CC BY
8
ФИЛОЛОГИЧЕСКИЕ НАУКИ / PHILOLOGY
DOI: https://doi.org/10.23670/IRJ.2017.60.127 Аведова Р.П.1, Ласкина Е.Е.2, Мойсова О.Б.3
'ORCID: 0000-0002-8771-9215, кандидат филологических наук, доцент, 2ORCID: 0000-0003-4024-0757, кандидат педагогических наук, доцент 3ORCID: 0000-002-2533-9241, кандидат филологических наук, доцент, Донской государственный технический университет ПРАГМАТИЧЕСКИЕ ОСОБЕННОСТИ ПОДТВЕРЖДАЮЩЕГО ВОПРОСА, КАК СРЕДСТВА УСТРАНЕНИЯ ИНФОРМАЦИОННОЙ ЛАКУНАРОНСТИ
Аннотация
Статья посвящена исследованию и последующему анализу категории вопроса-переспроса с точки зрения его контекстной и прагматической специфики в коммуникативной среде диалога. В статье рассматривается способность реплик указанных в статье устранять информационную недостаточность, обусловленную различными факторами. Авторами выделяются несколько типов подтверждающего вопроса-переспроса и проводится анализ способности каждого из них воздействовать на реципиента, а также исследуются взаимосвязь между их структурами и прагматической направленностью, позволяющими эффективно устранять информационную лакунарность.
Ключевые слова: вопрос-переспрос, диалогическое единство, реплики стимулы, информационные лакуны, коммуникативный эффект, прагматический потенциал.
Avedova R.P.% Laskina E.E.2, Moisova O.B.3
'ORCID: 0000-0002-8771-9215, PhD in Philology, Associate professor, 2ORCID: 0000-0003-4024-0757, PhD in Pedagogy, Associate professor, 3ORCID: 0000-002-2533-9241, PhD in Philology, Associate professor, Don state technical university VERIFYING ECHO-QUESTION PRAGMATIC PECULARITIIES AS MEANS OF INFORMATION GAPS
ELIMINATION
Abstract
The article is devoted to research and the subsequent analysis of the category of echo-question from the point of view of its contextual and pragmatic specifics in the communicative environment of the dialogical unity. The article analyses echo-question to eliminate information gaps of various nature. The authors distinguish several types of verifying echo-question and conduct their thorough analysis, considering communicative effect on the listener, correlation between their structure and pragmatic performance in information deficiency elimination.
Keywords: echo-question, dialogical unity, remarks incentives, information gap, communicative effect, pragmatic performance.
Introduction
Verifying echo-question is a special kind of interrogative responses - echo-questions, the specific use of which is to motivate the sender to repeat the element of the initial statement that was not received by the addressee for various reasons [1]. Different types of echo-questions in the discourse gain an additional function associated with shades of meaning that they acquire in different communicative situations [2]. Echo-questions can be used to clarify the information of initial statement and can be classified as a clarifying question; or they can draw attention to the speaker's words and take the form of an interrogative sign of attention. In addition, echo-questions can have a supporting function and can be a motivation to prove or disprove the information of the initial replicas [4].
The aim of this study is to analyze a peculiar type of echo-questions that performs verifying function and conduct thorough analysis of its pragmatic peculiarities as means of information gaps elimination.
Discussion
Echo-questions can be aimed at encouraging the interlocutor to confirm or to refute the messages of initial statement, which seemed to the recipient unlikely to happen and caused surprise and bewilderment with the sender's words [3]. Functioning as a confirmation or refutation of the information echo-questions help the addressee to fill in the information vacuum, the gaps, formed as a result of surprise with the sender's words. Thus, continuing the interaction, important for both participants of the communication. Verifying echo-question prompts the sender to the confirmation or refutation of the information of initial statement, eliminates information gaps and develops communication. Therefore, one can say that reaching the final goal verifying echo-question helps to eliminate information gaps [5].
