A linguistic analysis of lying in negative evaluations: The speech act performance of Chinese learners of Korean

이 논문은 중국인 한국어 학습자와 한국어 화자들 사이의 ‘거짓말’ 화행 양상을 언어학적으로 분석한 연구이다. 여기서 말하는 ‘거짓말’이란 요청, 사과, 거절 등과 같은 화행의 일종으로서 ‘부정적 평가’에 속하며 대화 참여자나 상황을 고려한 소위 ‘선의의 거짓말’을 가리키는 것으로 이해할 수 있을 것이다. 우리는 중국인 한국어 학습자 15명과 한국어 화자 15명을 대상으로 담화완성테스트(DCT)와 부연설명질문지(QFE)를 사용하여 피실험자들의 화행을 분석하였다. 피실험자 자신들의 설명과 한국어교육 전문가 다섯 명의 판정을 종합해 ‘거짓말’ 화행을 가려내고 통계 처리를 바탕으로 다음과 같은 결론에 도달했다. 한국어 화자들이 중국인 한국어 학습자들보다 (선의의) 거짓말을 더 많이 수행하는 것으로 나타났다. 그리고 두 집단 모두 부정적 평가가 사물에 관련된 경우보다 사람에 관련된 경우에 ‘거짓말’ 화행을 더 많이 사용한다. 그러나 화자와 청자 사이의 친소관계(distance)나 상하관계(power)는 거짓말 사용에 직접적 상관 관계를 보여주지 않았다. 이 연구는 지금까지 화행 연구 중에서 상대적으로 연구가 부진했던 부정평가와 ‘거짓말’ 화행에 대한 분석을 시도했다는 점에서 의미가 있다. 또한 한국어 화자와 중국인 한국어 학습자 사이에 보이는 화행 수행의 차이를 문화인식(cultural awareness)의 관점에서 해석해 볼 수 있는 가능성도 열어 주었다

Introduction

Why do parent\u2013child argumentative interactions matter? What is the reason for such an interest? This chapter provides the reasons that motivated the study of parent\u2013child argumentation with the aim to understand the function of this type of interactions. Focusing on the activity of family mealtime, in the first part, the chapter draws attention to the distinctive features of parent\u2013child conversations. A second section of the chapter is devoted to discussing whether and, eventually, when children have the competence to construct arguments and engage in argumentative discussions with the aim to convince their parents to change opinion. In the last part of the chapter, research questions and structure of the volume are presented

Requests On E-Mail: a Cross-Cultural Comparison

This study investigates differences in request e-mails written in English by Chinese English learners and native American English speakers The results show that while Chinese English learners treat e-mail communications like either formal letters or telephone conversations, native American English speakers regard e-mail communications as closer to written memos It was also found that although the native American English speakers structure their e-mail request messages in a rather direct sequence, the linguistic forms they employ to express their requests are more indirect In contrast, the Chinese English learners structure their request messages in an indirect sequence, but the linguistic forms they use to realize their requests are more direct Given this contrast, it is not surprising that some of the request samples written by Chinese English learners were judged as very impolite by the native English speaking evaluators in this study The findings of this study thus demonstrate the importance of studying requests within the overall discourse in which they occur. Studying only the linguistic forms used in phrasing the request itself, as in the studies conducted by Blum-Kulka et al (1989), cannot provide us with a full picture of the cultural differences inherent in making requestsPeer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/69055/2/10.1177_003368829802900206.pd

The Initial Phase of the Argumentative Discussions Between Parents and Children

This chapter examines the initial phase of parent\u2013child argumentative discussions during mealtime. The conceptual tool adopted for the analysis is based on the pragma-dialectical ideal model of a critical discussion (van Eemeren & Grootendorst\u201a 2004). The types of issues leading parents and children to engage in argumentative discussions during mealtime as well as the contribution that parents and children provide to the inception of argumentation are described and discussed. The analysis of the initial phase of parent\u2013child argumentative discussions also considers the role played by the specificity of the parent\u2013child relationship and the distinctive features of the activity of family mealtime for the beginning of an argumentative discussion. Exemplary argumentative sequences that bring to light the results obtained through the qualitative analysis of a larger corpus of argumentative discussions between parents and children are presented and discussed

