Chapter 2 Literature Review
2.4. Summary
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
i. Minimize dispraise of other [ii. Maximize praise of other]
D. MODESTY MAXIM (in expressives and assertives) i. Minimize praise of self [ii. Maximize dispraise of self]
E. AGREEMENT MAXIM (in assertives)
i. Minimize disagreement between self and other [ii. Maximize agreement between self and other]
F. SYMPATHY MAXIM (in assertives)
i. Minimize antipathy between self and other [ii. Maximize sympathy between self and other]
In these maxims, both sides of the interlocutors are concerned in performing a polite speech. Moreover, each maxim is related to the others; none of them is an independent maxim. For example, the tact maxim and the generosity maxim are a set of maxims regarding the cost-benefit relation of the interlocutors, and the approbation and modesty maxim are regarding to praise-dispraise relation. Under this postulation, the issue about the hierarchy of politeness regulations could be left aside because the application of one maxim rather than another is a competition of optimum, not grammar applicability.
2.4. Summary
In this study, Gricean maxims and Searle‘s theory of speech act are adopted as the analytic frames to examine how speech acts are conducted in political talk shows, and Leech‘s and Brown and Levinson‘s notions of politeness are the theoretical basis for explaining the distributional difference of pragmatic strategies in talk shows with opposite political inclination.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Chapter 3 Methodology
This study attempts to use quantitative evidence to prove that ideological divergence would result in pragmatic differences in speech. This chapter introduces the adopted variables of the study. Sections of this chapter are organized as below:
Section 3.1 introduces the corpus, Section 3.2 presents the transcription system, Section 3.3 illustrates the procedure of data processing, Section 3.4 displays the categorization of pragmatic functions, and Section 3.5 summarizes this chapter.
3.1. The Corpus
The data used in this study are conversations transcribed from two talk shows that are subject to social and political issues, namely DaHuanXingWen (大話新聞) and QuanMinKaiJiang (全民開講), which are famous for their opposite stances on political issues4 (Chang and Lo, 2007; 2009). This thesis examines three episodes of each talk show. In order to minimize the divergence among data and to establish a common ground for analysis, two variables are standardized in this study. First, the talk shows chosen for this study are those sharing the same topic, namely, the aftermath of typhoon Morako that brought extreme amount of rain and triggered enormous mudslides and severe flooding throughout southern Taiwan from August 7 to 8 in 2009. Second, the length of each excerpt equally lasts for 30 minutes from the beginning of the shows. In all, this thesis analyzes 6 episodes of political talk shows
4 Chang and Lo‘s research (2007) clearly represents the political inclination of the two shows:
QuanMinKaiJiang overall invites pro-KMT (Kuomintang) speakers (79.1% of all invited speakers) and generally supports KMT in speech content while DaHuanXingWen mainly invites pro-DPP (Democratic Progressive Party) speakers (59.3%) and stands for DPP on the political issues.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
(3 episodes from DaHuanXingWen, and 3 episodes from QuanMinKaiJiang), and the total length of data lasts for 180 minutes.
3.2. Data Transcription
In terms of the transcription system, this study adopts the scheme established by Du bois, Schuetze-Coburn, Cumming, and Paolino (1993). In addition, this study uses boldface and arrows ‗→‘ to indicate the specific location of speech act in the excerpts, and underlining is to mark the context of the speech act and the speech act itself.
Moreover, ‗L2‘ refers to ‗Taiwan Southern Min5,‘ a Sinitic language which has acquired an additional political value by representing the aspirations of the Taiwanese independence movement. As to solve the problem of transcribing Taiwan Southern Min in the excerpts, this study refers to the Online Dictionary of Taiwan Southern Min issued by the Ministry of Education in Taiwan.
3.3. Data Processing
The data used in this study are examined clause by clause from the pragmatic aspect. This study follows Searle‘s scheme of speech acts (1965) and analyzes every clause of the data with its literal meaning (i.e., the illocutionary purpose of the secondary speech act, abbreviated as SSA in Figure 4) and its intended meaning (i.e., the illocutionary purposes of the primary speech act, abbreviated as PSA in Figure 4).
Such differentiation forms the basis for the later categorization of direct and indirect speech act. Speech acts with identical primary and secondary acts are identified as direct speech acts; on the contrary, speech acts with different primary and secondary acts are identified as indirect speech acts. Finally, the pragmatic strategies used in the two political-talk-shows are analyzed with their statistical distribution. It is
5
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
hypothesized in this study that the ideological difference between the two shows would result in different choices of their pragmatic strategies. Figure 4 represents the procedure of data processing in this study.
