中文言語不禮貌會話分析：以台灣電視劇為例

Abstract

本論文觀察不禮貌現象出現頻率較高的戲劇語言，利用會話分析概念處理中文日常會話中的語言行為，根據Culpeper(2011)對不禮貌的定義並仿其不禮貌策略建立分類架構，並以人際關係管理理論(Spencer-Oatey, 2008)中的「面子」與「社交權利義務」兩要素取代修正，檢驗理論適用性的同時也希望對不禮貌研究多元性有所貢獻。 「面子」為個人在互動中希望受他人肯定的正面特質，可從個人特質、關係角色、社會群體三層次來解讀，其中關係角色層次本論文再詳細定為以社會角色為標準、與重要他人共用、關係運作協商三面向。語料中出現的面子攻擊輸出策略為：明確批評、蘊含式批評、陳述譴責、負面預測、訓誡指導、諷刺、駁斥、拒絕、輕視嘲笑等。另一判定不禮貌的要素「社交權利義務」，指個人對於與他人互動的型態與自身權益的期待，細分為公平權與聯結權。公平權之下，妨礙自由的行為包含積極的命令要求與消極的威脅；妨礙利益的有直接的剝奪輕忽與間接的自利行為；同時妨礙自由與利益的則是操弄他人資訊與提及禁忌話題。聯結權之下，妨礙互動參與行為可從會話進行與社交禮節兩角度分類，妨礙情感參與的行為則多出自彼此關係認知不符。不當關切他人隱私則同時妨礙平等及聯結權。 從語料的推導與論述，上述各種具體行為個別與整體都呈現了中文不禮貌的具體構成形態，而透過整理與分類過程，本論文認為中文言語不禮貌現象中的行為動機與形成原因也確實能以「面子」與「社交權利義務」等概念為基礎來解釋，但需在定義上做細部的調整增修，才能更有效率地將行為歸類。

The present study examines cinematic language, where impoliteness is frequent, and analyzes the linguistic behaviors of ordinary language with Conversation Analytic methodology. This study follows Culpeper’s definition on impoliteness(2011), and adopts his Impoliteness Strategies, revised with the notions of face and sociality rights and obligations from Rapport Management (Spencer-Oatey, 2008), as the framework of analysis. While testing the applicability of existing theories, this study also hopes to contribute to the field of Linguistic Impoliteness with discoveries in the Chinese language. Face is an image of self of approved positives attributes a person claims in interaction, and could be read on personal, relational, and social levels. Three subgroups are created on relational level to better explain the data: based on social role, shared with significant others, relation-work. Face-attacking output strategies in the data include: obvious criticisms, implied criticisms, condemnation, negative forecast, admonishment, sarcasm, revocation, refusal, and scorn. The violation of Sociality rights and obligations is another factor of forming impoliteness, which includes Equity and Association rights, referring to the entitlements people claim in interaction which in turn form expectations of interaction. With Equity rights, acts that infringe autonomy-imposition rights are orders/requests and threats; for cost-benefit rights, the acts are exploitation/indifference and self-benefiting; while information-meddling and speaking taboo infringe both rights. With Association, acts that infringe interactional involvement-detachment rights can be analyzed in terms of conversation engagement and social interaction. Acts that infringe affectional involvement-detachment rights often come from the mismatch of recognition of the relationship among interactors. Acts of prying into personal privacy infringe both Equity and Association rights. The nature and formation of linguistic impoliteness in Chinese are presented in this study by the analyzing and theorizing the various acts as individual and as a whole in the data. Through the categorizing process, it also appears that it is applicable to interpret the motives and causes of linguistic impoliteness in Chinese, but in order to serve as a more efficient sorting system, adjustments such as more specified definitions and clearer boundaries between each categories are needed.