LiteratureReview范例.docx
- 文档编号:23503278
- 上传时间:2023-05-17
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:9
- 大小:23.12KB
LiteratureReview范例.docx
《LiteratureReview范例.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《LiteratureReview范例.docx(9页珍藏版)》请在冰豆网上搜索。
LiteratureReview范例
LiteratureReview
Inthisthesis,IwillstudythecharacteristicsoftheconversationalmechanismofrepairinChineseconversationaldiscourse.Tothatend,itisnecessarytoconductareviewoftherelevantliteratureonconversationalrepair.Ishallstartwithanelaborationofthenotionof“repair”,goingontoresearchesintotheorganizationofconversationalrepairandconcludewiththeinterdisciplinaryandmulti-linguisticapplicationof“repair”research.
1.FromCorrectiontoRepair
Asarelativelynewfieldinconversationanalysis(CA),theproperstudyoftheconversationalphenomenonofrepairdidn’tstartuntilthepublicationofSchegloffetal’sseminalpaperin1977.Beforethat,therewereonlysomesporadicdiscussionsofthephenomenonundersuchgenericheadingsastongueslips(Laver1973,seeSchegloff1977)anderrorcorrection(Jefferson1975,seeSchegloff1977).Asastilloften-usedterm,“correction”,“commonlyunderstoodtorefertothereplacementofan‘error’or‘mistake’bywhatis‘correct’”(Schegloff1977:
363),notonlylimitsresearchtoaminorityofthenaturaloccurrencesofrepairbutalsomisleadsresearchersaboutthenatureofthetrouble-sources.
TheshiftoffocuswasledbySchegloffetal(1977),whosestudywasanempiricallybasedefforttoexaminetheorganizationofrepairasasetofordered,butnotequalpossibilities.Thephenomenonofcorrectionwasthereforeprovenpartofamuchwiderpicture,i.e.repairandthescopeofdiscussionwasgreatlyexpandedfromthemerecorrectingofsome“hearable[usuallylinguistic]errors”(1977:
363)toallpossible“practicesfordealingwithproblemsortroublesinspeaking,hearing,andunderstandingthetalkinconversation”(2000:
207),adefinitiongivenbySchegloffhimselfsome20yearslater.
Indeed,potentialtrouble-sourcesinconversationincludenotonlycorrectionofinformation,butalsoandmoreimportantlyreplacementofinappropriateitemsorambiguousanaphors,wordsearchandclarificationofthepragmaticfunction/understandingofapreviousturn.Theseandmanyotheroccurrencesmayonlybesubsumedunderthemoregeneralscopeofrepair.Incidentally,correctionmaynotalwaysbecategorizedunderrepaireither,asisexemplifiedbythedisagreementovertheso-called“embeddedcorrection”(Jefferson1987)–basicallyacovertformofother-correction–whichSchegloff(2000)ruledoutasnotconstitutingakindofrepair.Equallyimportantastheexpansioninthescopeofresearchwasthechangeintheviewofthetrouble-sourcesthatdirectlyoccasiontherepair.AccordingtoSchegloffetal(1977),trouble-sourcesarenotself-evidentbutdeterminedinteractivelybyparticipants.Inotherwords,allthesegmentsinanutteranceis,intheory,potentialtrouble-sourcesandoftentheexistenceofatrouble-sourcecanonlybeevidencedbytheactualmobilizationofthepracticeofrepaironthepartofeitherthehearerorthespeaker(andsometimesboth).Itisworthnotingthatjustasthestatusofatrouble-sourceisanuncertaintytobeinteractivelydetermined,theactualneedandproperprotocolofitsrepairisnotanymorecertain.Thisdynamicandinteractiveviewofrepairhasprovenrewardingintermsofrevealingnotonlyitsownmechanismbutalsoothercognitive,socialandpsychologicalaspectsofconversationaldiscourse,asmaybeinterestinglyexplainedbysucheverydaywisdom:
youdon’tknowsomething’satworkuntilitgoeswrong.
2.Theorganizationofrepair
Manystudieshavebeencarriedoutwithregardtothevariousdimensionsofconversationalrepairitself,e.g.itsclassification,
sites,formsandcauses.
Schegloffetal(1977)classifiedfourinteractionaltypesofrepairaccordingtothesubject(s)ofinitiation/repair,namelyself/other-initiatedself/otherrepair.Thisclassificationhasbeenadoptedbymanyresearcherslater,makingiteasiertotackleconversationaldata.YetGeluykens(1994:
56)suggests,rightlyIthink,thatthisclassificationisinneedofrefinementasitisnotalwayspossibletodrawasharpboundarybetweenselfandotherinitiation.Hefoundasortofother-promptedself-initiation,whichunderlinestheinteractiveaspectofconversationaldiscourse.
Alongwiththeinteractionalfour-typeclassification,Schegloffetal(1977)proposedtheunequaldistributionofthefourtypes.Tobemoreexact,self-repairispreferredtoother-repairandself-initiationtoother-initiation.Itfollowsthatthemostfavoredtypeisself-initiatedself-repair.Theirclaimwasputforwardwithnostatisticalevidencesolaterresearchershavediscussedtheirempiricalfindingswithreferencetoeitherorbothofthetwopreferences.Manystudies,includingsomebasedondatainlanguagesotherthanEnglish,areinsupportoftheobservationthatself-repairispreferred,e.g.Geluykens(1994)andMa(2007).Yetsomeremaindoubtfulastothepreferenceofself-initiationoverother-initiation,e.g.Gaskell(1980),Schwartz(1980)andGass&Varonis(1985)(seeWang2007).
