Conflict Talk Among Family Members in Young Shelton: A Study Based on the Adaptation Theory 顺应论视角下《小谢尔顿》中家庭成员间的冲突话语研究文献综述

 2023-04-21 09:11:59

文献综述

2. Literature review 2.1Studies of conflict talks abroadThe studies of conflict talks abroad began with the focus on verbal arguments. A large number of studies have been conducted on conflict talks which involved philosophy, rhetoric, anthropology, psychology, sociology and linguistics. Jacob and Jackson (1981) explored conflict talks from the perspective of speech act and interactive communication. Muntigl and Turnbull (1998) associated conversational arguments with oppositions in verbal communication. Schiffrin (1985) attached great importance to the structure of arguments and regarded arguments as underlying actions indicating different perspectives. From the perspective of speech act, arguments are interpreted as a type of illocutionary act with which verbal opposition and conflict talks might occur. Boggs (1978) discovered that verbal signals such as no, not used by children can cause conflict talks. There are also studies on how social culture and community influence conflict talk. Kuo (1991), Song (1993) and Sheldon (1996) explored linguistic strategies of conflict talks, and the culture and gender differences were also investigated. Tannen (1994) pointed out that conversational style, temporary context and communicative intention had an influence on the initiation and termination of conflict talks. Kakav (2001: 650) deems that conflict talks are paid little attention in interpersonal communication. The reason is that scholars regard conflict talks as a kind of disorderly discourse and they are unwilling to be involved in such negative verbal activities. As a result, few researches have been conducted on conflict talks. Kakav (2001) reviewed linguistic features of conflict talks and classified those studies into three categories: 1) linguistic features of conflict talks; 2) Contextual strategies of conflict talks; 3) ego and ideology construction and reflection on conflict talks. Barki and Hartwick (2004) found that conflict talks had three characteristics, namely, disagreement or exclusiveness, negative emotion and interference. Their study helps participants understand and identify conflict talks effectively.2.2Studies of conflict talks at homeZhao (2004) began to focus on sociological studies of conflict talks. Her studies to some extent are beneficial to reveal characteristics of conflict talks. Du (2006) investigated conflict talks with the method of conversational analysis. Li and Zhang (2007) regarded the quarreling discourse as a special form of conflict talks, and they studied the structure of quarreling discourse and concluded that quarreling discourse had their own special features in conflict talks. The pragmatic perspective: Wang (2006) made a pragmatic study of conflict talks between husbands and wives and analyzed linguistic features, triggering factors and strategies of conflict talks from the perspective of linguistic adaptation theory. Gao (2006, 2007) found seven strategies to deal with conflict talks: change the topic, compromise, the third party intervene, win or lose, withdrawal, external-factor interferences and end up in humor. Her study focuses on resolutions of conflict talk sequences instead of linguistic resolutions. Zhu(2008) investigated conflict talks between couples. Pragmatic strategies used by couples and gender difference in using these strategies are explored in her thesis. Ran (2010) overviewed the previous pragmatic studies on conflict talks in which the definition, characteristics and some suggestions for further pragmatic studies of conflict talks were explored. Zuom (2011) explored conflict talks in light of linguistic adaptation theory. Zhao and Zhang (2005) analyzed the causes for the occurrence of conflict talks in light of Relevance Theory and pointed Wang and Zhao (2008) issued a paper in which they mainly explored the metaphorical characteristics of conflict talks from cognitive perspectives out that lacking relevance was the primary reason for the occurrence of conflict talks.2.3Relevant studies of conflict talk among family members Gottman (1979) makes a research on the conflict talk between couples. Zhu (2008) examines the complex relationship between parents and children in Chinese diasporic families by listing to some samples of conflict talk between them. The pragmatic studies of conflict talk in Chinese mainly refer to Verschuerens adaptation theory. Wang (2006) makes a systematic analysis of conflict talks between couples from the perspective of discourse analysis and adaptation theory. Mao (2009) conducts adaptive research on the conflict talk among family members and Zhu (2008) launches pragmatic analysis of the conflict talk between couples. 2.4 Studies of the adaptation theory2.4.1 Verschuerens adaptation theoryThe linguistic adaptation theory was put forward by Verschueren in 1987. Linguistic Adaptation theory was proposed by Belgian pragmatist Verschueren in 1987. Later, he comprehensively and systematically improved this theory in Understanding Pragmatics in 1999. Verschueren proposed that pragmatics was a general cognitive, social and cultural perspective on linguistic phenomena in relation to their usage in form of behavior (2000, p. 12). He thought that pragmatics should study language variability, negotiation, and adaptability. In terms of language adaptation, Verschueren pointed that four aspects needed to be examined simultaneously: (1) contextual correlates of adaptability; (2) structural objects of adaptability; (3) dynamics of adaptability; (4) salience of the adaptation processes. These four aspects constitute the four main analytical dimensions of linguistic adaptation theory.2.4.2 Development of the adaptation theory in China Since then, domestic researchers have turned their attention to the linguistic adaptationtheory. Professor Qian Guanlian is the first one who draws linguistic adaptation theory intoChina. In 1991, he published a relevant article in domestic journal, which mainlydifferentiated pragmatics in a functional view of language use from the traditional ones. In 2000, he wrote another article to introduce the theoretical sources and frame embracing three key notions and four angles of Verschuerens study. Two pragmatic experts He and Yu(1999) interpret the main contents of the book Understanding Pragmatics and introducesome concrete employments of linguistic adaptation theory. Tan (2002) comparesVerschuerens contextual adaptation theory with traditional contextual views. She finds thattraditional context theory focuses on the static description of context, emphasizing on theinterpretation and restrictive function of context. However, Adaptation theory emphasizesthe dynamics of context and the subjective initiative of communicators. Yang (2001)proposes a Relevance-Adaptation mode that language uses is a process of adapting to association, language choices and use are the process of addressers seeking associatedadaptive context. Ran (2004) proposes the Relevance-Adaptation model of understanding language use. Pragmatists often compare adaptation theory with other related theories, including conversational implication theory, cooperation principle, politeness principle, and face theory. They pave the way for many domestic researchers and scholars to understand the application of linguistic adaptation theory.The above sections mainly introduce related researches on conflict talk abroad and at home, and related researches on conflict talk among family members, which are beneficial to the study. However, it is reasonable to conclude that limitation is easily found in the present works and studies of conflict talk. Although there are many studies based on adaptation theory, the studies about conflict talk among family members based on the adaptation theory are far from being adequate.

资料编号：[578026]

剩余内容已隐藏，您需要先支付 10元 才能查看该篇文章全部内容！立即支付

以上是文献综述，课题毕业论文、任务书、外文翻译、程序设计、图纸设计等资料可联系客服协助查找。

您可能感兴趣的文章