We have identified the main communicative task of the verifying echo-question. The question is what form can it take? Verifying echo-question can be represented by two structural types: echo-question with repetition and word-sentences like 'Really?'. Using verifying echo-question with data structured types is due to their pragmatic and communicative line. Despite completely different construction, the main function of the interrogative replica-repetition and the word-sentences like 'Really?' is the desire of the recipient, who having missed the essence of the initial replica is trying to obtain confirmation or refutation of the fact that it has been correctly heard and he understood his partner's remark, which helps to eliminate information deficiency in the process of perception of initial statement message [6].
Comparative analysis
To understand the researched function of verifying echo-question represented by two structural types of echo-question, we will analyze each of them separately, finding similarities and differences between them. First, let's refer to interrogative replica-repetition.
First of all, it should be noted that the structured types of verifying echo-question meet its communicative task: forming his reply, the recipient language borrows material from the preceding cues, repeating it partially or completely in their own statement based on the information provided by the sender in the initial statement, he would like to have a confirmation or denial [4]. Most often, 70% of the interaction environment shows that verifying echo-question is extremely reduced in form and consists only of that word, which contains the essence of the statements of the addresser, that is, in most dialogic unities with the verifying echo-question the addressee's remarks that were correctly received and which, therefore, do not longer have functional load and do not meet the functional purpose of verifying echo-question, are omitted.
However, verifying echo-question can be more detailed, complete, and structured, having the elements of the verbal composition of the first replica as its basis, to a greater or lesser extent structured with it. With this parallelism verifying echo-question can repeat exactly or with only minor variations a model of a declarative sentence of initial statement. Despite the complete structure of the replica question, verifying echo-question of such structure performs the same function as the reduced cue-repetition, and is focused on confirming the information and removing information gaps [5].
Now, compare the two dialogic units, in one of which verifying echo-question consists of only the component of initial replica, which caused the need to verify/refute the information; and the dialogic unity, in which the interrogative replica repetition repeats almost completely the structure of initial statement. Let us analyze the first dialogue:
- I know there was much evil she's done to your life.
- I don't hate her. I just don't want her to be on my list. I even remember something good...
- Something good? About Ally?
- Surprised? Once she helped me out when I was about to lose everything. she was the only one to stand by me...(B. Burns - 'The dark part of me').
In this dialogic unit verifying echo-question is the repetition of a part of the initial replicas. The reduction of verifying echo-question is a result of the fact that the recipient is astonished by the definite abstract of the message, as he knows about complex relationship between the hero and his sister. Therefore, by repeating Something good? the recipient asks the interlocutor to confirm whether he had understood correctly that the speaker had good memories of the past. Verifying echo-question is followed by the return-replica that reveals the essence of the previous statements, to eliminate the information vacuum and to convey to the addressee information that can explain the contradictory nature of the relationship of the sender with his sister. Consider the following example:
- He wants me.
- He wants you?
- He's been pursuing me for nearly a week (D. Mitchel - 'Cloud atlas').
This example, unlike the previous one, verifying echo-question is almost identical to the model of declarative sentence of initial statement. As in the previous example, the recipient is surprised by what he has heard from the interlocutor and wants to be sure in the perceived information, requiring the response in which the sender, removing the information lack, will be able to confirm or deny the initial statement. The examples confirm the general function in verifying echo-question, given in an extremely reduced structure, and with almost complete repetition of the initial statement.
Another structural peqularity of the verifying echo question functioning as means of data deficiency eliminator is introducing a question replica - interrogatives, symbolizing that the information has not been perceived. This phenomenon meets the basic task of the verifying echo-question, as this question word focuses the sender on the initial statement information, requiring confirmation. It is placed at the end of the phrase and represents a bump, the most meaningful information. The rest of information is not of interest and therefore it is not reflected in the verifying question. Let's analyse the example.
-I don't want to go to prom with him.
- Don't what?
