Ritualization in evolving pragmatic functions: a case study of DUI - 政大學術集成

全文

(1)LANGUAGE AND LINGUISTICS. 3.4:645-663, 2002. :2 002-0-003-004-000025-1. Ritualization in Evolving Pragmatic Functions:. A Case Study of DU[*. Kawai Chui National Chengchi University. Rituahzation brings about hnguistic changes through routine repetition of utterances in daily use. The purpose of this study is to investigate the process of rituahzation in developing the discourse particle dui from the verb in spoken Chinese. Dui originates from a verb conveying the speaker's behefthat what has been uttered is true. The speaker can also negotiate truth with the addressee in the form of a question tag, dui-bu-dui 'true-not-true'; the addressee's habituated response is dui. Such adjacency pair of question-answer constitutes a conversational routine for rituahzation, in that the addressee commits to the truth of the other's speech spontaneously, even though the other speaker does not ask for it. The particle dui further evolves a pragmatic function of agreement, as a result of conventionahzing the conversational implicature that commitment to the truth infers agreement with the content. Another line of development concerns the speaker's own utterance. Though dui is not the main verb, it st111 maintains an assertive meaning for the speaker to claim explicitly that what has been talked about is true, or to confirm that what follows is the right information to utter, as a result of ritualizing a conversational routine: after the speaker has uttered a proposition, the addressee may ask for truth confirmation by zhende-ma 'true-QST marker; Really?' or shi-ma 'copula QST marker; Is that so?'; the speaker's response toward his or her own prior utterance is the habituated dui. As these repeated utterances are ritualized, the speaker strengthens truth spontaneously without the addressee's request. Key words: ritualization, language change, pragmatic functions. 1. Introduction As a free lexical verb, dui bears the assertive meaning that what has been uttered is right or true. In conversational excerpt (1), speaker W talks about some software. The This paper was first presented at the 7th International Symposium on Chinese Linguistics and Languages at National Chung Cheng University, 2000. I am grateful to Shuanfan Huang, Feng-fu Tsao, and Shu-chuan Tseng for their useful comments and suggestions. I also wish to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their detailed and insightful comments. None of them is responsible for the final shape of this paper..

(2) Kawai Chui. predicate dui suggests her belief that the product does cost one hundred and ninety-nine dollars. (1) . W: ... ta gen=,_ 3.SG with ...na yi ge xuexiao de jiaoshou hezuo de.\ ASSC professor cooperate PRT which one CL school -7 yi bai jiushijiu [kuai jiu aui Ja].\ ... ( 1.9)fanzheng anyway that is one hundred ninety-nine dollar EMP right PRT W: '(We) cooperated with a professor at which school (to write) it? Anyway, (it) costs one hundred aDd ninety-nine dolIars.'. At the beginning of a tum, dui can be used to commit to the literal truth of the infonnation uttered by another speaker. In (2) by using dui, H agrees to L's opinion about the relationship between writing and computer documentation, since he also believes that people who write in an ugly way cannot print out lovely documents. (2) . L:. -7 H:. ... (2.l)keshi wo juede xiezi chou but I.SG feel writing ugly oo.yin chulai <L2 document L2> ye print out document also ...n.6).\. right PRT. de ASSC bu NEG. ren 0=,_ people PRT hut hen piaoliang.\ wiII very be. pretty. L: 'But I think for people whose writing is ugly, (their) printed documents are also not pretty.' H: 'Right.'. Instead of the other participant's utterance, dui also indicates the truth of the speaker's own, as illustrated in (3). The occurrence of dui enables speaker A to confirm to the addressee that her cousins' being twins is true. (3) . A:. -7 . oowo de biaoge,_. I.SG ASSC male cousin. ooshi [shuangbaotai,_. COP twins. yeshi ... wo de biaojie I.SG ASSC female cousin also a),_. ...(l.)dui right PRT. shuangbaotai.\. twins. A: 'My male cousins are twins. My female cousins are also twins. Right.'. 646.

