Cultural Values, Korean Requests, and Institutional Discourse
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Brown and Levinson (1987) acknowledge the possibility ofdifferent cultural weight given to the parameters of social distance,status and degree of imposition and difference in politeness styles. Subsequent studies on politeness research have followed Brown andLevinson’s politeness formula. The postmodern theorists’ (Watts &Locher) approaches has made great contributions to the functionalaspects of politeness studies since they regard politeness forms asflexible, negotiable and functional in local discourse contexts. Especially, Locher (2004) claims that “status is a complex, negotiablevariable and power is regarded as relational, dynamic and contestable.”Locher’s claim that what is appropriate and normal is not static, but adynamic and changeable entity that is dependent heavily on the‘speech event' at hand, is a revolutionary view that other researchershave not made. Nevertheless, her pragmatic approach to politeness stillneeds to acknowledge that the interactional nature of politeness focuseson variability derived from cultural values. The findings of this study extend far beyond the previous politenessresearch. First, Korean relational work requires Confucian culturalknowledge and is a crucial element in the construction of institutionalidentity. Second, Korean politeness should be understood from a culturespecificframework by using natural language data since Koreanspeakers employ culturally shared knowledge in order to better negotiatetheir discursive stance on an interactional level.
Abstract
Brown and Levinson (1987) acknowledge the possibility ofdifferent cultural weight given to the parameters of social distance,status and degree of imposition and difference in politeness styles. Subsequent studies on politeness research have followed Brown andLevinson’s politeness formula. The postmodern theorists’ (Watts &Locher) approaches has made great contributions to the functionalaspects of politeness studies since they regard politeness forms asflexible, negotiable and functional in local discourse contexts. Especially, Locher (2004) claims that “status is a complex, negotiablevariable and power is regarded as relational, dynamic and contestable.”Locher’s claim that what is appropriate and normal is not static, but adynamic and changeable entity that is dependent heavily on the‘speech event' at hand, is a revolutionary view that other researchershave not made. Nevertheless, her pragmatic approach to politeness stillneeds to acknowledge that the interactional nature of politeness focuseson variability derived from cultural values. The findings of this study extend far beyond the previous politenessresearch. First, Korean relational work requires Confucian culturalknowledge and is a crucial element in the construction of institutionalidentity. Second, Korean politeness should be understood from a culturespecificframework by using natural language data since Koreanspeakers employ culturally shared knowledge in order to better negotiatetheir discursive stance on an interactional level.
참고문헌 (29)
- 김주식, "의미론의 본질" (2013), 한국문화사
- Arundale, R. B, "Face as Relational and Interactional: a Communication Frameworkfor Research on Face, Face work, and Politeness", Journal of Politeness Research, 2(2), pp.193~216 (2006)
- Bourdieu, P., "Language and Symbolic Power" (1991), Polity Press
- Brow Brown, P, "Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage" (1987), Cambridge University Press
- Cameron, D., "Researching Language: Issues of Power and Method" (1992), Routledge
- Culpeper, J, "Towards an Anatomy of Impoliteness", Journal of Pragmatics, 25, pp.349~367 (1996)
- Eelen, G., "A Critique of Politeness Theories" (2001), St. Jerome Publishing
- Fukushima, S., "Requests and Culture: Politeness in British English and Japanese" (2000), Peter Lang
- Haugh, M, "The Discursive Challenge to Politeness Research: An Interactional Alternative", Journal of Politeness Research, 3(1), pp.295~317 (2007)
- Holmes, J., "Power and Politeness in the Workplace" (2003), Pearson Education Ltd
- Hong, J-O., "A Discourse Approach to Korean Politeness: Towards a Culturespecific Confucian Framework", PhD., pp.2009
- Hutchby, I, "Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Application" (1998), Polity Press Black Publishers Ltd
- Ide, S, "Formal Forms and Discernment: Two Neglected Aspects of Linguistic Politeness", Multilingua, 8(2), pp.223~248 (1989)
- Kang, A., "Talk, Interaction, and Cultural Persistence: Constituting Korean American Discourse in a Meeting Context", Ph.D., pp.2000
- Lakoff, R, "The Logic of Politeness: or, Minding Your p’s and q’s", Papers from the Ninth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, 8, pp.292~305 (1973)
- Locher, M., "Power and Politeness in Action: Disagreements in Oral Communication" (2004), Mouton de Gruyter
- Locher, M., "Politeness Theory and Relational Work", Journal of Politeness Research, 1(1), pp.9~33 (2005)
- Matsumoto, Y, "Re-examination of the Universality of Face: Politeness in Japanese", Journal of Pragmatics, 12(4), pp.403~426 (1988)
- Mills, S., "Gender and Politeness" (2003), Cambridge University Press
- Milroy, L., "Observing and Analyzing Natural Language" (1987), Blackwell
- Pizziconi, B, "Re-examination, Face and the Japanese Language", Journal ofPragmatics, 35, pp.1471~1506 (2003)
- Schegloff, E. A., "Opening up Closings", Semiotica, 8, pp.289~327 (1973)
- Schegloff, E. A., "Repair After Turn: the Last Structurally Provided Defence of Intersubjectivity in Conversation", The American Journal of Sociology, 97(5), pp.1295~1345 (1992)
- ten Have, P., "Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide" (1999), Sage Publications
- Terkourafi, M, "Beyond the Micro-level in Politeness Research", Journal of Politeness Research: Language, Behaviour, Culture, 1(2), pp.237~262 (2005)
- Thornborrow, J., "Power Talk: Language and Interaction in Institutional Discourse" (2002), Longman (Pearson Education)
- Watts, R. J., "Linguistic Politeness and Politic Verbal Behavior: Reconsidering Claims for Universality", pp.43~69 (1992), Mouton de Gruyter
- Watts, R. J., "Politeness" (2003), Cambridge University Press
- Wierzbicka, A., "The Theory of Cultural Scripts as a Tool of Cross-cultural Communication", Korean Linguistic Conference, 18, pp.191~218 (2003), Korean Linguistics