Figure 4. Procedure of data processing
(PSA = primary speech act, SSA = secondary speech act)
3.4. Categorization and Subcategorization of Speech Acts
This study follows Searle‘s scheme (1965) on categorizing utterance into direct and indirect speech acts. In this section, 3.4.1 introduces the definition of direct and indirect speech act adopted in this study. And, in 3.4.2 the types of direct and indirect speech acts in the analyzed data are also demonstrated
3.4.1. Definition of Direct and Indirect Speech Acts
Speech acts are composed of speakers‘ intended goals and linguistic corresponding forms, and therefore, there are two innate meanings of each speech act, namely speaker‘s intended meaning and the literal meaning. Adopting Searle‘s differentiation, in this study, the literal meaning of an utterance refers to its secondary
Indirect Speech Act Direct Speech Act
Pragmatic strategies
• Felicity condition
• Cooperative Principles
• Politeness principles Linguistic Device
• Phonological expression
• Syntactic structure
• Semantic implicature
Utterance
PSA ≠ SSA PSA = SSA
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
speech act (SSA) and the real communicative purpose of the utterance its primary speech act (PSA). Take excerpt (6) on page 17 as an example, the primary speech act of (6) is the rejection to the proposal made by X, and the secondary speech act is making a statement that Y has to prepare for an exam. It is therefore differentiated that
―the secondary speech act is literal; the primary speech act is not literal‖ (Searle, 1965: 267). The opposition/non-opposition between these two concepts (PSA and SSA) is the criterion to identify whether the targeted sentence is a direct speech act or an indirect speech act in this study. When the literal meaning corresponds with speaker‘s intended meaning, the utterance is a direct speech act. On the contrary, if the literal meaning and speaker‘s intended meaning are different, the utterance is an indirect speech act. Figure 4 on page 27 illustrates the distinction of these two categories of speech acts graphically.
Table 3. The categorization of Direct Speech Acts emerged in this study
3.4.2. Direct Speech Act
As defined in the previous section, direct speech acts are performed when speaker‘s intended meanings are identical with sentence meanings. In the political talk shows analyzed in this study, speech acts fall into four types of functions in Searle‘s categories (1979), these identified purposes of speech acts are Assertive (to commit the speakers to truth of the expressed proposition), Expressive (to express the psychological state of the hearers), Directive (to attempt to get the hearers to do something), and Commissive (to try to do something for the hearers). Table 3 represents these four categories of speech acts with the specific illocutionary purposes.
Categories Illocutionary purposes of speech acts
Assertive informing, confirmation, correction, justification Expressive thanking, praising, sympathizing, condemnation Directive request, suggestion, inquiry, warning
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Definitions and examples of each purpose of speech act are demonstrated from 3.4.2.1 to 3.4.2.3.
3.4.2.1. Expressives
Among the data analyzed in this study, there are four illocutionary purposes falling in the category of direct expressive, including thanking, praising, sympathizing, and condemnation, are speech acts expressing speaker‘s psychological state. The linguistic forms applied in these direct expressives are listed in Table 4, and condemnation will be the focus of this study.
Table 4. Linguistic devices of Direct Expressives emerged in this study
(Shaded fieldis the focus of this study)
3.4.2.1.1. Condemnation
Condemnation is a type of expressive delivering speaker‘s unfavorable or adverse judgment on the proposed target. Excerpt (11) is a demonstration of direct condemnation.
(11)
1 M5: [我]從此我也不會再稱呼他總統 可是 弘儀我覺得今天我看到小林 村的畫面<L2 我 我真艱苦 L2>
2 Host: 嗯
→ 3 M5: 更可惡是<L2 這政府 L2>從頭到尾都在騙我們 4 Host: 嗯
5 M5: 軍聞社 ho 國防部个 單位<L2 講啊 L2> 特戰隊進去之後看到小林村 很多人在生還<L2 咱毋是閣足歡[喜个嘛對無]L2>
6 Host: [hen] hen
Illocutionary purposes Linguistic devices Condemnation Syntactic—negation
Semantic—lexical, comparison, contrast Thanking Semantic—lexical
Praising Semantic—lexical, contrast
Sympathizing Semantic—information content, lexical, performative verb
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
7 M5: 結果都在騙人耶
[大話新聞, 三立新聞台, August 13, 2009]
In Turn 3 of (11), speaker M5 not only points out that the government is lying, but also condemns the government‘s deed of lying. In example (11), the modifier, ke wu (可惡) ‗hateful,‘ literally depicts that speaker M5 resents the government because it conceals the fact that the victims in Xiaolin village (小林村) have never been rescued.
3.4.2.1.2. Thanking
The speech act of thanking is adopted when the speaker intends to show his/her gratitude to the addressees. Example (12) demonstrates such direct speech act.
