• Cross-Cultural Studies
• /
• v.27
• /
• pp.347-386
• /
• 2012

This article aims to establish the model of textual communication and its schema. To do this, we must identify the characteristics of textual communication, different from that of the oral, because the model of communication is usually done to show the structure of oral communication. Moreover, we must clarify the status text as '${\acute{e}}nonc{\acute{e}}$', that is to say product of the act of enunciation. The study of the text has now reached to achieve from the perspective of pragmatics, overcoming the structural point of view that dominates long text linguistics. And now, we need to enrich the theoretical basis of the pragmatics of text. Then the search of elements necessary to develop the model and pattern of textual communication can help to establish the elements used to form the theoretical basis. To clarify the characteristics of textual communication, we needed to explain the present communication by the position of reader and the point of view of textual reference. The schema that we proposed is not perfect, but there are still issues to think to complete it. For example, one must take into account the plurality of readers and reflect the relationship between interpretive texts in this schema, etc. This kind of problem is not only required to complete the schema but also to strengthen the basis of the theory of textual communication and the pragmatics of text.

• Cross-Cultural Studies
• /
• v.37
• /
• pp.361-382
• /
• 2014

This study aims to investigate the change of functions of duibuqi and analysis other fuctions of duibuqi apart from apology from pragmatics and conversation analysis perspectives. Duibuqi consists of dui(face) and buqi(be not capable of performing), and means 'be not capable of facing'. After that, it is assumed to have changed to 'ashamed' and finally 'sorry'. In terms of functions, duibuqi is generally regarded as meaning 'sorry' typically, so mei guanxi is considered to consist adjacency pair with it, but in this investigation, mei guanxi is very little adjacent to duibuqi contrary to expectation(n=2/28, per.=7.1/100). About half of duibuqi(n=15/28, per.=53.6/100) functions in apology action sequence, and in the sequence, duibuqi functions much more for take the lead in apology(n=11/15) but not for a reaction against scolding(n=4/15). And the other half of duibuqi(n=13/28, per.=46.4/100) functions for softening the impact of reject or direct action, or for switching situations, e.g. from favorable situation to unfavorable situation, or for expressing speaker's emotion to the other's repair etc. Consequently, duibuqi has being changed its meanings and its functions is being changed accordingly.

• Journal of Korean language education
• /
• v.29 no.4
• /
• pp.225-254
• /
• 2018

The purpose of this study is to contrast the patterns of realization and understanding of refusal speech acts between Korean and Thai learners. This study intends to answer the following questions: (1) Do Koreans and Thai learners perform refusal speech acts differently? (2) Do Koreans and Thai learners understand refusal speech acts differently? A DCT and a follow-up interview were conducted to collect data of two groups of 30 native Korean speakers and 30 native Thai speakers. For research question 1, we analyzed the refusal strategy and provided reasons given by Koreans and Thai learners depending on the context. For research question 2, we ran a chi-squared test on the elements of the follow-up interviews, such as the weight of burden of refusing, and whether the participant would actually refuse or not. The differences between the refusal strategies of the two groups could be categorized by the preceding inducing speech act. In refusing a request, the difference was prominent in the apologizing strategy, whereas in refusing a suggestion, the difference was mainly in the direct refusal strategy. When refusing an invitation, the most evident difference was the number of refusal strategies employed. When providing an explanation of refusal to people with high social status, Koreans gave more specific reasons for refusals, whereas Thai learners tended to use more vague reasons. Moreover, when refusing an invitation, Koreans primarily mentioned the relationship, and Thai learners showed the spirit of Greng Jai. When asked the weight of burden of refusing, Koreans felt pressured to refuse a request from people with high social status, and a suggestion or invitation from people with high level of intimacy while Thai learners found it highly difficult to make a refusal in all cases. In answering whether they would actually refuse or not, Koreans tried not to make a refusal to people with high level of intimacy, and such a trend was not evident among the Thai. This study can help us better understand the learner's pragmatic failure, and serve as a basis in establishing a curriculum for teaching speech acts.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.75-91
• /
• 2021

In this study, most of the previous researches on the analysis of apology are limited to comparative study of apology in different countries from the perspective of cross-cultural communication and analysis of apology in daily life. Therefore, by introducing pragmatics on apology strategy and cultural interpretation theories, this study tried to analyze apology and apology strategies in the seventh season of American TV series Desperate Housewives. Specifically speaking, based on Trosborg's classification of apology strategies, this study sorted out, classified and counted apology strategies in the seventh season of Desperate Housewives, and then 200 apology strategies were randomly selected and analyzed in detail. The statistical results showed that 'expression of apology' strategy was used at the highest frequency of 64.0%, followed by 'explanation or account' and 'minimizing the degree of offence'; 'Acknowledgement of responsibility', 'offer of repair' strategy, 'expressing concern for hearer' and 'promise of forbearance' were used relatively less frequently. The results can be interpreted by America's high individualism, low power distance and low-context culture having great influence on the frequency of American apology strategy. This study can increase understanding of apology and culture, reduce offence in communication with Americans, and make cross-cultural communication smooth, and meanwhile it is expected to enrich the research scope of TV drama art by analyzing language in TV drama art.

• Cross-Cultural Studies
• /
• v.33
• /
• pp.407-459
• /
• 2013

The paper pragmatically analyzes ellipsis in Russian and Polish colloquial and informal texts. The famous Polish writer Sławomir $Mro{\dot{z}}ek^{\prime}s$ "Exit to the South", written in Polish and Russian is used as a material for the analysis. Russian and Polish ellipsis in colloquial and informal texts have in common that the givenness and subjecthood of the elliptical co-referent play a crucial role. However, the ellipsis in two languages also has differences in many ways. Above all, in the Polish texts of colloquial and informal style, a theme is likely to be elliptical and the coreferential relation reaches to an extra-sentential antecedent, while the ellipsis in analysed Russian texts in most cases requires coordinate, subordinate or relative clauses, and the elliptical co-referent tends to have an intra-sentential antecedent. The ellipsis of the theme-subject is unmarked in Polish, where every verbal form has an ending denoting person. Unlike formal style which often allows explicit noun subject, Polish text of colloquial and informal style prefer null form of the subject in most cases. If Polish sentences have explicit theme-subjects, they disambiguate intervening and main themes, and indicate the contrast, the focus, the introduction of new narratives or the change of speaker's point of view. Sometimes direct speeches and deictic pronouns also need explicit theme-subjects in Polish sentences. On the other hand, the ellipsis of the theme-subject is marked in Russian even in colloquial and informal texts. The theme-subject can be deleted in Russian colloquial and informal texts, if the subject is a form of the first or the second person, or if the aspect and the tense of the antecedent sentence's verb are the same as those of the given sentence's verb and both the antecedent and the coreferential word have the nominative case.