No abstract

This study draws on Relevance Theory (Sperber and Wilson, 1986/1995), Conversation Analysis (Sacks et al., 1974), and Politeness Theory (Brown and Levinson, 1987) in investigating a full range of discourse functions for hao and dui with reference to recurrent patterns, distributions, and forms of organization in a large corpus of talk. Special emphasis is placed on a comparison of hao and dui in combination with a small subset of discourse particles: in particular hao/hao le/ hao la/hao a/hao ba and dui/dui a/dui le in spoken discourse. We find that both of the markers signal special sequential relatedness in talk and carry information which is relevant in determining the boundaries of conversational exchange. However, in interaction hao is used for expressing acceptance of the other speaker’s move or act, whereas dui conveys acknowledgment of the propositional content of the utterance produced by the other speaker.

No abstract

The study reported here, building on the research methods of Conversation Analysis (Sacks et al., 1974), Politeness Theory (Brown and Levinson, 1987), and Relevance Theory (Sperber and Wilson, 1986/1995), attempts to examine the distribution of Mandarin qishi ('actually') and shishishang ('in fact') across two different discourse modes in formal speech settings: formal lectures and TV panel news discussions. The results indicate that qishi is prevalent in TV panel news discussion data, which fall into the interactional mode, whereas shishishang is more prevalent in formal speech at UNIV OF CONNECTICUT on May 30, 2015 dis.sagepub.com Downloaded from 236 Discourse Studies 13 (2) data, which fall into the transactional mode. The study shows that in interaction, qishi is addresseeoriented and signals alignment (agreement) or divergence (disagreement), whereas shishishang is message-oriented and asserts a proposition with a tone of certainty. In addition, the study suggests that although the literal meanings of qishi ('it's fact') and shishishang ('in the aspect of fact'), which are concerned with factuality, are seemingly unrelated to emotive expressivity, they offer a rhetorical strategy for expressing the speaker's attitudinal position, and can both serve to indicate the speaker's epistemic inference.

No abstract