{"title":"汉语对话中的道歉:词汇形式与“道歉”的自反构造","authors":"Guodong Yu , Chase Wesley Raymond , Yaxin Wu","doi":"10.1016/j.pragma.2025.04.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper uses the theory and methods of Conversation Analysis (CA) to explore the lexical design of apologies in naturally-occurring Mandarin conversation. We present three recurrent lexical formats used to issue apologies—(i) 不好意思 <em>bùhǎoyìsī</em>, (ii) 对不起 <em>duìbùqǐ</em>, and (iii) 抱歉/道歉 <em>bàoqiàn/dàoqiàn</em>—all of which are regularly translated into English as “(I'm) sorry” and/or “I apologize”. Rather than being used interchangeably, we argue that each of these formats is fitted to particular sorts of ‘apologizeables’, which are reflexively constructed as such through the issuing of the apology turn. The formats can therefore be arranged on a cline with regard to the gravity of the offense thereby indexed, with more ‘minimal’ offenses addressed with <em>bùhǎoyìsī</em>, comparatively graver apologizeables addressed with <em>duìbùqǐ</em>, and morally laden circumstances constructed with <em>bàoqiàn</em> and <em>dàoqiàn</em>. We also consider how lexical formats can be modulated through other aspects of turn design, like subject expression and adverbials, which likewise contribute to apology actions and their sequential relevancies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16899,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pragmatics","volume":"242 ","pages":"Pages 60-75"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Apologies in Mandarin Chinese conversation: Lexical format and the reflexive construction of ‘apologizeables’\",\"authors\":\"Guodong Yu , Chase Wesley Raymond , Yaxin Wu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.pragma.2025.04.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This paper uses the theory and methods of Conversation Analysis (CA) to explore the lexical design of apologies in naturally-occurring Mandarin conversation. We present three recurrent lexical formats used to issue apologies—(i) 不好意思 <em>bùhǎoyìsī</em>, (ii) 对不起 <em>duìbùqǐ</em>, and (iii) 抱歉/道歉 <em>bàoqiàn/dàoqiàn</em>—all of which are regularly translated into English as “(I'm) sorry” and/or “I apologize”. Rather than being used interchangeably, we argue that each of these formats is fitted to particular sorts of ‘apologizeables’, which are reflexively constructed as such through the issuing of the apology turn. The formats can therefore be arranged on a cline with regard to the gravity of the offense thereby indexed, with more ‘minimal’ offenses addressed with <em>bùhǎoyìsī</em>, comparatively graver apologizeables addressed with <em>duìbùqǐ</em>, and morally laden circumstances constructed with <em>bàoqiàn</em> and <em>dàoqiàn</em>. We also consider how lexical formats can be modulated through other aspects of turn design, like subject expression and adverbials, which likewise contribute to apology actions and their sequential relevancies.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16899,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pragmatics\",\"volume\":\"242 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 60-75\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pragmatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378216625000840\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378216625000840","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本文运用会话分析的理论和方法,探讨了自然发生的普通话会话中道歉的词汇设计。我们提出了三种用于道歉的反复出现的词汇格式——(i), (ii), (iii), (iii), (i 'm), (i 'm), (i 'm), (i 'm), (i 'm), (i 'm),对不起,(i 'm), (i 'm),对不起,(i 'm)。我们认为,这些格式中的每一种都适合于特定类型的“道歉”,而不是可以互换使用,它们是通过发出道歉转来反射性地构建的。因此,这些格式可以根据所索引的罪行的严重程度进行排列,以bùhǎoyìsī来处理更“轻微”的罪行,以duìbùqǐ来处理相对严重的道歉,并以bàoqiàn和dàoqiàn来构建道德负担重的情况。我们还考虑了如何通过回合设计的其他方面来调节词汇格式,如主语表达和状语,这同样有助于道歉行为及其顺序相关性。
Apologies in Mandarin Chinese conversation: Lexical format and the reflexive construction of ‘apologizeables’
This paper uses the theory and methods of Conversation Analysis (CA) to explore the lexical design of apologies in naturally-occurring Mandarin conversation. We present three recurrent lexical formats used to issue apologies—(i) 不好意思 bùhǎoyìsī, (ii) 对不起 duìbùqǐ, and (iii) 抱歉/道歉 bàoqiàn/dàoqiàn—all of which are regularly translated into English as “(I'm) sorry” and/or “I apologize”. Rather than being used interchangeably, we argue that each of these formats is fitted to particular sorts of ‘apologizeables’, which are reflexively constructed as such through the issuing of the apology turn. The formats can therefore be arranged on a cline with regard to the gravity of the offense thereby indexed, with more ‘minimal’ offenses addressed with bùhǎoyìsī, comparatively graver apologizeables addressed with duìbùqǐ, and morally laden circumstances constructed with bàoqiàn and dàoqiàn. We also consider how lexical formats can be modulated through other aspects of turn design, like subject expression and adverbials, which likewise contribute to apology actions and their sequential relevancies.
期刊介绍:
Since 1977, the Journal of Pragmatics has provided a forum for bringing together a wide range of research in pragmatics, including cognitive pragmatics, corpus pragmatics, experimental pragmatics, historical pragmatics, interpersonal pragmatics, multimodal pragmatics, sociopragmatics, theoretical pragmatics and related fields. Our aim is to publish innovative pragmatic scholarship from all perspectives, which contributes to theories of how speakers produce and interpret language in different contexts drawing on attested data from a wide range of languages/cultures in different parts of the world. The Journal of Pragmatics also encourages work that uses attested language data to explore the relationship between pragmatics and neighbouring research areas such as semantics, discourse analysis, conversation analysis and ethnomethodology, interactional linguistics, sociolinguistics, linguistic anthropology, media studies, psychology, sociology, and the philosophy of language. Alongside full-length articles, discussion notes and book reviews, the journal welcomes proposals for high quality special issues in all areas of pragmatics which make a significant contribution to a topical or developing area at the cutting-edge of research.