불손발화에서 나타나는 경어사용과 청자반응 -상하관계와 발화의 직접성을 중심으로-
The use of Honorifics and Listener’s Response in Impolite Utterances -Focusing on the Directness of Utterances and the Hierarchical Relationship-
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
To examine how the use of honorifics in impolite utterances works, this study analyzed their use in impolite utterances and the type of listener’s responses by focusing on the hierarchical relationship and the directness of the utterances. Impolite utterances using honorifics appeared more often toward superior. When the listener was a superior, such utterances tended to be indirect while direct when the listener was an inferior. In addition, in both cases, aggressive responses accounted for more than half of the listener’s responses. Due to the incongruence between the speaker's rude attitude and honorifics, the use of such expressions in impolite utterances itself offends the listener and triggers an aggressive response. The types of listener’s responses include not only attack but also acceptance, defense, and non-response. This response was found to be a process of restoring one's own face, or maintaining face, as a way to protect or compensate for damaged face or to retaliate by threatening face to the other interlocutor.
Abstract
To examine how the use of honorifics in impolite utterances works, this study analyzed their use in impolite utterances and the type of listener’s responses by focusing on the hierarchical relationship and the directness of the utterances. Impolite utterances using honorifics appeared more often toward superior. When the listener was a superior, such utterances tended to be indirect while direct when the listener was an inferior. In addition, in both cases, aggressive responses accounted for more than half of the listener’s responses. Due to the incongruence between the speaker's rude attitude and honorifics, the use of such expressions in impolite utterances itself offends the listener and triggers an aggressive response. The types of listener’s responses include not only attack but also acceptance, defense, and non-response. This response was found to be a process of restoring one's own face, or maintaining face, as a way to protect or compensate for damaged face or to retaliate by threatening face to the other interlocutor.
참고문헌 (26)
- Bousfield, D., "Impoliteness in Interaction" (2008), Jo hn Benjamims
- Culpeper, J., "Towards an anatomy of impoliteness", Journal of Pragmatics, 25, pp.349~367 (1996)
- Culpeper, J., "Impoliteness and entertainment in the television quiz show: T he Weakest Link", Journal of Politeness Research: Language, Behaviour, Culture, 1, pp.35~72 (2005)
- Culpeper, J., "Impoliteness: Using Language to Cause Offence" (2011), Cambridge University Press
- Culpeper, J., "Impoliteness revisited : With spec ial reference to dynamic and prosodic aspects", Journal of Pragmatics, 35, pp.1545~1579 (2003)
- Goffman, E., "Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-to-Face Behavior" (1967), Aldine Publishing Company
- Holmes, J., "Impoliteness and ethnicity: M āori and Pākehā discourse in New Zealand workplaces", Journal of Polite ness Research: Language, Behaviour, Culture, 4(2), pp.193~219 (2008)
- Lakoff, R., T., "The limits of politeness: Therapeutic and courtroom discour se", Multilingua, 8(2-3), pp.101~130 (1989)
- Locher, M., A., "Impoliteness in Language: Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice", pp.77~99 (2008), Mouton de Gruyter
- Ting-Toomey, S., "Facework competence in intercultural conf lict : an updated face-negotiation theory", International Journal of Intercult ural Relations, 22(2), pp.187~225 (1998)
- 권용재, "논증적 담화구조에서 수사의문문의 기능 연구 - 러시아 정치-외교적 담화를 중심으로 -", 수사학, (34), pp.5~31 (2019), 한국수사학회[DOI]
- 김태나, "문학 텍스트에서의 무례 및 불손에 대한 반응 연구", 순천향 인문과학논총, 31(2), pp.56~91 (2012), 인문학연구소[DOI]
- 이성범, "언어적 무례함에 대한 실험화용적 연구: 공격성 발화를 중심으로" (2015), 서강대학교출판부
- 전윤영, "청자의 무례 발화 대응 전략 연구", 언어학 연구, (60), pp.133~162 (2021), 한국중원언어학회[DOI]
- 安達太郎, "疑問文における反語解釈をめぐる覚え書き", 京都橘女子大学研究紀要, 31, pp.35~50 (2005)
- 宇佐美まゆみ, "ディスコース ポライトネス理論構想(2)-発話行為レベルの絶対的ポライトネスから談話レベルの相対的ポライトネスへ-", 言語, 31(9), pp.101~105 (2002)
- 大石初太郎, "敬語" (1986), 筑摩書房
- 大塚生子, "夫婦間会話における自己フェイス補償ストラテジー:(イン)ポライトネスの観点から", 大阪大学言語文化学, 23, pp.31~43 (2014)
- 呉泰均, "日本語聞き手待遇表現の語用論的機能:丁寧体選択におけるストラテジーの関与", 研究論集, 10, pp.133~159 (2010)
- 尾鼻靖子, "武装する敬語:非命題的アイロニー考察", 言語と文化, 23, pp.19~34 (2020)
- 菊地康人, "敬語" (1997), 講談社
- 김수경, "「プラス待遇表現のマイナス待遇化」における 発話機能と人間関係", 일어일문학연구, 92(1), pp.23~42 (2015), 한국일어일문학회[DOI]
- 久保進, "発話内行為の意味ネットワーク─言語行為論からの辞書的対話事例分析─" (2002), 晃洋書房
- 西尾純二, "マイナスの待遇表現行動：対象を低く悪く扱う表現への規制と配慮" (2015), くろしお出版
- 하정일, "関連性理論から見た敬語の過剰使用とその語用論的効果-慇懃無礼を中心に-", 일어일문학연구, 87(1), pp.233~257 (2013), 한국일어일문학회[DOI]
- 松村明, "大辞林" (2006), 物書堂