faces. In addition, the percentage of using the strategy of “Explicit expression of apology” has been increasing when the offender is distant from the offended. It indicates that people treat strangers more politely than intimate friends and lack of politeness becomes a sign of intimacy in Chinese culture.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT i
摘要 ii
謝辭 iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS iv
LIST OF TABLES vi
LIST OF FIGURES viii

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Motivation and Purpose of the Study 1
1.2 Significance of the Study 3
1.3 Organization of the Study 4

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 5
2.1 Definition of Apology 5
2.2 Speech Act Theory 7
2.3 Cooperative Principle 11
2.4 Politeness Theory 12
2.4.1 Face-Threatening Theory 12
2.4.2 Politeness Principle 15
2.4.3 Chinese Politeness 19
2.5 Previous Studies of Chinese Apology Strategies 22
2.6 Strategies of Apology 28
2.7 Theoretical Framework 34
2.8 Research Hypotheses 41
2.9 Summary 42

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 44
3.1 Subjects 44
3.2 Material 45
3.2.1 Questionnaire Design 46
3.3 Procedure 50
3.4 Data Collection 51
3.5 Data Analysis 52

CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION 53
4.1 Overall Distribution 53
4.2 The Distribution of Apology Strategies Used by Each Age Group in Intimacy 56
4.3 The Distribution of Apology Strategies Used by Each Age Group in Severity of Offence 75
4.4 The Distribution of Apology Strategies Used by Each Age Group in Five Specific Behaviors of Offences 81
4.5 General Discussion 94
4.5.1 The First Finding 95
4.5.2 The Second Finding 97
4.5.3 The Third Finding 98
4.5.4 The Fourth Finding 100
4.5.5 The Fifth Finding 101

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION 103
5.1 Summary 103
5.2 Contribution 105
5.3 Suggestions of Further Studies 106

ENGLISH REFERENCES 108

CHINESE REFERENCES 113

APPENDIX I 114

APPENDIX II 118

Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Aziz, E. A. (2005). Face and Politeness Phenomena in the Changing China. Makara, Social Humaniora, 9, 1-15

Beebe, L. M. & Cummings, M. C. (1996). Natural speech act data versus written questionnaire data: How data collection method affects speech act performance. Speech Acts Across Cultures: Challenges to Communication in a Second Language, ed. by Gass, S. & J, Neu, 65-86, New York: Mounton de Gruyter. [google book].

Blum-Kulka, S. & Olshtain, E. (1984a). Requests and Apologies: A Cross-cultural Study of speech act realization patterns. Applied Linguistics, 5, 196-213.

Brown, P., & Levinson, Stephen C. (1987). Politeness: some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chang, S-M. (2005). A Study on Situational Apology of Mandarin Chinese. M. A. Thesis. National Kaohsiung Casual University

Chen, H-P. (2008). A Sociopragmatic Study on Gender Differences in Apologetic Strategies. M. A. Thesis. Fu Jen Catholic University.

Edmondson, W. J.(1981). Spoken discourse: a model for analysis. London: Longman.

Fraser, B. (1981). On apologizing. Conversational Routine: Explorations in Standardized Communication Situation and Prepatterned Speech, ed. by Coulmas, F., 259-271. The Netherlands: Mouton.

Fraser, B. (1990). Perspectives on Politeness. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 219-236

Goffman, E. (1967). Interactional ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. Garden City, New York: Anchor & Doubleday.

Goffman, E. (1971, 2010). Relations in public: microstudies of the public order. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Publishers. (Original work published 1971)

Grice, Herbert P. (1975). Logic and conversation. Syntax and Semantics, 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press: 41-58.

Grice, Herbert P. (1989). Studies in the way of words. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Gu, Y-G. (1990). Politeness Phenomena in Modern Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 237-257

Holmes, J. (1989). Sex Differences and Apologies: One Aspect of Communicative Competence. Applied Linguistics, 10, 194-213

Holmes, J. (1990). "Apologies in New Zealand English". Language in Society 19, 155-199. [abstract]

Holmes, J. (1995). Women, men, and politeness. London: Longman

Ho, P-C. (2006). Internal Modification in Apology Realization: Cross-cultural Variations. M. A. Thesis. National Sun Yat-sen University.

