A Pragmatic Study Of Conflicting Response Strategies Between The Interlocutors In Unequal Power Relations

Conflict talk is a common but complicated language phenomenon.It refers to “the kind of conversational communication in which two or more participants who take alternative or opposite positions on the same issue,oppose the utterances,actions,or selves of one another unfriendly in successive turns,and the process by which such disagreement arises,is dealt with and resolved”(Grimshaw,1990,p.4).An increasing number of scholars at home and abroad have paid considerable attention to the study of the response strategies of conflict talk from the perspective of pragmatics,but most of them focus on the study of mitigating strategies.As a consequence,they pay less attention to the conflicting response strategies.This thesis treats conflicting response strategies as research objects,and takes the dialogues of characters in unequal power relations in TV series In the Name of the People with anti-corruption theme as the data to probe into the effects of power on conflicting response strategies under the guidance of Spencer-Oatey’s(2000)Rapport Management Theory.The following research questions are mainly involved: 1)What are the types of conflicting response strategies adopted by the interlocutors in unequal power relations? What are the differences of conflicting response strategies used by both interlocutors in unequal power relations? 2)What pragmatic motivations cause a significant difference in the use of conflicting response strategies between the interlocutors in unequal power relations?The present study has the following findings: 1)There are mainly 13 types of conflicting response strategies selected by the addressee,among which there are 6 kinds of direct ones,including swear words,explicit refusal,implementation of power,threats,verbal provocation,and refutation;7 kinds of indirect ones,including irony,implicit refusal,indirect negation,rhetorical questions,intentional misinterpretation,obedience,and self-deprecation.High-powers often use direct conflicting response strategies,especially refutation and implementation of power,while low-powers often respond to high-powers through indirect ones,mainly using rhetorical questions and indirect negation.2)Based on the pragmatic motives behind the conflicting response made by high and low powers,this thesis explains the reasons why the two sides have significant differences in the use of conflicting response strategies.According to personal attitudes,emotions,and the components of rapport management,the pragmatic motivations behind the conflicting response are divided into highlighting identity,maintaining face,upholding rights,sticking to one’s positions,and expressing negative emotions.It is found that,driven by pragmatic motives of highlighting identities or sticking to their positions,high-powers are accustomed to adopting direct conflicting response strategies.In contrast,low-powered participants often tend to use indirect conflicting response strategies driven by their maintenance of face or rights.This study helps us to understand the different conflicting responses made by the interlocutors under the influence of power.It contributes to understand and avoid the use of inappropriate or potentially offensive response strategies,helping us to consciously use appropriate communication strategies in the workplace or in the officialdom to maintain interpersonal relations.