(3) Ritualization in Evolving Pragmatic Functions. Different from the predicate function in (1), dut in (2) and (3) is a discourse particle rather than the main verb. Its meaning is not solely assertive; it has developed additional pragmatic functions. Dui thus undergoes semantic and morphosyntactic change, and various interactional functions are evolved in the process. Despite the fact that the particle form has many other functions, this paper just focuses on the two illustrated in (2) and (3), because they both result from ritualization through routine repetition of utterances in daily use (Haiman 1994). The issues to be discussed include: What are the conversational routines that give rise to ritualization of dui? How does the process take place in the speaker-addressee negotiation of meaning? What pragmatic functions are evolved? Section 2 will analyze the process of ritualization in the development of dui. The results will be discussed in section 3, followed by concluding remarks in the last section.. 2. Ritualization of dui Ritualization of dui is comprised of two lines of development, gIvmg rise to various pragmatic functions in the speaker-addressee interaction. As 'ritual language is born from repetition of ordinary language' (Haiman 1994:23), this section examines the evolving of pragmatic functions from conversational routines in spoken Chinese.. 2.1 Assertiveness Dui starts out as a full-fledged verb. 1 Syntactically, it functions as the main predicate of the clause; semantically, it conveys the assertive meaning that 'has to do with the speaker's assessment of the truth of the proposition' (Traugott 1989:44). Its occurrence indicates that the speaker believes the information in question is correct or true, as clearly shown in example (1). In excerpt (4) below, the topic of conversation concerns lobsters. Speaker W negates the predicate dut, suggesting that the season to eat lobsters is not right.. The verbal dui can form compound verbs, such as ying-dui 'to answer' and dui-fu 'to deal with'. This is a separate line of development of dui that does not take part in the process of ritualization.. 647.

(4) Kawai Chui. Z: ... buguo ta. (4) . ~. shuo?/ but 3.SG say ... (.7)a=,_ PRT Asuan haochi ...hai bu de delicious ASSC NEG count still qingxing],_ ... [na ge situation that CL W: [jiushi women,that is l.PL bu dui.\ ..jijie] season NEG right. na=?/ that. Z: 'But she said (the lobsters) were still not counted as delicious.' W: 'That is, it was not the right season for us (to eat lobsters).'. 2.2 Assertiveness and assent Besides asserting whether the message is true or not, the speaker can use dut to form a question tag, dui-bu-dui 'right-not-right', negotiating with the addressee the literal truth of the conveyed information. 2 In (5), speaker C mentions that the boy that speaker B talks about is the one B met at primary school. The question tag enables C to negotiate such truth with the addressee. B then provides a positive reply, again, by virtue of dut. 3 The next nominal phrase guoxiao na ge nande 'the boy at primary school' further re-assures the boy's identity. (5). C:. ~ ~. B:. ~. C: B:. ..0,1 PRT ..<A ni na shi A> guoxiao,_ 2.sG that COP primary school ..dui bu dui?/ right NEG right ... Adui.\ right ... <DIM guoxiao na ge nande DIM>,_ primary school that CL male 'You are talking about the one (you met) at primary school, right?' 'Right. The boy (I met) at primary schoo1.'. Chen and He (2001) have discussed the non-literal pragmatic functions of dui-bu-dui. This question tag can also be attached to clausal fragments to function as a pause filler. It is beyond the scope ofthis paper to discuss these various functions. 3 The non-lexical replies performing the same function can be m, uh huh, or he-a. 2. 648.

(5) Ritualiz.ation in Evolving Pragmatic Functions. On the other hand, if the information is not true, dui can be negated directly in the addressee's reply. However, bu dui 'not-right' is face-threatening. The preferential response is to correct the information without using the negative form, just like what C does in (6). She only mentions the color of the tortoises (i.e., a little bit orange), which is different from the one proposed by A (i.e., completely green), without overtly denying A's inaccurate information .. A: ... (1.2)nimen na. (6). -7 -7 C:. -7. zhong%,_ 2.PL that kind quan lu de ... shi COP all green PRT ... (.9)you yidiandian.\ have a litt1e bit ... nage, PF ... (.6)juse de.\ orange PRT. dui right. bu. NEG. dui?\ right. A: 'The kind (oftortoises) you (have) are all green, right?'. c:. '(They) are a little bit. .. orange.'. In fact, negotiating the literal truth of information between the speaker and the addressee in form of the question tag dui-bu-dui is the usual linguistic behavior in Chinese conversation. In direct reply, the negation of dui is face-threatening; thus, the positive form expressing the personal commitment to the truth of the information becomes most frequently occurring. It is this positive dui that takes part in ritualization. The adjacency pair of question and answer constitutes a conversational routine for negotiation. While the tag and the simple positive response are constantly repeated in daily use, ritualization takes place on the grounds that the addressee habitually expects the tag and then replies with dui. As a result of ritualization, the addressee commits to the truth of the other's speech spontaneously, even though s/he is not asked for it. In the following excerpt (7), C merely makes a statement about a person's perfect image in the mind of the addressee B, and does not negotiate its truth by the tag. Nevertheless, it is still habitual for B to employ dui to assert that C's information is correct.. 649.

