Friendly or condescending?

IF 0.1 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Naomi Geyer
{"title":"Friendly or condescending?","authors":"Naomi Geyer","doi":"10.1558/EAP.18183","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article illustrates how participants’ sense of appropriate language use is discursively negotiated, examining entries in online discussion boards regarding medical practitioners’ use and non-use of honorifics. The analysis shows social factors deemed relevant by the discussion board participants regarding their evaluations on honorifics use and non-use such as interlocutors’ age and social distance as well as the location and type of medical institution. Participants’ evaluations, the article demonstrates, are based on their views of medical practice (whether it is similar to or different from other types of service, whether it is similar to first-time encounters, and so forth). Medical practitioners’ non-use of honorifics tends to be accepted and appreciated in a context in which the addressee (patient) experiences urgency, vulnerability, and/or anxiety. Lastly, the study illustrates the process of enregisterment of honorific usage.","PeriodicalId":37018,"journal":{"name":"East Asian Pragmatics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"East Asian Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1558/EAP.18183","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This article illustrates how participants’ sense of appropriate language use is discursively negotiated, examining entries in online discussion boards regarding medical practitioners’ use and non-use of honorifics. The analysis shows social factors deemed relevant by the discussion board participants regarding their evaluations on honorifics use and non-use such as interlocutors’ age and social distance as well as the location and type of medical institution. Participants’ evaluations, the article demonstrates, are based on their views of medical practice (whether it is similar to or different from other types of service, whether it is similar to first-time encounters, and so forth). Medical practitioners’ non-use of honorifics tends to be accepted and appreciated in a context in which the addressee (patient) experiences urgency, vulnerability, and/or anxiety. Lastly, the study illustrates the process of enregisterment of honorific usage.
友好还是居高临下?
这篇文章展示了参与者的适当语言使用感是如何通过讨论来协商的,研究了在线讨论板上关于医生使用和不使用敬语的条目。分析显示了讨论会参与者认为与他们对敬语使用和不使用的评估相关的社会因素,如对话者的年龄和社交距离,以及医疗机构的位置和类型。文章表明,参与者的评估是基于他们对医疗实践的看法(是否与其他类型的服务相似或不同,是否与首次接触相似,等等)。在受试者(患者)经历紧急、脆弱和/或焦虑的情况下,医生不使用敬语往往会被接受和赞赏。最后,对敬语用法的注册过程进行了说明。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
East Asian Pragmatics
East Asian Pragmatics Social Sciences-Cultural Studies
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信