Hofstede, G. H. (1980). Culture's consequences: international differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications.

Hou, Y-C. (2006). A Cross-curtural Study of the Perception of Apology- Effect of Contextual Factors, Exposure to the Target Language, Interlocutor Ethnicity and Task Language. M. A. Thesis. National Sun Yat-sen University.

Huang, Y-L. (2008). Politeness Principle in Cross-Culture Communication. English Language Teaching, 1, 96-101

Jin, P. & Li, Y. (2013). Politeness Principles Difference in Appellations Between English and Chinese. Studies in Literature and Language, 6, 18-22

Kim, P. H., Ferrin, D. L., Cooper, C.D. & Dirks, K.T. (2004). Removing the Shadow of suspicion: The Effects of Apology Versus Denial for Repairing Competence- versus Integrity-based Trust Violations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 104-118

Ladegaard, H. J. (2004). Politeness in young children’s speech: context, peer group influence and pragmatic competence. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 2003-2022

Lazare, A. (2004). On apology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Leech, Geoffrey N. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman.

Leech, Geoffrey N. (2005). Politeness: Is There an East-West Divide? Journal of Foreign Languages General Serial, 6, 1-30

Lin, T-C. (2010). A Study of the Developmental Patterns of Apologies by Chinese Children. M.A. Thesis. National Taiwan Casual University.

Miahouakana Matando, J. P. (2012). Cross-cultural Values Comparison Between Chinese and Sub-Saharan Africans. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3, 38-45

Olshtain, E. & Cohen, A. (1983). Apology: A speech-act set. Sociolinguistics and Language Acquisition, 18-35

Olshtain, E. & Cohen, A. (1990). The Learning of Complex Speech Act Behaviour. Tesl Canada Journal, 7, 45-65

Scher, S. J., Darley, J. M. (1997). How Effective Are the Things People Say to Apologize? Effects of the Realization of the Apology Speech Act. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, Vol. 26, No. 1

Schwartz, M. (2010). Apology Strategies. Munchen: GRIN Verlag GmbH. [google book].

Searle, John R. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Searle, John R. (1969). Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Shen, F-H. (2013). Sociopragmatic Analysis of Apology in Mandarin. M. A. Thesis. National Chengchi University.

Shih, H-Y. (2006). An Interlanguage Study of the Speech Act of Apology Made by EFL Learners in Taiwan. M. A. Thesis. National Sun Yat-sen University. [google book].

Sidanius, J & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: an intergroup theory of social hierachy and oppression. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Smith, N. (2008). I was wrong: the meanings of apologies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sung, K-T. (2001). Elder respect Exploration of ideals and forms in East Asia. Journal of Aging Studies, 15, 15-26

Tao, L. (2010). Politeness in Chinese and Japanese Verbal Communication. Intercultural Communication Studies, 2, 37-54

Triandis, H. C. (1989). The Self and Social Behavior in Differing Cultural Context. Psychological Review, 96, 506-520

Trosborg, A. (1987). Apology Strategies in Native / Non-natives. Journal of Pragmatics, 11, 147-167

Trosborg, A. (1995). Interlanguage Pragmatics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. [google book].

Tsai, I-T (2007). Studying Apologies: A comparison of DCT and Role-play Data. M.A. Thesis. National Sun Yat-sen University.

Tsai, P-C. (2002). A Study of the Speech of Apology in Chinese. M.A. Thesis. National Tsing Hua University. [Abstract]

Turnbull, W. (2003). Language in action: psychological models of conversation. Hove: Psychology Press.

Zhu, J. & Bao, Y. (2010). The Pragmatic Comparison of Chinese and Western “Politeness” in Cross-cultural Communication. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 1, 848-851

白雪 (2012)。漢語道歉語的社會語言學研究。瀋陽師範大學碩士論文。

周林豔 (2008)。致歉言語行為研究。吉林大學碩士論文。

周筱娟 (2005)。現代漢語禮貌語言研究。武漢大學博士論文。

洪靜 (2005)。道歉言語行為的多為透視。山東大學碩士論文。

蔡宏進、廖正宏 (1987)。人口學。臺北:巨流圖書公司。

QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top