(12)
→ Host: …那麼啊 <L2 我欲感謝 L2>台北市議員洪健益啊 以及很多人啦 hon <L2 當然我無法度 L2>一一唸名單 <L2 啊 in na 這个欲閣佇台北 L2> 帶三台山貓車 一台貨卡車二十位志工 去台南 啊協助 這樣
[大話新聞, 三立新聞台, August 13, 2009]
In excerpt (12), the Host expresses his gratitude to the councilor and the volunteers who have devoted themselves to the rescue work. The Taiwan Southern Min performative verb, kam sia (感謝) ‗thank,‘ literally indicates the Host‘s gratitude and directly conveys the illocutionary purpose of thanking.
3.4.2.1.3. Praising
When a speaker commits praising, his/her purpose is to express the state of approval or admiration to the expressed antecedent. Example (13) specifies this speech act.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
(13)
→
M1: 弘]儀<L2 你發動一个遐 L2> 拋磚引玉<L2 捐五十萬救你个 故鄉 今日 L2>回應 <L2 我看落足感動个 neh 今日干焦 L2>回應<L2 就攏一直來 啊L2> ba 北海 鱈魚香絲 <L2 捐一百萬 伊个 L2>員工所得一日所得
<L2 捐出來 淡水鎮个陳老太太 捐一百萬 伊个公子陳先生捐 百五萬 L2>
[大話新聞, 三立新聞台, August 13, 2009]
In excerpt (13), Speaker M1 expresses his affection to the public‘s donation for the typhoon victims. The Taiwan Southern Min modifier, tsiok kam-tong (足感動) ‗so moved,‘ indicates M1‘s positive evaluation to such an act, and that makes the utterance a praising.
3.4.2.1.4. Sympathizing
Sympathizing is a speech act happening when the speaker aims to show the homonymy of feelings existing between the speaker and the expressed target, as demonstrated in (14).
(14)
→
→
Host: <L2 啊 這馬 開始 L2> 啊這個大家 啊自力救濟 那麼 挖屍體 撿 屍塊 <L2 老實講看起來有夠悽慘 L2> 啊竟然啊現在連 冰櫃都沒有 大體 必須要放在垃圾桶裡面 <L2 ho 聽落實在是真心酸 L2>來我們 來看VCR
[大話新聞, 三立新聞台, August 13, 2009]
The Host reveals his compassion for the victims by using Taiwan Southern Min adjectival complements, tshi tsham (悽慘) ‗miserable‘ and sim sng (心酸) ‗grieved,‘
in linguistic expression. These expressions literally reveal the Host‘s sympathy toward the victims‘ misery.
‧
falling in the category of direct assertive, include informing, confirmation, correction, and justification. Linguistic features of these direct assertives are listed in Table 5.Table 5. Linguistic devices of Direct Assertives emerged in this study
3.4.2.2.1. Informing
In political talk shows, informing is a common speech act because speakers often have to introduce some background information of the intended topic, such as people, events, locations, or time. In the speech act of informing, speakers aim to provide adequate and true information to hearers. As mentioned in Grice (1975), no provided information should be more informative than necessary and also no provided information should lack evidence. The following excerpt taken from the talk shows provides a typical example of direct informing.
(15)
Illocutionary purposes Linguistic devices Informing
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
→ 7 M5: 他說 <L2in 遐有人去予埋去啊 L2>6 8 Host: <L2 是 L2>
[大話新聞, 三立新聞台, August 13, 2009]
From the end of Turn 1 to Turn 7, speaker M5 reports a text message received from the damaged area. In M5‘s report, he tells the audience three pieces of information: first, the area calling for help (Turn 3); second, the information source (Turn 5); third, the emergency situation (Turn 7). As represented in (15), speaker M5 gives sufficient information about the people, the location, and the event of an urgent need. In addition, speaker M5 also mentions the source of the information, a text message from others, which shows that his information is with adequate evidence. In all, the sufficient and true information qualifies M5‘s utterance as the speech act into informing.
3.4.2.2.2. Confirmation
When making the speech act of confirmation, speakers check the truth of the expressed proposition to assure their own expressibility and the hearer‘s accessibility to the given information. Excerpt (16) demonstrates such speech act.
(16)
1 Host: …那我們現在給大家看 今天啊 台北市議員洪健益啊 啊 這個 帶 了 志工 十三位志工 六噸還有 一頓 一輛 六頓的卡車去屏東啊 南州教會 去配合長老教會去救援 那麼 他從 屏東啊 林邊鄉 林邊 鄉<L2 就無 L2> 土石流嘛
2 ?: hen hen
→ 3 Host: o [kay]
[大話新聞, 三立新聞台, August 13, 2009]
6 In the transcription of this study, L2 refers to Taiwan Southern Min.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
In the beginning of the excerpt, the Host reports the rescue action launched by a councilor. Information of the rescue action includes the number of devoted volunteers, the amount of invested resources, and the path that volunteers took to the damaged area. However, the last piece of information about the path is vague: it is widely acknowledged that Pingtung County (屏東縣) is one of the damaged areas in this disaster; yet, in the reported rescue action, it serves as the bypath to the destination.