Astrongobjectiontothepreferenceofself-correctionwasputforwardbyNorrick(1991,seeJiang&Li2003),whosedatawascollectedfromconversationinparent-child,teacher-studentandNS-NNScontexts.Afterexaminingtheorganizationofcorrectiveexchangesinthesecontexts,hecontendedthatthepartyablertoperformthecorrection–notnecessarilythespeaker–doesit.Further,hedismissedtheallegedpreferenceasasub-casewhichisonlypossiblebetweenadultnativespeakers
whoseabilityofrepairisapproximatelyequal.Inotherwords,theabsenceofsuchpreferenceisthenormwhilethepreferenceisaspecialcase.Interestingly,Schegloffetal(1977)hasalsoobservedthatother-correction“seemstobenotasinfrequent”and“appearstobeonevehicleforsocialization”inthosecontextswheresomeonenot-yet-competentinacertaindomain–beitlanguagefacilityorbackgroundinformation–isinvolved(381).However,theyfurtherarguedthatthisexceptiontotheinfrequencyofother-correctionisonlyatransitionalstageandwillbesupersededbythepreferenceofself-correctioneventually.JoiningintheheateddiscussionareJiang&Li(2003),whoalsoquestionedthevalidityofSchegloff’sclaimaboutthepreferenceforself-repair.TheyofferedasprooftheworkofNorrick(1991)andZhao(1996).Thelatter,onthebasisofdataobtainedinacademicseminars,ofwhichother-repairtakesuparemarkableproportion,suggestedthattheoptionofself-orother-repairshouldtakeintoaccountofthecontext,includingthecontentofconversationandtherespectivesocialstatusoftheparticipants(Jiang&Li2003:
42).Intheirownsurvey,Jiang&Li(2003)calculatedthefrequenciesofrepairintwocategoriesandfoundthepreferenceofself-repaironlyexistentinthecategorythatincludedclearingupmisunderstandings,wordsearchorself-editingwhileinthecorrectionofrealerrors,other-repairenjoysabiggerpercentageof60%.ThereforetheyblamedthemysteryofthepreferenceontheoverlybroaddefinitionofrepairputforwardbySchegloffetal.
Besidestheinteractionalfour-typeclassification,repairhasbeenclassifiedbyotherways.Intermsofthekindoftrouble-spotbeingrepaired,Levelt(1989,seeGeluykens1994:
20)distinguishesbetweenE[rror]-repairandA[ppropriateness]-repair.Consideringthetemporalaspectofrepair,thereareimmediaterepairsanddelayedrepairs(Geluykens1994:
22).
Therehasalsobeenin-depthdiscussiononthesites,orwhatiscalledthesequentialenvironmentforrepairinitiationandreparans(therepairingsegment).Ausualwayofreferringtothepositionofrepairinitiationisbyreferencetotheturnwherethetrouble-sourceoccurs.Schegloffetal(1977)foundself-initiationmainlyinthreepositions,namelythesameturnasthetrouble-source,thesameturn’stransitionplaceandthethird-turntothetrouble-sourceturn;other-initiation,ontheotherhand,wasfoundmainlyinthenextturn(tothetrouble-sourceturn).Levinson(1983,seeGeluykens1994)identifiedfoursimilaropportunities,whichareorderedwithdecreasingpreferenceandmostoftenusedbyeitherself-orother-initiation.
Inparticular,Schegloff(2000)elaboratedthelocusofother-initiation(OI)thatoccursinpositionsotherthantheturnfollowingthetrouble-sourceturn.HesuggestedseveralinteractionalconstraintsthatmaybeaccountableforthesesomewhatdeviantOIs,constraintsrelatedtotheorganizationofrepair,ofturnsorofturn-taking.Inaddition,heobservedoccasionaldelaysinOIswhichimpliesthespeaker’sintentionof“settingasidetheunderstandingproblem”(233)orassessingitlater.ThisobservationwasofgreatrelevancetothestudyofWong,whoexaminedaformof“delayednextturnrepairinitiation”inN-NNEnglishconversationandproposedthatitmightbeaccountedbythedifferencesbetweennativeandnon-nativeparticipantsintheirwaysofsocialinteraction–morespecifically,intheuseofcertaintokensandsequentialorganizationinconversation.
FromthecomparisonbetweenSchegloff(2000)andWong(2000),itseemsthattheinstantaneityandcomplexityofconversationspelldangerforhastygeneralizationanddueattentionshouldbepaidtominutedifferentiation.AcaseinpointmaybefoundinSchegloff(1997)’sdistinctionbetween“thirdturnrepair”and“thirdpositionrepair”,bothofwhichoccupiesasaruletheturnsubsequenttotheturnfollowingthetrouble-sourceturn,hence
“third”.Yetacloserlookwithafocusonsequentialrelevancewillclearuptheconfusionofthetwo.While“thirdpositionrepair”isusuallyself-repairinresponsetoother-initiationinthesecondturn,“thirdturnrepa
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- LiteratureReview 范例
![提示](https://static.bdocx.com/images/bang_tan.gif)