{"title":"与他人相处而不是相处:是什么引发了评价性反应?","authors":"Helen Spencer-Oatey , Jiayi Wang","doi":"10.1016/j.pragma.2025.05.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>There has been a growing focus within (im)politeness theory on evaluation – the subjective judgements that people make on the appropriateness of verbal and non-verbal behaviour and of the interlocutors involved. However, to date there is insufficient clarity over the factors that trigger those evaluations. Often this is explained in terms of breach of norms, but there are various conceptual and empirical difficulties associated with this. This paper argues for greater attention to be paid to personal wants and concerns as additional evaluative grounds and proposes labelling these ‘personal interactional concerns’ (PICs). This concept is in line with much (im)politeness theory as well as with theorising in interpersonal psychology. Relevant literature from these fields is first reviewed to identify the range of triggers or interactional concerns that have been identified by different scholars. A dataset of metapragmatic comments, plus some associated discourse data, is analysed to identify the factors that interlocutors refer to when reflecting on their recent interactions with unfamiliar professionals. The aim is to explore (a) what triggers or concerns participants refer to and (b) whether the additional concept of PICs is helpful for explaining individual variation. The article ends by arguing that greater clarity on these trigger factors is important not only for theoretical reasons, but also for the support they can offer in helping people reflect more meaningfully on relationally salient incidents that they experience.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16899,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pragmatics","volume":"243 ","pages":"Pages 6-23"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Relating to others and (not) getting along: What triggers evaluative reactions?\",\"authors\":\"Helen Spencer-Oatey , Jiayi Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.pragma.2025.05.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>There has been a growing focus within (im)politeness theory on evaluation – the subjective judgements that people make on the appropriateness of verbal and non-verbal behaviour and of the interlocutors involved. However, to date there is insufficient clarity over the factors that trigger those evaluations. Often this is explained in terms of breach of norms, but there are various conceptual and empirical difficulties associated with this. This paper argues for greater attention to be paid to personal wants and concerns as additional evaluative grounds and proposes labelling these ‘personal interactional concerns’ (PICs). This concept is in line with much (im)politeness theory as well as with theorising in interpersonal psychology. Relevant literature from these fields is first reviewed to identify the range of triggers or interactional concerns that have been identified by different scholars. A dataset of metapragmatic comments, plus some associated discourse data, is analysed to identify the factors that interlocutors refer to when reflecting on their recent interactions with unfamiliar professionals. The aim is to explore (a) what triggers or concerns participants refer to and (b) whether the additional concept of PICs is helpful for explaining individual variation. The article ends by arguing that greater clarity on these trigger factors is important not only for theoretical reasons, but also for the support they can offer in helping people reflect more meaningfully on relationally salient incidents that they experience.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16899,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pragmatics\",\"volume\":\"243 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 6-23\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-22\",\"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/S0378216625001092\",\"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/S0378216625001092","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Relating to others and (not) getting along: What triggers evaluative reactions?
There has been a growing focus within (im)politeness theory on evaluation – the subjective judgements that people make on the appropriateness of verbal and non-verbal behaviour and of the interlocutors involved. However, to date there is insufficient clarity over the factors that trigger those evaluations. Often this is explained in terms of breach of norms, but there are various conceptual and empirical difficulties associated with this. This paper argues for greater attention to be paid to personal wants and concerns as additional evaluative grounds and proposes labelling these ‘personal interactional concerns’ (PICs). This concept is in line with much (im)politeness theory as well as with theorising in interpersonal psychology. Relevant literature from these fields is first reviewed to identify the range of triggers or interactional concerns that have been identified by different scholars. A dataset of metapragmatic comments, plus some associated discourse data, is analysed to identify the factors that interlocutors refer to when reflecting on their recent interactions with unfamiliar professionals. The aim is to explore (a) what triggers or concerns participants refer to and (b) whether the additional concept of PICs is helpful for explaining individual variation. The article ends by arguing that greater clarity on these trigger factors is important not only for theoretical reasons, but also for the support they can offer in helping people reflect more meaningfully on relationally salient incidents that they experience.
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.