- I don't have a dress (B. Burns - 'The dark part of me').
In this dialogic unit a question word what in the verifying echo-question replaces want to go to prom of the initial replica (the information that is of great interest for the recipient) and is intended to encourage the heroine to verify her reluctance to attend signifficant event , and give an explanation of her decision, as without proper explanation the interlocutor does not understand the reaction of the heroine. Thus, verifying echo-question in the dialogic unit terminates the information defficiency through highlighting the initial statement component, which arose information gaps. The rest information isn't essential to the listener and isn't reflected in the interrogative replica-repetition's structure.
As mentioned earlier, verifying function can be performed by the interrogative word-sentences like 'Really?', that can take forms of 'Yes?', 'Seriously?', 'Is that so?', 'Indeed?','So?',etc., as well as short interrogative statements composed of a personal pronoun and an auxiliary verb , being an inquiry about the accuracy or inaccuracy of data in the replica-stimulus, they stimulate the information gaps elimination because of the initial statement's information deficiency. The difference between this type of echo-question from the studied above is in their structural features. If the verifying echo-question has in its structure a part of the of the initial replica statement and encourages the speaker to repeat the data he is focused on in his response replica, interrogative word-sentences like 'Really?' are focused on the whole replica, therefore the sender decides what information the addressee asks to repeat. However, interrogative word-sentences like 'Really?', as well as verifying questions, are targeted at the person's confirming or refuting the messages of initial replica, and despite being completely different types of a verifying echo-question, they perform the same task.
Common pragmatic peqularities of these types of verifying echo-questions are reflected in their usage. Sometimes interrogative echo-questions and structures like 'Really?' are followed by additional data, represented by declarative sentences, where the possible causes of verifying questions may be given or the addressee expresses the attitude towards the speaker's words or suggests possible causes of his communicative behavior. Such additional proposals, accompanying the verifying question are aimed to prompt the interlocutor to give exactly the information which will enable to verify or deny if the
recipient has understood the utterance. Let's analyze some examples where the interrogative response is followed by additional offer, and see its occurrence:
- Did you know she's gone to Paris?
- Paris? I see. She's marrying him.
- No. That's not it... She's ill. She is dying. (B. Burns - 'The dark part of me').
The second replica of the dialogic unit provides an example of verifying echo-question, that reflects the recipient's surprise with the interlocutor's message. The protagonist's reaction is determined by failing not understanding his beloved behavior. The confirming question is followed by additional information in the form of declarative sentences, expressing the addressee's assumption on the causes that influenced heroin's behavior, and that are aimed at encouraging t he interlocutor to verify or deny the speaker's assumption. In the response statement the sender denies the interlocutor's assumption and gives true reasons. Thus, the information deficiency arising from the lack of addressee's awareness are eliminated.
One more peculiarity of verifying echo-question ,represented both by interrogative replica-repetition and replicas like 'Really?', is its ability to some extent to lose the value of inquiring and acquire additional shades of meaning. Interrogation loss is not complete, therefore verifying echo-question does not cease to be an interrogative response, nevertheless, expressiveness becomes a dominant feature turning verifying question into an expressive-emotional means displaying the listener's subjective attitude to the data of the initial statement. Let's study several examples in different communication environments.
Let's analyze the first communicative context. Being completely charmed by the gangster, protagonist fails to notice that her boyfriend is evil and tells her friend about him with admiration. This results in the recipient's indignant reaction as she herself had been treated cruelly by the man. The recipient's indignation is reflected in the echo -question represented by the repetition of incentive replica. The echo-question is aimed not only at inducing the interlocutor to overturn what she had said previously, but it also conveys the addressee's emotional protest against what she has heard:
- He is so cute.
- Cute? -I asked incredulously. - He was about to kill me!
- He was just making fun of you. (D. Koomson. My best friend's girl).
Let us analyze communicative context in which echo-question is represented by the form 'Seriously?':
Emmett: She didn't hunt the humans?
