Doing referring in Murriny Patha conversation
Doing referring in Murriny Patha conversation
复制标题
在 Murriny Patha 对话中进行提及
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Joe Blythe
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Joe Blythe
成功的沟通取决于我们对谈话对象和内容的了解。因此，人称参照是社会科学的核心。指称人是一个信息从当前说话者传递到谈话接受者的插入过程。本论文关注的是通过这种信息传递所实现的工作。本文采用的对话分析方法是一种将对话分析的“微观”与人类学语言学的“宏观”相结合的方法。Murriny Patha（英语：Murriny Patha）是澳大利亚北部的一种非帕马-尼永干语，是一种高度复杂的多合成语言，其亲属范畴被语法化为动词屈折变化。为了指称人，以及名字、昵称、kinterms、最小描述和自由代词，Murriny Patha语使用者广泛使用嵌入在多合成动词中的代名词指称标记。Murriny Patha没有正式的“婆婆”登记册。然而，在回避关系中命名亲属，以及命名和他们的同名者方面有许多禁忌。同样，在命名死者和命名与死者同名的人方面也有禁忌。因此，对于每一个发言者来说，都有许多人的名字应该避免。在任何时候，说这种语言的人都有一系列的指称选择。发言者关于选择哪类指称形式的决定（名称、kinterms等）是由对话偏好决定的，这些偏好塑造了“参照设计”。六种偏好--一种偏好是将所指对象与共同在场的谈话者联系起来，一种偏好是避免使用人名，一种偏好是使用人名，一种偏好是简洁，还有一对与指称特异性有关的相反偏好--引导说话者在一个场合选择一个名字，在下一个场合选择一个kinterm，在另一个场合选择口头交叉引用。不同类别的表达更好地满足特定的会话偏好。说话者所作的指称选择具有系统性。对话者的介入目标是通过特定形式在特定顺序环境中的常规放置而制定的。这些目标，然后揭示通过轮流展开的会话互动。
Successful communication hinges on keeping track of who and what we are talking about. For this reason, person reference sits at the heart of the social sciences. Referring to persons is an interactional process where information is transferred from current speakers to the recipients of their talk. This dissertation concerns itself with the work that is achieved through this transfer of information. The interactional approach adopted is one that combines the “micro” of conversation analysis with the “macro” of genealogically grounded anthropological linguistics. Murriny Patha, a non-Pama-Nyungan language spoken in the north of Australia, is a highly complex polysynthetic language with kinship categories that are grammaticalized as verbal inflections. For referring to persons, as well as names, nicknames, kinterms, minimal descriptions and free pronouns, Murriny Patha speakers make extensive use of pronominal reference markers embedded within polysynthetic verbs. Murriny Patha does not have a formal “mother-in-law” register. There are however numerous taboos on naming kin in avoidance relationships, and on naming and their namesakes. Similarly, there are also taboos on naming the deceased and on naming their namesakes. As a result, for every speaker there is a multitude of people whose names should be avoided. At any one time, speakers of the language have a range of referential options. Speakers’ decisions about which category of reference forms to choose (names, kinterms etc.) are governed by conversational preferences that shape “referential design”. Six preferences – a preference for associating the referent to the co-present conversationalists, a preference for avoiding personal names, a preference for using recognitionals, a preference for being succinct, and a pair of opposed preferences relating to referential specificity – guide speakers towards choosing a name on one occasion, a kinterm on the next occasion and verbal cross-reference on yet another occasion. Different classes of expressions better satisfy particular conversational preferences. There is a systematicity to the referential choices that speakers make. The interactional objectives of interlocutors are enacted through the regular placement of particular forms in particular sequential environments. These objectives are then revealed through the turn-by-turn unfolding of conversational interaction.