본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

암시적 간접 화행의 요인에 대한 고찰

On the factors of off-record indirect speech acts

조용준
한말연구학회|2017.09|한말연구 (Korean Language Research)|제45호|pp. 185-226|DOI 10.16876/klrc.2017..45.185

0

조회

0

다운로드

2

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

(im)politeness암시적 간접 화행최소노력의 원리(비)공손성전략적 화자다면적 접근off-record indirect speechprinciple of least effortstrategic speakermulti-component theory

초록

This paper aims to present a detailed, analytical review of five prominent theory for various factors of off-record indirect speech acts: Horn’s (1984) R-implicature-based account, Levinson’s (1983) conversation analytic ellision theory, Brown & Levinson’s (1987) Politeness Theory, Pinker and his colleagues’ (Pinker 2007; Pinker et al. 2008; Lee & Pinker 2010) strategic speaker theory, and Terkourafi and her colleagues’ (Terkorafi 2011a; 2011b; 2013; Soltys et al. 2014) multi-component theory. We begin by introducing conflicting theories on general speech acts: speech act theory and conversation analysis approach. We then discuss the scope and limitations for each of the five theories. We conclude the paper with our proposal that the multi-component theory, with some modification, is on the right track. Their original data, concerned with factors of intimacy and immediacy, can be subsumed under Horn’s (1984) economy-based account. However, their eclectic view provides an exhaustive and empirically supported approach to off-record indirectness.

Abstract

This paper aims to present a detailed, analytical review of five prominent theory for various factors of off-record indirect speech acts: Horn’s (1984) R-implicature-based account, Levinson’s (1983) conversation analytic ellision theory, Brown & Levinson’s (1987) Politeness Theory, Pinker and his colleagues’ (Pinker 2007; Pinker et al. 2008; Lee & Pinker 2010) strategic speaker theory, and Terkourafi and her colleagues’ (Terkorafi 2011a; 2011b; 2013; Soltys et al. 2014) multi-component theory. We begin by introducing conflicting theories on general speech acts: speech act theory and conversation analysis approach. We then discuss the scope and limitations for each of the five theories. We conclude the paper with our proposal that the multi-component theory, with some modification, is on the right track. Their original data, concerned with factors of intimacy and immediacy, can be subsumed under Horn’s (1984) economy-based account. However, their eclectic view provides an exhaustive and empirically supported approach to off-record indirectness.

참고문헌 (77)