Edward: She started to... She was entirely focused on the hunt... She heard me behind her and reacted defensively. As soon as my pursuit broke into her concentration, she snapped right out of it. I've never seen anything to equal her. She realized at once what was happening, and then... she held her breath and ran away...
Emmett: Seriously? Bella: He's not telling it right... He left out the part where I growled at him (S. Meyer - 'Breaking Dawn ').
The interrogative replica-repetition represented by the question word 'Seriously?' conveys the speaker's extreme surprise with the last sentence of the incentive replica. To understand the addressee's reaction, let's analyse the communicative environment in which the verifying echo-question arose. The hero was astonished to hear from his interlocutor about such unexpected behavior of the "newborn" vampire, as they have an irresistible craving for blood and cannot control their instincts, while the heroine stopped the hunt on a wounded person. This makes it difficult for the listener to believe and results in the question 'Seriously?' , conveying astonishment and intended at encouraging interlocutor to confirm or deny the message. We can observe, the veryfing function and the speaker's emotional state representation are effectively combined in one replica.
Results
The examples examined prove the the echo-question's ability to perform not only interrogative function, but also deliver other shades of meaning, conveying speaker's emotional state in the course of perceiving the interlocutor's message. Verifying remains the main pragmatic function, since verifying the data of the initial statement is the main communicative task of this interrogative response-replica type, while emotional state representation contributes to the main task. Interrogative meaning is to some extent lost, therefore one can speak of different emotional connotations' prevalence.
Conclusion
It can be concluded that verifying echo-question represents an effective means of information defficiency elimination. Information insufficiency elimination is realized due to verifying echo-question's pragmatic potential to stimulate the interlocutor to verify or refute the replica-stimulus message and fill the gaps resulting in the course of data delivery from speaker to addressee and the subsequent perception by the later of the initial replica's information.
Moreover, verifying echo-question can be represented by two structures: interrogative replica-repetition and structures like 'Seriously?' , 'Yes?', 'Really', 'Indeed?', 'So?', 'Is that so?', etc. and questions containing personal pronoun and auxiliary verb . Having analyzed the structures mentioned above it can be concluded: despite structural differences they all perform the same pragmatic function and are aimed at confirming or refuting the information delivered in the replica-incentive. Furthermore, all the verifying echo-question structures posess common peculiarities. For instance, they can be followed by statements reflecting the speaker's attitude to the replica-stimulus or speaker's assumptions on the reasons of events, reported in the initial statement. They can also contain the addressee's reflections on the message delivered in replica-stimulus. Such additional statements, accompanying verifying echo-questions, are aimed at inducing interlocutor provide precise information that can verify or refute whether the listener understood the message correctly. They also explain why it was necessary to verify or refute it.
Another feature of verifying echo-question, discovered during the study, is its ability to lose to some extent its interrogative function and convey other shades of meaning, such as surprise, bewilderment, indignation, anger, irony, etc. Thus verifying echo-questions, apart from confirming or refuting initial statement's information, can also be used as means of expressing the listener's subjective attitude to the thought or message contained in the replica-stimulus. It was noted that when
acquiring an additional shade of meaning, verifying echo-questions are still aimed at confirming the data, since it is their main pragmatic function, while conveying the addressee's emotional state simply contributes to it.
In addition to common peculiarities typical to all types of verifying echo-questions, there have been found correlation between specific features of verifying questions represented by interrogative replica-repetition and its structure. This is due to the fact that the addressee, in most cases, in his replica repeats only the part of the statement to which he would like to receive verification or denial, the rest of the information is of no value to him and therefore is not reflected in his response.
That is, in the verifying echo-question of this type all the elements correctly received by the addressee are omitted beimg of no significance and not corresponding to the pragmatic purpose of the verifying echo-question. Another peculiarity of the interrogative replica-repetition verifying echo-questions is the introduction into its composition a question word symbolizing the information that is not perceived. This question word is placed at the end and represents a rheme, the most significant information of the replica-stimulus, which the addressee needs to confirm in order to eliminate information deficiency.