A Qualitative Methodology for Studying Parent–Child Argumentation

This chapter provides a detailed exposé of the research methodology on which the investigation of parent–child argumentation during mealtime is based. In the first part, the conceptual tools adopted for the analysis of argumentative discussions between parents and children, i.e., the pragma-dialectical ideal model of a critical discussion and the Argumentum Model of Topics, are presented. Subsequently, the process of data gathering and the procedures for the transcription of oral data are discussed. Finally, in the last part of the chapter, ethical issues and practical problems in collecting parent–child mealtime conversations present throughout the study are considered

Reporting conditionals with modals

Conditionals and modals work in tandem in some instances of practical reasoning, or decision making. Consider the following example (from Kratzer 2012): a. I want to become a mayor. b. (q) I will become a mayor only if (p) I go to the pub. c. Therefore, I should go to the pub. Given what the cogniser wants (a) and the relevant circumstances (b), the conclusion that the cogniser goes to the pub comes out as necessary. Hence, the presence of the necessity modal should in (c). Indeed, given the context of (a), the necessity modal in (c) is simply a reflection of the necessity of p for q, which is overtly represented by the use of the ‘only if p, q’ construction. This chapter looks into whether indirect reports of conditionals – in particular, indirect reports which involve the use of a modal verb – are sensitive to the necessity of p for q in cases where necessity is not overtly represented in a conditional, as in ‘if p, q’ formulations. We report on two online experiments into the relation between (i) perceived necessity or sufficiency of the truth of a conditional antecedent for the truth of the consequent, and (ii) the formulation of an indirect report of a conditional with necessity or possibility modals (have to, should, could). In Experiment 1, the ‘necessity/sufficiency of p for q’ variable was manipulated by contextually altering the number of alternative antecedents (e.g. Cummins et al. 1991; Thompson 1994; Politzer 2003). It was found that modals used in indirect reports of ‘if p, q’ conditionals co-vary with the number of alternative antecedents in predictable ways. This suggests that modals used in indirect reports of ‘if p, q’ conditionals may be a diagnostic for biconditional versus material interpretations of conditionals. The aim of Experiment 2 was to find out whether the results of Experiment 1 could be replicated in contexts which lower/eliminate the believability of the conditionals. It was found that manipulating the believability variable has no reliable effect on the results

Indirect Reports in Modern Eastern Armenian

In this work we consider the distribution of complementizers in Modern Eastern Armenian. There are two complementizers: wor and t‘e. They both introduce complement clauses, but t‘e also expresses a dubitative value, implying that the speaker has doubts on the content following the complementizer. Moreover, t‘e, when embedded under verbs of saying, shifts the anchoring of indexicals, moving the anchor from the speaker – better called utterer – to the subject of the saying predicate. On the basis of this and further evidence coming from the analysis of sequence of tense and if-clauses, we will argue that the position of t‘e in the left periphery of the clause occupies a high position in the syntactic hierarchy. The aim of this work is on one hand, a better understanding of indirect reports and their syntax and, on the other, a more precise characterization of indexicals across languages

Shifting Characterizations of the ‘Common People’ in Modern English Retranslations of Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War: A corpus-based analysis

Little research has yet explored the impact of (re)translation on narrative characterization, that is, on the process through which the various actors depicted in a narrative are attributed particular traits and qualities. Moreover, the few studies that have been published on this topic are either rather more anecdotal than systematic, or their focus is primarily on the losses in character information that inevitably occur when a narrative is retold for a new audience in a new linguistic context. They do not explore how the translator’s own background knowledge and ideological beliefs might affect the characterization process for readers of their target-language text. Consequently, this paper seeks to make two contributions to the field: first, it presents a corpus-based methodology developed as part of the Genealogies of Knowledge project for the comparative analysis of characterization patterns in multiple retranslations of a single source text. Such an approach is valuable, it is argued, because it can enhance our ability to engage in a more systematic manner with the accumulation of characterization cues spread throughout a narrative. Second, the paper seeks to move discussions of the effects of translation on narrative characterization away from a paradigm of loss, deficiency and failure, promoting instead a perspective which embraces the productive role translators often play in reconfiguring the countless narratives through which we come to know, imagine and make sense of the past, our present and futures. The potential of this methodology and theoretical standpoint is illustrated through a case study exploring changes in the characterization of ‘the common people’ in two English-language versions of classical Greek historian Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War, the first produced by Samuel Bloomfield in 1829 and the second by Steven Lattimore in 1998. Particular attention is paid to the referring expressions used by each translator—such as the multitude vs. the common people—as well as the specific attributes assigned to this narrative actor. In this way, the study attempts to gain deeper insight into the ways in which these translations reflect important shifts in attitudes within key political debates concerning the benefits and dangers of democracy