  1. 김태자, "발화 분석의 화행의미론적 연구" (1987), 탑출판사
  2. 김태자, "간접 화행과 대화적 함축", 국어학, 18, pp.131~152 (1989), 국어학회
  3. 박재연, "양태와 관습적 간접 화행의 환유적 연계- 요청 화행을 중심으로 -", 國語學, (73), pp.69~108 (2015), 국어학회[DOI]
  4. 이성범, "소통의 화용론–커뮤니케이션에 대한 화용적 접근" (2015), 한국문화사
  5. 이성은, "간접화행 이해의 메커니즘에 대하여", 석사, 독어학, pp.2003
  6. 이준희, "국어의 간접 화행에 관한 연구", 박사, 국어국문학, pp.1999
  7. 이준희, "명령문의 간접 화행", 한국어의미학, 8, pp.279~290 (2001)
  8. 이필영, "간접화행 해석의 조건과 방향", 텍스트언어학, 15, pp.313~339 (2003), 한국텍스트언어학회
  9. 장경희, "주시경학보 1", pp.130~152 (1988), 탑출판사
  10. 정종수, "간접화행 판단의 제문제", 한국언어문화, (28), pp.47~68 (2005), 한국언어문화학회
  11. Aijmer, K, "Conversational routines in English: Convention and creativity" (1996), Longman
  12. Atkinson, J. M, "Order in court" (1979), Macmillan
  13. Austin, J. L, "How to do things with words" (1962), Oxford University Press
  14. Blum-Kulka, S, "Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns (CCSARP)", Applied Linguistics, 5(3), pp.196~213 (1985)
  15. Blum-Kulka, S, "Indirectness and politeness in requests: Same or different", Journal of Pragmatics, 11, pp.131~146 (1987)
  16. Blum-Kulka, S, "Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies" (1989), Ablex
  17. Brown, P, "Politeness: Some universals in language usage" (1987), Cambridge University Press
  18. Chakroff, A, "An Indecent Proposal:The Dual Functions of Indirect Speech", Cognitive Science, 39, pp.199~211 (2015)
  19. Clark, H. H, "Understanding What Is Meant from What Is Said: A Study in Conversationally Conveyed Requests", Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior, 14, pp.56~72 (1975)
  20. Clark, H. H, "Using language" (1996), Cambridge University Press
  21. Culpeper, J, "Impoliteness: Using language to cause offence" (2011), Cambridge University Press
  22. Egorova N, "Early and parallel processing of pragmatic and semantic information in speech acts: neurophysiological evidence", Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, pp.1~13 (2013)
  23. Fiske, A. P, "The four elementary forms of sociality: Framework for a unified theory of social relations", Psychological Review, 99, pp.689~723 (1992)
  24. Friederici A. D, "Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing", Trends in cognitive science, 6(2), pp.78~84 (2002)
  25. Garrett, M, "Language production vol. 1" (1980), Academic Press
  26. Gibbs, R. W, "Do people always process the literal meanings of indirect requests", Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, pp.524~533 (1983)
  27. Goffman, E, "Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior" (1967), Anchor Books
  28. Golato, A, "Studying compliment responses: a comparison of DCTs and recordings of naturally occurring talk", Applied Linguistics, 24(1), pp.90~121 (2003)
  29. Gordon, D, "Syntax and Semantics, Vol 3: Speech Acts", pp.1975~ (1975), Academic Press
  30. Grice, H. P, "Syntax and semantics Vol. 3: Speech act", pp.41~58 (1975), Academic Press
  31. Holtgraves, T. M, "Communication in context: Effects of speaker status on the comprehension of indirect requests", Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory and Cognition, 20, pp.1205~1218 (1994)
  32. Holtgraves, T. M, "Interpreting indirect replies", Cognitive Psychology, 37, pp.1~27 (1998)
  33. Holtgraves, T. M, "Social psychology, cognitive psychology, and linguistic politeness", Journal of politeness research, 1(1), pp.73~93 (2005)
  34. Holtgraves, T, "Politeness as universal : Cross-cultural perceptions of request strategies and inferences based on their use", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, pp.719~729 (1990)
  35. Horn, L. R, "Meaning, form and use in context: Linguistic applications, Proceedings of GURT ’84", pp.11~42 (1984), Georgetown University Press
  36. Horn, L. R, "Handbook of pragmatics", pp.3~28 (2004), Blackwell
  37. Lachenicht, L. G, "Aggravating language a study of abusive and insulting language", Paper in Linguistics, 13(4), pp.607~687 (1980)
  38. Lakoff, R. T, "The logic of politeness; or, minding your Ps and Qs", Papers from the Ninth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, pp.292~305 (1973)
  39. Lee, J. J, "Rationales for indirect speech: The theory of the strategic speaker", Psychological Review, 117(3), pp.785~807 (2010)
  40. Lee, J. J, "Rationales for indirect speech: The theory of the strategic speaker", Psychological Review, 117(3), pp.785~ (2010)
  41. Leech, G, "Principles of pragmatics" (1983), Longman
  42. Leech, G, "The pragmatics of politeness" (2015), Oxford University Press
  43. Levelt, W. J. M, "Speaking: From intention to articulation" (1989), MIT Press
  44. Levinson, S. C, "The precision of turn-taking and its implications for processing models of language", Frontiers in Psychology (2015)
  45. Levinson, S. C, "Some Pre-Observations on the Modeling of Dialog", Discourse Processes, 4, pp.93~116 (1981)
  46. Levinson, S. C, "Pragmatics" (1983), Cambridge University Press
  47. Levinson, S. C, "The Handbook of Conversation Analysis", pp.103~130 (2013), Wiley-Blackwell
  48. Levinson, S. C, "The Oxford handbook of pragmatics", pp.199~216 (2017), Oxford University Press
  49. Marslen-Wilson, W. D, "The temporal structure of spoken language understanding", Cognition, 8, pp.1~71 (1980)
  50. Marslen-Wilson, W, "Against modularity" (1975)
  51. Martinet, A, "A functional view of language" (1962), Clarendon Press
  52. Pickering, M. J, "Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue", Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, pp.169~226 (2004)
  53. Pinker, S, "The evolutionary social psychology of off-record indirect speech acts", Intercultural Pragmatics, 4(4), pp.437~461 (2007)
  54. Pinker, S, "Indirect speech, politeness, deniability, and relationship negotiation:Comment on Marina Terkourafi’s “The Puzzle of Indirect Speech", Journal of Pragmatics, 43, pp.2866~2868 (2011)
  55. Pinker, S, "The logic of indirect speech", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(3), pp.833~838 (2008)
  56. Pinker, S, "The logic of indirect speech", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(3), pp.833~838 (2008)
  57. Pulvermüller, F, "Understanding in an instant:Neurophysiological evidence for mechanistic language circuits in the brain", Brain and Language, 110(2), pp.81~94 (2009)
  58. Schegloff, E.A, "Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis I" (2007), CUP
  59. Schelling, T. C, "The strategy of conflict" (1960), Harvard University Press
  60. Searle, J. R, "Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language" (1969), Cambridge University Press
  61. Searle, J. R, "Speech Acts", pp.59~82 (1975), Academic Press
  62. Searle, J. R, "Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts" (1979), Cambridge University Press
  63. Shegloff, E. A, "Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis" (2007), Cambridge University Press
  64. Shtyrov Y, "Automaticity and attentional control in spoken language processing:neurophysiological evidence", The mental lexicon, 5, pp.255~276 (2010)
  65. Soltys, J, "Disentangling politeness theory and the strategic speaker approach", Intercultural Pragmatics, 11(1), pp.31~56 (2014)
  66. Soltys, "Disentangling Politeness Theory and the Strategic Speaker approach: Theoretical considerations and empirical predictions", Intercultural Pragmatics, 11(1), pp.31~56 (2014)
  67. Stefanowitsch, A, "Metonymy and pragmatic inferencing", pp.105~126 (2003), John Benjamins
  68. Stivers, T, "Universals and cultural variation in turn-taking in conversation", PNAS, 106, pp.10587~10592 (2009)
  69. Tanaka, H, "The particle ne as a turn-management device in Japanese conversation", Journal of pragmatics, 32, pp.1135~1176 (2000)
  70. Terkourafi, M, "The puzzle of indirect speech", Journal of Pragmatics, 43, pp.2861~2865 (2011)
  71. Terkourafi, M, "The puzzle of indirect speech", Journal of Pragmatics, 43, pp.2861~2865 (2011)
  72. Terkourafi, M, "Why direct speech is not a natural default: Rejoinder to Steven Pinker’s “Indirect speech, politeness, deniability, and relationship negotiation", Journal of Pragmatics, 43, pp.2869~2871 (2011)
  73. Terkourafi, M, "Why direct speech is not a natural default: Rejoinder to Steven Pinker’s “Indirect speech, politeness, deniability, and relationship negotiation", Journal of Pragmatics, 43, pp.2869~2871 (2011)
  74. Terkourafi, M, "Re-assessing the Speech Act Schema: Twenty-first century reflections", International Review of Pragmatics, 5(2), pp.197~216 (2013)
  75. Terkourafi, M, "Conventionalization: A new agenda for im", politeness research, 2015, pp.86, 11~18
  76. Wolfson, N, "The Bulge: A Theory of Speech Behavior and Social Distance", Penn Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 2(1), pp.55~83 (1990)
  77. Zipf, G. K, "Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort" (1949), Addison-Wesley