Список литературы на английском языке / References in English
1. Avedova R.P Structural and Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Indigenisation. On Multilingualism and Language Evolution. Anchimbe, Eric A. (Ed.), 2014. ISBN 978-94-007-7880-1. - XV, P. 213
2. Blakemore D. Echo question: A pragmatic account // Lingua. 1994. № 4.
3. Cussen R. The Night Watchman. EServer. - 1992. [Electronic resource]. - URL: http://drama.eserver.org/plays/contemporary/night-watchman.html (accessed: 20.10.2016).
4. Meyer S. Eclipse / S. Meyer. — New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2008. - 576 p.
5. Rowling J. K. Goblet of fire. NY: Scholastic Paperbacks, 2002. - 752p.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.23670/IRJ.2017.60.069 Девель Л. А.
ORCID: 0000-0001-9992-1851 Кандидат филологических наук, ^юз переводчиков России ЛЕКСИКОГРАФИЧЕСКИЙ ПОТЕНЦИАЛ ПРЕДМЕТНОЙ ОБЛАСТИ «ТЕАТР»
Аннотация
Проблематика лексикографирования языков для специальных целей актуальна для прикладной лингвистики, двуязычной переводной и сравнительной лексикографии, терминографии. Рассмотрение лексикографического потенциала предметной области «театр» позволяет позиционировать вновь вышедший учебно-тематический словарь делового языка театра в ряду наиболее важных имеющихся толковых и переводных справочников по театру. Словарь делового языка театра служит в качестве доступного, двуязычного бумажного справочника по театру с парой русский английский для использования в учебных и профессиональных целях коммуникации, который может быть ресурсом для базы данных международного многоязычного театрального бесплатного онлайн словаря, создаваемого при поддержке ЮНЕСКО.
Ключевые слова: лексикографирование, театр, база данных, англо-русский, терминология, социально-значимый, функционально-прагматический, деловой язык, язык для специальных целей.
Devel L.A.
ORCHID: 0000-0001-9992-1851 PhD in Philology St. Petersburg State University of Culture and Arts LEXICOGRAPHICAL POTENTIAL OF THE THEATER TOPICAL AREA
Abstract
The problem of languages lexicography for special purposes is relevant for applied linguistics, bilingual translation, comparative lexicography, and terminography. The consideration of the lexicographical potential of the "theater" topical area allows positioning the newly published bilingual English-Russian educational and thematic dictionaries with the theater business language among the available reference media on a theater. The dictionary of the theater business language serves as a widely available, reliable bilingual guide to a theater with a Russian-English pair for use in educational and professional communication; it can be a resource for the database of an international multilingual theatrical free online dictionary developed with the support of UNESCO.
Keywords: lexicography, theater, database, English-Russian, terminology, socially significant, functional and pragmatic, business language, language for special purposes.
В связи с появлением Словаря делового языка театра - англо-русского русско-английского учебно-тематического в 2013 году [11] позиционируем его в ряду лексикографических ресурсов существующих на сегодняшний день с целью оптимального его использования и в связи с нижеследующими задачами.
Задачи словарной науки и практики всегда заключались и заключаются: в совершенствовании существующих типов словарей; в создании новых типов словарей на основе новых актуальных принципов и технологий; в соединении традиций и инноваций в терминологические системы и словарные комплексы [5], [16] .
Исследования терминологии, прежде всего, как инструмента представления знаний получили особую актуальность в мире в связи с интеграцией и формированием единого информационного пространства [4]. Проблема представления терминологии для непрофессиональных пользователей остается открытой. Очевидно, что определенные разряды специальной лексики имеют высокую социальную значимость и должны быть представлены не только в отраслевых терминологических словарях, предназначенных для профессионалов в определенной