(6) Kawai Chui. (7). C:. -7'. B:. C: B:. ... ta zai 3.SG at ..xingxiang image ..dui,\ right. ni de%.. nao zhong,_ 2.SG ASSC brain in yizhi shi Afeichang wanmei de, always COP very be.perfect PRT. 'In your mind, his image is always very perfect.' 'Right.'. The morphosyntactic status of the ritualized dui in (5) and (7) is no longer a verb, but a particle at the beginning of a tum. According to the classification in Clancy et al. (1996), dui is a type of reactive token 'produced by an interlocutor who is playing a listener's role during the other interlocutor's speakership, and do not in themselves claim the floor' (1996:356). Being a short non-floor-taking lexical word, dui is thus categorized as a 'reactive expression'. But, in fact, it can also function as a 'resumptive opener'-another category in their classification, since dui can be followed by a full tum. In short, whether dui is a reactive expression or a resumptive opener by no means indicates its semantic relationship with the utterance(s) in the prior tum. Wang (1998) regards dui, among others, as an 'agreement marker', just like the sign of assent right in English (Haiman 1994). This is borne out in (2) and (7). However, the particle form does not necessarily function to agree; what B does in (5) is just to confirm that the identity of the person in question is true. In other words, the original assertive meaning is retained along with the assent function. The evolving of this pragmatic function results from conventionalizing a conversational implicature (Traugott and Konig 1991): since committing to literal truth implicates agreement with the content, dui usually, but not always, suggests assent. The semantic development of dui thus increases the speaker's informativeness concerning his or her attitude towards the conveyed information.. 2.3 Assertiveness, truth strengthening, and self-confirmation The functions of committing truth and assent mentioned in the previous section are subject to the other participant's utterance. Dui involves another line of development concerning the speaker's own utterance, rather than the other's. The place where the word appears also differs; instead of tum beginning, it typically occurs at the end of the tum. In (8), C is doubtful about a mutual friend going to Oxford. B tries to explain, but then he remembers that the friend has not told him about that. The occurrence of dui at the end of the tum assures the addressee C that what B has just uttered is true.. 650.

(7) Ritualization in Evolving Pragmatic Functions. (8). B:. C:. B:. -7. [tal qu niujin.l 3.SG go Oxford ... (.8)he.\ PRT ... ziji qu ma?/ self go QST ..bushi,\ NEG ..<A suisuibianbian A> be.easy ... (.6)ta%,\ 3.SG ... ( .9)ta shi,\ 3.SG COP ... zenme jiang,_ how say ...ta ye mei gen 3.SG also NEG with ... ta shi <DIM ruhe 3.SG COP how ... dui%,\ right. jiu keyi jinqu EMP can go to. wo I.SG neng can. jiang say jinqu go in. de ye.\ PRT PRT. shuo=,/ COMPL de DIM>,\ PRT. B: 'He went to Oxford.' C: 'Did (he) go by himself? It's by no means easy to go (to Oxford).' B: 'He... he ...how to say (this)? He also didn't tell me how he could go (to Oxford). Right.'. Despite the fact that the assertive meaning still holds, dui in (8) does not perfonn the predicate function, as it does in (1) and (4); it is a particle at the end of the tum. This line of development also results from ritualizing a conversational routine in fonn of question-answer, but the negotiation initiator is the addressee. In (9), C infonns A that a friend merely gave her a small amount of strawberry toothpaste while the friend had bought a whole box of strawberry toothpaste. The addressee A asks for truth confIrmation by uttering zhende 'true; Really?'. C's response toward her own prior utterance is, of course, the positive dui. (9) . C:. ..[ta] gei wo%- 3.SG give l.SG ..zheme yi%- so one .. Azheme xiao de caomei yagao,_ so small ASSC strawberry toothpaste. 651.

