Interactional Sociolinguistics as a resource for Intercultural Pragmatics
Interactional Sociolinguistics as a resource for Intercultural Pragmatics
复制标题
互动社会语言学作为跨文化语用学的资源
DOI：
10.1515/iprg.2005.2.2.205
复制
发表时间：
2005
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
D. Tannen
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
D. Tannen
互动社会语言学（IS）和跨文化语用学（ICP）之间的联系是紧密而明显的。这两个领域都关注语言如何在交互中传达意义。两者都认为语言的过程是动态的、自然发生的，是参与者互动的结果，而不是单个说话者单手语言产生的结果；对于两者来说，跨文化互动的语言是关键。然而，虽然后一个焦点是 ICP 领域的组成部分，但在某种程度上，它是 IS 的启发；也就是说，信息系统研究人员倾向于关注跨文化互动，因为当人们对语言的使用的期望不被认同时，语言在互动中创造意义的方式就会凸显出来，而跨文化互动提供了一个通常不认同这种期望的研究场所。这就是为什么跨文化互动的音频或录像的话语分析是信息系统方法论的基石，其理论基础是关于信号意义方式的期望和惯例是自动的和文化相关的这一概念。这些方法论和理论基础反映了 IS 的主要目标：理解语言如何在交互中创造意义。然而，对于许多信息系统从业者来说，另一个目标是解释语言过程在跨文化接触中所发挥的作用，特别是当这些接触涉及社会不平等、歧视或相互刻板印象时。对于这些从业者来说，跨文化遭遇不是一种启发式的，而是像 ICP 一样，是一个决定性的研究场所。 Gumperz（1982）在他创立 IS 的基础研究中证明，使用语言创造和解释意义的系统性不同方式导致了对在巴基斯坦、印度或西印度群岛出生和长大的伦敦居民的就业歧视。通过分析就业面试中的互动，他遵循了埃里克森（Erickson，1975）对“把关遭遇”中歧视的语言基础的关注：少数群体成员要求获得多数群体批准的演讲事件跨文化语用学2-2（2005），205-208
The link between interactional sociolinguistics (IS) and intercultural prag matics (ICP) is a close and obvious one. Both fields are concerned with how language conveys meaning in interaction; both regard the process by which language does so as dynamic, emergent, and resulting from the interaction of participants rather than from the single-handed linguistic production of individual speakers; and for both, the language of intercul tural interaction is key. However, whereas this latter focus is constitutive of the field of ICP, it is, in a way, a heuristic for IS; that is, IS researchers tend to focus on intercultural interaction because the ways in which language works to create meaning in interaction stand out in relief when expectations regarding their use are not shared, and intercultural interac tion provides a research site in which such expectations are typically not shared. That is why the discourse analysis of audio- or videotaped inter cultural interaction is the bedrock of IS methodology, and its theoretical foundation is the notion that expectations and conventions regarding ways of signaling meaning are automatic and culturally relative. These methodological and theoretical foundations reflect the primary goal of IS: to understand how language works to create meaning in interaction. Yet for many IS practitioners, another goal is to account for the role played by linguistic processes in intercultural encounters, especially when those encounters involve social inequality, discrimination, or mutual stereotyping. For these practitioners, the intercultural encounter is not a heuristic but, as it is for ICP, a defining research site. In his foundational research whereby he founded IS, Gumperz (1982) demonstrated that systematically different ways of using language to create and interpret meaning contributed to employment discrimination against London residents who were born and raised in Pakistan, India or the West Indies. By analyzing interaction in employment interviews, he followed Erickson's (1975) focus on the linguistic basis of discrimina tion in "gatekeeping encounters": speech events in which a member of a minority community requires the approval of a majority-community Intercultural Pragnlatics 2-2 (2005), 205-208