「-ていただく」의 불손(Impoliteness)실현-체면위협 발화행위와 불손의 실현요소를 중심으로-
Impoliteness Realization of “-teitadaku” -Focus on Face-threatening Speech Acts and the Realization Factors of Impoliteness-
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This study paid attention to the cases where “-teitadaku” conveys a connotation of impoliteness and analyzed the patterns of impoliteness realization of “-teitadaku” focusing on face-threatening speech acts. Accordingly, this study classified face-threatening acts into expression of disadvantage, self-revelation expression, expression of relative demeanor, expression of will, and expression of negative evaluation, according to their respective patterns, and analyzed which speech act in each pattern induces “-teitadaku” to imply impoliteness. This study also reviewed what factor attaches the connotation of impoliteness to “-teitadaku”. As a result, the current study discovered that ① linguistic factors in the sentence that embedded it and the relationships between “-teitadaku” and the speeches before and after it, or these two in combination presented the phrase of “-teitadaku” as a face-threatening speech act, or ② the occurrences of face-threatening acts in the preceding and following contexts added the connotation of impoliteness to “-teitadaku”. In addition, the realization of impoliteness took on a complicated pattern as both ① and ② simultaneously occurred, in the case of face-threatening acts with multiple patterns.
Abstract
This study paid attention to the cases where “-teitadaku” conveys a connotation of impoliteness and analyzed the patterns of impoliteness realization of “-teitadaku” focusing on face-threatening speech acts. Accordingly, this study classified face-threatening acts into expression of disadvantage, self-revelation expression, expression of relative demeanor, expression of will, and expression of negative evaluation, according to their respective patterns, and analyzed which speech act in each pattern induces “-teitadaku” to imply impoliteness. This study also reviewed what factor attaches the connotation of impoliteness to “-teitadaku”. As a result, the current study discovered that ① linguistic factors in the sentence that embedded it and the relationships between “-teitadaku” and the speeches before and after it, or these two in combination presented the phrase of “-teitadaku” as a face-threatening speech act, or ② the occurrences of face-threatening acts in the preceding and following contexts added the connotation of impoliteness to “-teitadaku”. In addition, the realization of impoliteness took on a complicated pattern as both ① and ② simultaneously occurred, in the case of face-threatening acts with multiple patterns.
참고문헌 (37)
- 권용재, "논증적 담화구조에서 수사의문문의 기능 연구 - 러시아 정치-외교적 담화를 중심으로 -", 수사학, (34), pp.5~31 (2019), 한국수사학회[DOI]
- 김수경, "「テクレルのマイナス待遇化」に関する一考察 -非恩恵表現を中心に-", 일어일문학연구, 105(1), pp.23~43 (2018), 한국일어일문학회[DOI]
- 임시은, "비난의 표현방식 –한일 화자의 비교–", 일본연구, (65), pp.351~373 (2015), 일본연구소[DOI]
- Bousfield, D., "Impoliteness in Interaction" (2008), John Benjamims
- Bousfield, D., "Impoliteness in Language: Studies on i ts interplay with Power in Theory and Practice" (2008), Mouton de Gruyter
- Brown, P., "Politeness: Some universals in language u sage" (1987), Cambridge University Press
- Culpeper, J., "Towards an anatomy of impoliteness", Journal of Pragmatics, 25, pp.349~367 (1996)
- Culpeper, J., "Impoliteness revisited : With special reference to dynamic and prosodic aspects", Journal of Pragmatics, 35, pp.1545~1579 (2003)
- Culpeper, J., "Impoliteness and entertainment in the television quix 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
- Goffman, E., "Interaction ritual : Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior" (1967), Aldine Publishing
- ウォンサミン スリーラット, "不満表明とそれに対する応答に関する研究:日本語母語話者とタイ語母語話者を比較して", 言語文化と日本語教育, 31, pp.11~20 (2016)
- 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.100~105 (2002)
- 内海 彰, "暗黙的提示理論に基づく皮肉理解の認知モデリングへのベイズアプローチ", 人工知能学会全国大会論文集, 34, pp.1~4 (2020)
- 尾鼻 靖子, "授受表現「クレル」を使った皮肉‧非難表現について:「クレル」の 恩恵性を再考する", 言語と文化, 20, pp.1~15 (2017)
- 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)
- 加藤 重広, "発話的な効力と発話内的な効力―日本語の疑問形式を出発点に, 日本語語用論フォーラム1", pp.27~56 (2015), ひつじ書房
- 川口 義一, "「ナラ表現」の「文脈化」と「教材化」", 早稲田大学日本語研究教育センター紀要, 13, pp.27~49 (2000)
- 岸野 麻衣, "授業進行から外れた子どもの発話への教師の対応─小学校2年生の算数と国語の一斉授業における教室談話の分析─", 教育心理学研究, 53(1), pp.86~97 (2005)
- 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
- 熊井 浩子, "行為要求表現について一Vテ モラッテイイカを中心に―", 静岡大学国際交流センター紀要, 6, pp.1~19 (2012)
- 三枝 令子, "終助詞「じゃない」の意味と用法", 言語文化, 41, pp.19~33 (2004)
- 滝浦 真人, "ポライトネス入門" (2008), 研究社
- 中田 一志, "終助詞「よね」の機能─直接形を中心に─", 日本語‧日本文化研究, 27, pp.1~15 (2017)
- 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
- 日本語記述文法研究会, "現代日本語文法〈4〉第8部・モダリティ" (2003), くろしお出版
- 河 正一, "インポライトネスにおけるフェイス侵害行為の考察", 地域政策研究, 17(1), pp.93~116 (2014)
- 原田 登美, "日本語会話における<授受表現>の使用実態とポライトネス‧ストラテジー:「日本語会話データベース(上村コーパス)」に見る", 言語と文化, 11, pp.117~138 (2007)
- 肥合 智史, "皮肉検出のための皮肉の対象の推定", 信学技報, 118(210), pp.7~11 (2018)
- 堀口純子, "『~テクレル』『~テモラウ』の互換性とムード的意味", 日本語学, 6(4), pp.59~72 (1987)
- 牧原 功, "不満表明・改善要求における配慮行動", 群馬大学留学生センター論集, 7, pp.51~60 (2008)
- ムニンタラウォン シリワン, "「∼てもらう」表現とタイ語における強制性", 日本語‧日本文化, 34, pp.67~87 (2008)
- 山本 裕子, "授受補助動詞の対人的機能について", 名古屋女子大学紀要人文‧社会編, 49, pp.269~283 (2003)
- 徐璐, "日本語の敬語使用とポライトネス", 文明21, 33, pp.93~102 (2014)
- "新明解国語辞典" (2012), 三省堂
- "大辞林" (2006), 物書堂
- "デジタル大辞泉" (2020)[URL]