(8) Kawai Chui. ~. A:. ~. C:. ..ta mai 3.SG buy ..zhende?1 really ... dui.\ right. Ie <M:RC yi xiang MRC> ye,\ PRF one box PRT. C: 'He gave me such a ... such a small amount of strawberry toothpaste ....He had bought a box (of strawberry toothpaste).'. •. A: 'Really?' C: 'Right.'. In excerpt (10), speaker A first mentions that her father's hair is very greasy. C questions its truth with zhende rna; A's habituated reply with dui is further accompanied by partial repetition of the negotiated information-her father's greasy hair, re-assuring that what she has said in the first tum was true. (1O)~. A:. ~ ~. 652. ~. C:. ~. A:. .. yinwei wo ba,\ because 1.SG father ..<L4 masi L4>,\ also ..I\feichang youxing,\ very be.greasy ..ta% - 3.SG ..<F I\zongshi F>,_ even though ..ta jin%- 3.SG REPAIR ..jintian cai ganggang today EMP just ..guobujiu,\ a while later .. aiya,_ PRT ..you juede,_ again feel ..kanqilai you you de.\ look greasy PRT ... ?I really PRT .. dul a,\ right PRT. xi le,_ wash PRF.

(9) Ritualization in Evolving Pragmatic Functions. doushi ji ..wo ba extremely I.SG father also. -?. A: C: A:. you de,_ be. greasy PRT. 'Because my fatherCs hair) is also very greasy. He ... even washed (his hair), a while later, (it) looks greasy again.' 'Really?' 'Right. My fatherCs hair) is extremely greasy.'. he has. Besides zhende(-ma), the negotiation initiator can also use shi-rna 'copula-QST marker; Is that soT to fulfill the same function, as B does in (11). Speaker A's response with dui confirms what she has said in her own prior turn, i.e., that some fish eggs are really delicious. (II) . A:. -?. B:. -?. A:. A: B: A:. ...( 1.9)<A youde A> yu%- some fish ... yuluan,\ fish egg ..hen haochi .very be.delicious ..shi rna?! COP QST ..dui a.right PRT 'Some fish ... fish eggs are very delicious.' 'Is that so?' 'Right.'. Just like the question tag and the simple positive commitment of dui mentioned in section 2.2, it is also usual linguistic behavior for the addressee to ask for truth confirmation when what the speaker has talked about is not in the addressee's state of belief or knowledge, and the speaker's response toward his or her original utterance is always the habituated positive dui. As these repeated utterances are ritualized, the speaker confirms truth spontaneously without the addressee's request. Take (12) for instance. The subject of conversation is TV programs. By using dui, B asserts that French TV programs are what he intends to talk about. (12) . B:. .. xiang xian%- like REPAIR ..xiang xianzai nage=,_ that like now ...youxiandianshi a,_ PRT cable TV. 653.

(10) Kawai Chui. A: .. ,_ PRT B: ... dui a,_ right PRT ... chule yingwen,_ besides English -7 ... hai you "fawen._ also have French 7 ... (.9)"dui%,\ right -7 ...fawenj French B: 'Like ... like the cable TV now,' A: 'Mm.' B: 'Right, besides the English (programs), (it) also has French (programs). Right, French (programs).'. Dui in the previous examples appears at the end or near the end of the turn. In the following example (13), it rather takes place in the middle, confirming the truth of the information just conveyed, i.e., that it is impossible for a certain kind of boy to like the speaker. (13)7 -7. 7. -7. c: ..<A. wo juede "shuo% A>,_ l.SG feel COMPL ... na zhong nansheng,\ that kind boy ..bu keneng hui xihuan wo zhe yi xing=,_ 1.SG this one style NEG be. possible will like ..<A ni zhidao A>?I 2.sG know ...duj,\ right ... ranhou,\ then ... (.8)gang kaishi dou juede ta%j just beginning all feel 3.SG ..hui%,\ will .. zhuyi wo,_ notice l.SG. C: '1 thought it's impossible for that kind of boy to like my kind (of girl), you know. Right. Then, at the very beginning, (1) always thought he would notice me.'. 654.