관련 논문AI추천

사회적 친밀감 조성/증대를 위한 담화전략으로서의 아이러니 사용과 그 원리, 그리고 적합성김대영대한영어영문학회 · 영어영문학연구2019 · 제45권 제3호간접화행 해석의 조건과 방향이필영한국텍스트언어학회 · 텍스트언어학2003 · 제15권 화용론적 관점에서 메아리 발화의 명시의미 분석국지연담화·인지언어학회 · 담화와 인지2009 · 제16권 제3호한국어 요청 화행의 언어 유형론적 분석 시론(試論)박소영, 윤창숙언어과학회 · 언어과학연구2022 · 제103호응대화행의 간접화행에 관한 연구정종수한국현대언어학회 · 언어연구2014 · 제29권 제4호생략적 발화의 화용적 기능이성범, 홍승진담화·인지언어학회 · 담화와 인지2009 · 제16권 제1호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (8건)

부사 ‘여간’에 대한 연구김건희pp. 5-35동사에서 파생한 의태어 연구박동근pp. 37-65원리 중심의 국어 규범 교육 방안 모색양세희pp. 67-93『조양반셔(造洋飯書)』 연구(1) - 표기와 어휘의 특징을 중심으로 -이현희pp. 95-126한국어 담화표지 연구의 현황과 과제전영옥pp. 127-160
원문 보기