Such confusing information drives the Host‘s speech act of clarification and confirmation.
Firstly, at the end of Turn 1, the Host clarifies that Linbian Town (林邊鄉), although locating in Pingtung County, is not affected by the landslide and, therefore, it is not part of the damaged area. Further, in Turn 3, the Host utters ‗okay‘ with a raising intonation to confirm whether his hearers are clear with the clarified information or not. In semantic aspect, the utterance ‗okay‘ focuses on the addressee‘s satisfaction or acceptability toward the antecedent proposition. As to the phonological aspect, the rising intonation of ‗okay‘ indicates that the utterance is a question to the hearer. Overall, in Turn 3, the Host asks for confirmation on whether the provided information (the clarification) is satisfactory/acceptable for the hearers to comprehend both linguistically and pragmatically.
3.4.2.2.3. Correction
Correction is a speech act committed to eliminate the inaccuracy of the expressed proposition, as represented in (17).
(17)
1 2
M4: …一萬人現在還困在山上什麼[孤]島裡面 Host: [嗯]
3 M4: 如果今天 疏疏散多少人 4 Host: <L2 是 L2>
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
5 M4: 兩三百人 [這]
→ 6 Host: [七]到八 他說救出八百多人
7 M4: 救出八百多人那代表這一萬多人如果用八百的速度要 多久啊
[大話新聞, 三立新聞台, August 13, 2009]
Speaker M4 in Turn 5 reports the number of victims who are rescued in that day—two to three hundred people. The number is later amended by the Host with the correct number—more than eight hundred people—in Turn 6. Because the number is given by the Host in the conversation prior to the excerpt, the Host is reminding M4 of the correct number. It is shown that when making the speech act of correction, the speaker concerns the accuracy of the given proposition.
3.4.2.2.4. Justification
Justification is a speech act by which speakers give explanations for something or for doing something, as demonstrated in (18).
(18)
1 Host: [是] 好的 所以鄉鄉長還有什麼 代表村民有話要說的嗎
2 M2: 對 據實的說 啊因為我們這個天然災害啦 ho 啊這重大天然災害的 死亡的這個失蹤人口的認定是 一年嘛 ho
3 Host: 嗯
→ 4 M2: 我們希望政府能夠從 從寬認定 是因為這個是 [緊]急狀況嘛
[2100 全民開講, TVBS, August 13, 2009]
In the beginning of Turn 4, speaker M2 requests the government to leniently grant the eligibility of the victims‘ subvention. Afterwards, speaker M2 justifies his appeal by explaining that the request is based on the urgent situation right now. The conjunction, yin wei 因為 ‗because,‘ syntactically and semantically indicates that the following utterance is an explanation for speaker M2‘s appeal. And by the
‧
worthwhile to spend effort on it.3.4.2.3. Directives
Among the analyzed data, there are four purposes of speech acts which conform to the category of direct directives, including request, suggestion, inquiry, and warning. The linguistic forms applied in these direct directives are listed in Table 6.
Table 6. Linguistic devices of Direct Directives emerged in this study
3.4.2.3.1. Request
Request is a speech act expressing a speaker‘s intention to make hearers do something for him/her7, as illustrated in excerpt (19).
(19)
7 It should be noted that if speakers specifically ask for pieces of information, the illocutionary act is Illocutionary purposes Linguistic devices
Request Syntactic—imperative
Semantic—performative verb, lexical
Suggestion Syntactic—modal, imperative, subjunctive mood Semantic—performative verb
Inquiry Syntactic—A-not-A
Warning Semantic—condition, consequence
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
10 Host: 嗯
→ 11 M5: <L2 麻煩 ho L2> 看救難單位趕快跟他聯絡趕快把物資 統統都送進去
[大話新聞, 三立新聞台, August 13, 2009]
In (19), speaker M5 begins with stating the status quo of victims after typhoon Morakot. In the end of his report (Turn 11), he asks the rescue teams to help these victims. The politeness marker, ma fan (麻煩) ‗to trouble,‘ literally points out the
In (19), speaker M5 begins with stating the status quo of victims after typhoon Morakot. In the end of his report (Turn 11), he asks the rescue teams to help these victims. The politeness marker, ma fan (麻煩) ‗to trouble,‘ literally points out the