(11) Ritualization in Evolving Pragmatic Functions. The infonnation prior to the occurrence of dui need not be a complete thought. The infonnation being confinned in the tum below (14) merely includes the preposed obj ect yingwenzuoye 'English homework'. The function of dui is to assure that 'English homework' is the right kind of infonnation that C wants to mention. (14). C:. 7 7. ...mei ge libai,\ every CL week ...(.7)zhouji,\ weekly diary ..wo yao shou=,_ 1.SG have to collect ... (.9)ranhou%,_ then ...yingwenzuoye,\ English homework ... ,\ right shou,_ ..yeshi wo yao also 1.SG have to collect. C: 'Every week, the weekly diaries, I had to collect (them). homework, right, I also had to collect (it).'. the English. Instead of committing to the truth of what has been said, dut has evolved another pragmatic function concerning the infonnation to be conveyed. In (15) dut occurs immediately after the conjunctive constituent daole 'when it comes to'. For the speaker to confinn the truth ofa conjunction is implausible. Dui rather functions to self-confinn that the following clauses about her classmates being upset before class segregation are the right infonnation to utter. C: ... (.7)guosan. 7. 7. the third year at junior high school ..<A hen haoxiao A>,\ very be.funny ...daole%,_ when it comes to ..."dui%,\ right ..kuaiyao fenban zhiqian% A>,\ soon segregate before ..women dou hen nanguo.\ 1.PL all very be. upset. shihou,\ time. 655.

(12) Kawai Chui. c: . 'During the third year in junior high school, it's funny, when it came to (the time), right, (we) would be segregated soon, we were all very upset.'. In (16) C talks about the trademarks of two kinds of Sassoon shampoo, and she is about to express a negative opinion by uttering bushi shuo 'it is not that'. But she abandons the topic and starts questioning about the kind of shampoo speaker B uses for her greasy hair. The occurrence of dui after the negative constituents bus~i ShUO, again, confirms on the part of the speaker that what follows is the right topic to discuss. (16). C:. B:. C:. -7. -7. -7 -7 -7. yeshi gen%,_ ..ta 3.S0 also with ..hongse saxuan yiyang de <L2 I\mark L2>.\ red Sassoon same ASSC trademark ... (.7)m=,/ PRT ..ye hai hao la,\ also still be.okay PRT ... ,\ like this .. busbi sbuo%,/ NEO COMPL ...(.8)dui a,\ right PRT ..zheyang,\ like this ..I\a oi dou yong sbeome%?/ use what PRT 2.S0 all ...oi toufa dousbi pian=,/ 2.S0 hair also tend ...you._ be.greasy. C: 'It also has the same trademark with the red Sassoon.' B: 'Mm.' C: '(It) is okay. It's not that ... right ... What kind (of shampoo) do you use? Your hair also tends to be greasy.'. Dui in the examples of this section is not the main verb, but a particle. Its occurrences in (8), (12), (13), and (14) confirm truth toward the speaker's own uttered information. Why does the speaker express truth explicitly while s/he is supposed to convey true information in communication, as Grice's maxim of Quality (Grice 1975) suggests? Dui has evolved the function of pragmatic strengthening which 'largely. 656.

