中文空殼名詞之互動功能: 以問題是、事實上、這樣(子)和什麼意思為例

Abstract

近年來，許多學者開始將語言當作是一種社會行動，而非單單只是一個認知能力來研究。在這個前提下，語言的使用被視為是一個動態的互動過程，而非靜止的心理狀態。這樣的觀點讓研究者得以解釋許多語言與人際互動相互作用下所導致的現象。過去的文獻中指出許多語言表達的形式可以做為社會互動的工具，但卻鮮少有研究著墨於抽象名詞或空殼名詞 (Schmid 2000) 在人際互動中的功能，如對話輪進行與立場採取的影響。故本論文有兩大目標 ─ 第一，我們將研究空殼名詞或空殼名詞標記在中文對話的使用；第二，希望能夠藉由本研究，來展現語言作為社會行動的複雜性與相互關聯性。 本論文使用自然產生之口語語料，來研究四個空殼名詞標記，「問題是」、「事實上」、「這樣(子)」與「什麼意思」在中文對話中的使用。運用會話分析與互動語言學之理論，本研究將深入探討空殼名詞在不同層次的社會互動中，所具有的功能與扮演的角色。 本論文首先將呈現每一個空殼名詞標記的結構組成與分布情況。研究發現除了Schmid (2000) 所列之四大構式外，中文中仍有其他結構用來連結抽象名詞與語境中的命題訊息，名詞與命題也不需由同一位說話人產出。本研究同時呈現出不同標記由於結構或功能上的因素，而在話輪中傾向出現的位置，藉此也增進我們對空殼名詞使用的了解。其次，基於這樣的會話語料，我們更進一步分析各個標記之互動功能與其所作用之社會活動。我們認為「問題是」是用來調整對話中特定假設；「事實上」是用來標記概括性的言論；作為回應標記的「這樣(子)」，讓說話人能夠與對話的對象協商知識與活動的界線；最後藉由「什麼意思」，說話人可以對前一個說話人的發言，表達懷疑或挑戰，並促使前一個說話人對其內容進行修正。而四個標記最重要的功能在於協助說話人在對話中，對知識的處理與合作的達到上，採取一特定之立場。基於Stivers et al. (2011b)對於知識立場與互動合作概念的分類，我們主張，僅管這四個標記各自表達特定的知識狀態與肯定度，但其實都是用來讓說話人能夠聲明自己的知識權力，並同時躲避自身的知識責任。雖然這四個空殼名詞標記似乎大多表達較不合作的立場，但他們的使用事實上是為了要保存說話人的面子與協商是誰同意誰，藉此達到最後更高程度的社會合作。 本研究對於空殼名詞與語言作為社會行動的研究皆多有貢獻。就空殼名詞而言，本論文應為第一個對非歐洲語言的空殼名詞使用作出的研究，也是少數探討對話中空殼名詞使用的研究。就語言作為社會行動來說，我們區分了不同層次的社會行動，同時也討論了空殼名詞在各個層次的實現與應用。藉由本研究，我們揭露了語言與社會互動的微妙與複雜。

In the past few decades, an increasing number of researchers have studied language as social action as opposed to a pure mental capacity. The use of language, based on this premise, is treated as a dynamic interactive process instead of a fixed cognitive state. This perspective enables researchers to account for a number of phenomena in the interface of language and social interaction, such as turn-taking and stancetaking. A variety of linguistic devices have been reported to serve such social interactive ends; however, abstract nouns or shell nouns (Schmid 2000), albeit their pervasiveness and importance, are rarely investigated under this framework. The aim of the present study is thus twofold: First, we intend to investigate the use of shell nouns or shell-noun-based markers in Mandarin conversations, and second, with such an investigation, we attempt to showcase the complexity and interrelatedness of different levels of language use as social action. Using a database composed of naturally occurring Chinese conversations, we inspect the use of four shell-noun-based expressions, wentishi, shishishang, zheyang(zi) and shemeyisi, in Mandarin conversations. Adopting the framework of Conversation Analysis and Interactional Linguistics, we reveal in great detail how linguistic devices such as shell nouns function at different levels of social interaction. The present study first presents the structural and distributional patterns of each marker. We find that lexico-grammatical patterns other than those outlined in Schmid (2000) can help link shell nouns to a proposition, and the co-interpreted shell noun and shell content are not necessarily produced by the same speaker. We also advance the research of shell nouns by pinpointing the preference of each shell-noun-based expression for particular turn locations, which is, as we argue, largely shaped by its structural and functional properties. Based on the conversational data, we further put forth a new analysis for the interactional function of each marker, identifying the social act that they respectively support in interaction. We claim that while wentishi adjusts specific assumptions, shishishang marks generalizations that can strengthen one’s argument and the solidarity between interactants; the response token use of zheyang(zi) allows the recipient to negotiate the boundary of information and activities, whereas shemeyisi expresses the second speaker’s challenge against or doubt about the prior turn, prompting the prior speaker to make repair. Finally, we propose that these markers most importantly function to facilitate the conversationalists’ act of stancetaking in managing knowledge and pursuing cooperation. Adopting the taxonomy proposed by Stivers et al. (2011b) concerning the key elements in the study of knowledge exchange and cooperation in interaction, we argue that while each expression indexes a particular speaker-hearer knowledge state and certainty, they are all exploited to claim speakers’ epistemic rights and disclaim their responsibility. Although most of them seem to imply a less cooperative stance in the course of interaction, they are in fact designed to save face and negotiate over “who agrees with whom”, so as to achieve a great extent of social cooperation in the end. The present research contributes to both the study of shell nouns and our understanding of language as social action. In terms of shell nouns, the current thesis is, to our knowledge, not only the first thesis-level effort that investigates the set of nouns in a non-European language, but also one of the few studies that inspect their use in spoken interaction. With respect to language as action, we distinguish between different levels of social action and manifest the use of shell nouns at each level. By this study, we unveil the delicacy and complexity of language and social interaction.