대화에서의 공손과 불손전략에 대한 화용론적 연구

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this study is to discuss the realization of politeness and impoliteness strategies in every talk-in-interaction. With this study, it is possible to explore the models of linguistic impoliteness or aggravation with the real life data from the movies. This study
clarifies the pragmatic research field on the aggravating forms of social behavior by looking at the particular types of verbal threats and their immediate responses.
In chapter 2, Brown & Levinson's hierarchy of politeness strategies suggest a socially-normative view (1978, 1987). Face Threatening Acts (FTAs) threaten either the speaker's or the hearer's face positively or negatively. It has demonstrated that the context affects the interpretation of FTAs.
In Chapter 3, the issues surrounding the viability of the 'bald on record' strategy and those surrounding the 'positive' and 'negative' face-oriented varieties of impoliteness were discussed. Impoliteness is a negative attitude towards behavior occurring in specific situational context. The model set out in Culpeper (1996) is analyzed to ascertain its usefulness in accounting for impoliteness in the given discourses. The three dynamic stages of impoliteness by Bousfield (2008) were discussed to ascertain the beginnings, the middles and the ends of conversations which come to the resolution of the conflict, either mitigating or aggravating.
In chapter 4, four models of impoliteness strategies were proposed to inspire to develop pragmatic competence to English as a Second Language Speakers: (i) Individual impoliteness which intentionally attacks the hearer's face by the speaker's individual personality. (ⅱ) Relational impoliteness is sanctioned impoliteness which is shown in institutional situations. (ⅲ) Social norm of impoliteness, which constantly changes through cultures and generations. People shift in and out of the particular cultures of FTAs. (ⅳ) Accidental impoliteness, which is experienced by the second language speakers who lack proficiency in the target language, is unwittingly done. Conversation analysis with real life data from movie transcripts were used to explore the pragmatic strategies of impoliteness.
In chapter 5, the threat responses are analyzed from a theoretical perspective to reveal their function and use in interaction. It is argued that a threat uttered in a conditional form ('If you do/don't do X') stresses the urgency to comply on the part of the addressee because s/he is confronted with two undesirable actions: compliance or non-compliance. Using data from the Discourse Completion Test, these forms of conflict behavior were empirically investigated from the addressee's point of view. The result showed a more powerful speaker achieves more compliance responses. The sample showed more sensitive to the power and age variables. Targets seemed to be less inclined to comply with a threat that is issued by a friend or by a person they are well-acquainted with.
This study examined pragmatic strategies employed by Koreans in responding to rudeness. Results in responding to threats showed that the group employed 15 negative pragmatic strategies. The sample more freely used negative pragmatic responses to express statements to the less powered groups. Deference is a polite and respectful attitude towards the hearers which lead to more inclined results in positive strategies. In situations countering in impoliteness, the act of countering leads to further impolite attacks, especially to the same and lower status groups.
This study suggests that the second language speakers should be aware of the types and relative significance of different pragmatic politeness and impoliteness strategies in the target language through educational and conversational materials.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 제1장 서론 1
• 1.1 연구 목적 1
• 1.2 언어분석 연구의 방법 5
• 제2장 담화에 나타난 공손전략 14
• 2.1 공손(politeness)의 정의 14
• 2.2 대화격률 관점에서의 공손 15
• 2.3 체면 관점에서의 공손 19
• 2.3.1 체면위협 행위(Face Threatening Act) 19
• 2.3.2 동양 문화권에서의 공손과 체면 21
• 2.3.3 체면위협의 역동성에 따른 화용론적 실패 23
• 2.4 Brown & Levinson(1987)의 공손이론 25
• 2.4.1 명시적 표현 25
• 2.4.2 적극적 공손 28
• 2.4.3 소극적 공손 33
• 2.4.4. 간접 표현 41
• 제3장 담화에 나타난 불손전략 55
• 3.1 불손과 관련용어 정의 55
• 3.1.1 불손(impoliteness) 55
• 3.1.2 체면(face)과 불손 61
• 3.1.3 과잉공손(over-politeness) 65
• 3.1.4 권위(power)와 불손 67
• 3.2 Culpeper(1996)의 불손이론 69
• 3.2.1 불손의 형태 69
• 3.2.2 명시적 표현 72
• 3.2.3 적극적 불손 76
• 3.2.4 소극적 불손 81
• 3.2.5. 간접 불손표현 86
• 3.2.6 공손 불이행 88
• 3.3 Bousfield(2008)의 불손이론 90
• 3.3.1 직접간접 불손실현 90
• 3.3.2 불손의 역동성 92
• 제4장 대화분석을 통한 불손전략의 재조명 99
• 4.1 개인 간 위협표현으로 나타나는 불손 100
• 4.1.1 청자에 대한 모욕에 나타나는 불손 101
• 4.1.2 소통을 저해하는 불손 112
• 4.1.3 비언어적 형태의 불손 116
• 4.2 공동체 내 관계에 나타나는 불손 121
• 4.2.1 훈육이나 통제 시 나타나는 불손 122
• 4.2.2 가족 간에 나타나는 불손 127
• 4.2.3 상하관계에서 나타나는 불손 133
• 4.3 사회규범 내에 나타나는 불손 137
• 4.3.1 집단에 대한 공격의 불손 139
• 4.3.2 문화의 변형에 따라 나타나는 불손 143
• 4.3.3 사이버공격에 나타나는 불손 148
• 4.4 목표어에 관한 무지에 의한 불손 149
• 4.4.1 문체의 오용에 의한 불손 151
• 4.4.2 속어의 무분별한 사용에 나타나는 불손 153
• 4.4.3 한국식 영어표현과 부호전환에서 나타나는 불손 154
• 제5장 불손 대응의 실험연구 157
• 5.1 연구목적 157
• 5.2 연구방법 157
• 5.2.1 연구 도구 158
• 5.2.2 연구 절차 159
• 5.2.3 위협 응답의 유형 161
• 5.3 위협 응답의 연구 결과 168
• 5.3.1 위협에 대한 화용론적 대응 168
• 5.3.1.1 화자의 권위가 우위일 경우 168
• 5.3.1.2 화자와 청자의 권위가 동일한 경우 171
• 5.3.1.3 화자의 권위가 청자보다 하위일 경우 172
• 5.3.2 위협 응답에 나타난 불손 화용전략 173
• 5.3.3 한국인의 위협응답에 나타난 불손 화용전략 184
• 5.3.4 대화 시 불손 경험 190
• 제6장 결론 193
• 참고문헌 196
• ABSTRACT 205
• [부록 1] Limberg(2009)의 담화완성실험 208
• [부록 2] 한국어로 작성된 담화완성실험 210
• [부록 3] 체면 유지를 위한 상호작용 212