(13) Ritualization in Evolving Pragmatic Functions. concem[s] strategic negotIatIon of speaker-addressee interaction and, in that connection, articulation of attitude' (Traugott 1989:51). What dui strengthens is the speaker's subjective belief-state about the truth of what has been asserted. On the other hand, the function of dui in (15) and (16) is different. First, it is subject to what is going to be talked about. Second, the particle dui is used by the speaker to self-confinn that what follows is the right information to say, when slhe is engaged in some kind of verbalizing difficulty, as clearly evidenced by self-initiated repairs like the abandonment ofa topic in (16). The problem in (15) can be cognitive or linguistic, in that the speaker, for whatever reason, does not remember the information to be uttered, or s/he lacks the right words to express the idea.. 3. Discussion Ritualization of dui reflects the linguistic behaviors of Chinese speakers in verbal conununication, in that it is habitual to negotiate truth between the speaker and the addressee in question-answer form. Since the negotiator can either be the speaker or the addressee, dui is comprised of two lines of development. First, when the speaker initiates a negotiation, the question tag dui-bu-dui is employed to ask the addressee whether the information just conveyed is correct or not. The direct reply is often the positive dui; the face-threatening negative reply bu dui tends to be avoided. The question tag and the positive reply together constitute a conversational routine. On the other hand, for the information that is not in the addressee's belief state, the addressee might question its truth by zhende(-ma) or shi ma. The reply concerning one's own prior utterance is always dui. This adjacency pair becomes another conversational routine in negotiating truth. As habituated behaviors constitute linguistic routines with recurrent verbal representation, ritualization takes place: dui represents the addressee's truth commitment, strengthens truth toward the speaker's own utterances, or self-confirms that the speaker's following utterances are the right information to convey, even without being asked for it. It is 'decline in the tendency to respond to stimuli that have become familiar due to repeated or persistent exposure' (Haiman 1994:7). Moreover, frequency of use is crucial in linguistic change. The positive form is ritualized because, just like the degree adverb hen 'very' taking part in morphologization (Chui 2000), dui is the frequently occurring constituent. In Tseng's (2001) study of Chinese discourse particles, she fmds that dui is one of the most frequently used words in spoken dialogues. It is also one of the ten most frequently used words at the turn-initial position.. 657.

(14) Kawai Chui. As a result of ritualization, the morphosyntactic status of dui changes into a particle. For a verb to become a particle is typical of grarrunaticalization. However, at the present stage of development, instead of semantic weakening or bleaching, the grarrunaticalized particle form still retains the originally assertive sense that is subject to the literal truth-conditional meaning: to confirm the truth of the other participant's utterance at the tum beginning, or to suggest that one's own utterance is the right information to convey. Along with the assertive meaning are varipus" pragmatic functions evolved in ritualization. The pragmatic functions of dui-'assent' and 'strengthening truth'--evidence conventionalization of conversational implicatures. 'One of the mechanisms for semantic change in grarrunaticization is the conventionalization of implicature, by which a frequently occurring inference that an addressee is licensed to make beyond the explicit meaning of an utterance becomes part of the explicit meaning' (Bybee 1994:240). In the case of dUi, the implicatures arise in the context of negotiating truth. First, for the addressee to claim that the other participant's utterance is true usually implicates the subjective attitude of agreement. On the other hand, while the speaker is supposed to abide by Grice's maxim of Quality, the explicit commitment to truth implicates the strengthening effect in conveying the information. These changes bear out Traugott's (1989, 1991) Tendency III: 'Meanings tend to become increasingly based in the speaker's subjective belief state/attitude toward the proposition' (Traugott and Konig 1991:209). The development of dui clearly reflects changes in spoken language. Ritualization arising from repetition of ordinary language gives rises to pragmatic functions from different manifestations of conversational routines in respect of question-answer, negotiation of truth between the speaker and the addressee, and conventionalization of conversational implicatures.. 4. Conclusion The present study has shown that grarrunaticalization is motivated by speaker addressee interaction (Hopper and Traugott 1993), and changes result from ritualizing the repetition of ordinary language (Haiman 1994). In other words, the linguistic development reflects the usual linguistic behavior of the speech corrununity. As semantic shift is largely motivated by language use, the discourse data in real interaction is pertinent to understanding the pragmatic motivation for linguistic change. Finally, while the ritualized dui can be subject to the other participant's utterance or to the speaker's own utterance, whether the two lines of development are separate, or whether one is developed from the other is worth considering for future study.. 658.

(15) Ritualization in Evolving Pragmatic Functions. Appendix A: Abbreviations in the interlinear glosses l.PL. l.SG 2.PL 2.SG 3.PL 3.SG ASSC BA BC BEl CL COMPARE COMPL COP DUR EMP EXP GEl INCRO NEG PF PRF PROG PRT QST REPAIR SELF SUO SUPL. first person plural first person singular second person plural second person singular third person plural third person singular associative morpheme the morpheme BA backchannel the morpheme BEl classifier compare morpheme complementizer copula verb durative aspect emphatic adverbial experiential aspect the morpheme GEl inchoactive aspect negative morpheme pause filler perfective aspect progressive aspect discourse particle question particle repair phoneme(s) reflexive morpheme the morpheme SUO superlative degree. 659.

(16) Kawai Chui. Appendix B: Transcription conventions The transcription system was proposed by Du Bois et al. (1992). Units {carriage return} {space}. intonation unit truncated intonation unit word truncated word. Speakers speaker identity/tum start speech overlap. [] Transitional continuity. final continuing appeal. ? Terminal pitch direction. fall rise level. \ /. Accent and lengthening 1\. primary accent lengthening. ...(N). long medium short latching. Pause. (0) V ocal noises (H) % @ Q!@!ty <@. inhalation glottal stop laughter @>. <Q Q> <F F> <PP PP> <MRC MRC> Specialized notations <L2 L2> <L3 L3> <L4 L4>. «. ». laugh quality quotation quality fast tempo very soft each word distinct and emphasized code switching from Mandarin to English code switching from Mandarin to Japanese code switching from Mandarin to Taiwanese transcriber's comment. Relevant expressions in examples are in boldface; the lines where the expressions in question appear are marked by the arrow sign '-.7'.. 660.

(17) Ritua1ization in Evolving Pragmatic Functions. References Bybee. Joan L. 1994. The grammaticiz.ation of zero. Perspectives on Grammaticalization, ed. by W. Pagliuca, 236-254. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Chen, Yiya, and Agnes Weiyun He. 2001. Dui bu dui as a pragmatic marker: Evidence from Chinese classroom discourse. Journal ofPragmatics 33: 1441-1465. Chui, Kawai. 2000. Morphologization of the degree adverb HEN. Language and Linguistics 1.1:45-59. Clancy, Patricia M., Sandra A. Thompson, Ryoko Suzuki, and Hongyin Tao. 1996. The conversational use of reactive tokens in English, Japanese, and Mandarin. Journal ofPragmatics 26:355-387. Ou Bois, John W. 1986. Self-evidence and ritual speech. Evidentials: The Linguistic Coding ofEpistemology, ed. by W. Chafe and J. Nichols, 313-333. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Ou Bois, John W., Stephan Schuetze-Coburn, Danae Paolino, and Susanna Cumming 1992. Discourse Transcription. Santa Barbara Papers in Linguistics, voL 4. Santa Barbara: University of California, Santa Barbara. Grice, H. PauL 1975. Logic and conversation. Syntax and Semantics, voL 3, ed. by Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan, 41-58. New York: Academic Press. Haiman, John. 1994. Ritualization and the development of language. Perspectives on. Grammaticalization, ed. by W. Pagliuca, 3-28. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.. Heine, Bernd, Ulrike Claudi, and Friederike Hennemeyer. 1991. Grammaticalization: A. Conceptual Framework. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Hopper, Paul J., and Elizabeth C. Traugott. 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pagliuca, William (ed.). 1994. Perspectives on Grammaticalization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Traugott, Elizabeth C. 1989. On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language 65.1 :31-55. Traugott, Elizabeth C., and Ekkehard Konig. 1991. The semantics-pragmatics of grammaticaliz.ation revisited. Approaches to Grammaticalization, ed. by Elizabeth C. Traugott and Bernd Heine, 189-218. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Traugott, Eliz.abeth c., and Bernd Heine (eds.). 1991. Approaches to Grammaticalization. Amsterdam: John Benjarnins. Tseng, Shu-chuan. 200 1. Highlighting utterances in Chinese spoken discourse. Paper presented at the 15th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation. Hong Kong. Wang, Yu Fang. 1998. The linguistic structures of agreement and disagreement in. 661.

(18) Kawai Chui. Mandarin conversation. Paper presented at the Joint Meeting of the 7th International Conference on Chinese and the 10th North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics. Stanford: Stanford University. ." [Received 11 October 2001; revised 14 March 2002; accepted 15 April 2002] Department of English National Chengchi University 64, Sec. 2, Chih-nan Road Taipei 116, Taiwan kawai@nccu.edu.tw. 662.

(19) ~. l111IT. M IRa 11110.

(20)