Наукова стаття Metacommunicative utterances related to turn-taking in conversation and ways of rendering them into Ukrainian, based on oscar wilde’s works and their translations
Код роботи: 1358
Вид роботи: Наукова стаття
Тема: Metacommunicative utterances related to turn-taking in conversation and ways of rendering them into Ukrainian, based on oscar wilde’s works and their translations
Кількість сторінок: 12
Дата виконання: 2016
Мова написання: англійська
В.Є. Олесь. Метакомунікативні висловлювання на переймання комунікативної ініціативи та способи їх перекладу українською мовою. Стаття присвячена комплексному аналізу мовних одиниць переймання комунікативної ініціативи, що виступають рамковими елементами діалогу та полегшують зміну комунікативних ролей мовця та слухача у розмові.
Ключові слова: метакомунікативне висловлювання, комунікативна ініціатива, комунікативна роль.
В.Е. Олесь. Метакоммуникативные высказывания на получение коммуникативной инициативы и способы их перевода на украинский язык. Статья посвящена комплексному анализу языковых единиц заимствования коммуникативной инициативы, выступающих в роли рамочных элементов диалога и облегчающих смену коммуникативных ролей говорящего и слушателя в разговоре.
Ключевые слова: метакоммуникативное высказывание, коммуникативная инициатива, коммуникативная роль.
V.Ye. Oles’. Metacommunicative utterances related to turn-taking in conversation and ways of rendering them into Ukrainian (based on Oscar Wilde’s works and their translations). The paper focuses on the analysis of the linguistic units relevant to turn-taking which serve as framing, organizing elements of the dialogue and facilitate the change of communicative roles of speaker and listener in conversation.
Key words: metacommunicative utterance, turn-taking, communicative role.
1. Арутюнова Н. Д. Стратегия и тактика речевого поведения / Н. Д. Арутюнова // Прагматические аспекты изучения предложения и текста. - К., 1983. - С. 4-12.
2. Почепцов Г. Г. Фатическая метакоммуникация / Г. Г. Почепцов // Семантика и прагматика синтаксических единств. - Калинин, 1981. - С. 52-59.
3. Levinson S. C. Pragmatics. - Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. - P. 354.
4. Sacks H. Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-taking for Conversation. / H. Sacks, E. A. Schegloff, G. A. Jefferson // Language. - Baltimore, 1974. - Vol. 50, № 4. - P. 696-735.
Linguistic investigations of recent decades are characterized by their viewing language as one of the most important components of human social practice and activity which does not only function but, rather, is used by people to organize interaction between individuals and groups of individuals, providing for the flow of cognitive-emotive processes and information exchange. Most scholars lay emphasis on the correlation between the structure of language units and the structure of communicative context, pointing that the choice of verbal means depends on who, why and where speaks, which interests, beliefs, intentions the communicants possess and how the content of their speech correlates with time and space in which the act of communication is taking place. Much attention is paid to organizational and regulating functions of the language, i.e. its ability not only to convey information but to organize the most successful social intercourse.
This paper focuses on the analysis of the linguistic units relevant to turn-taking which serve as framing, organizing elements of the dialogue and facilitate the change of communicative roles of speaker and listener in conversation.
Dialogue is one of the basic forms of verbal communication. A dialogue can expose the multitude of relations between the communicative intentions of the partners and their speech moves. Therefore, the dialogue is the most favourable and suitable object for pragmalinguistic investigation, for establishing the units of verbal communication and for defining the rules of interactive speech behaviour of the communicants.
Dialogue is a type of verbal communication the main feature of which is turn-taking – the exchange of at least two verbal moves. In conversation, the roles of speaker and listener change constantly. The person who speaks first becomes a listener as soon as the person addressed takes his or her turn in the conversation by beginning to speak.
So, “conversation is an enterprise in which one person speaks, and another listens: one participant, A, talks, stops; another, B, starts, talks, stops; and so we obtain an A-B-A-B-A-B distribution of talk across two participants” [3, р. 296].
Turn-taking in conversation is predetermined by a number of factors, the most important of which are: the cast of the participants, their social positions and roles, the topic of the conversation, the setting in which the conversation is taking place. In each separate communicative situation the communicants interact as social types, revealing the social properties which have been formed as the result of their social practice. Interlocutors usually enter a dialogue having different attitudes, anticipations, expectations, beliefs, goals, intentions, emotions etc. For this reason, the two or more speakers experience different grades of involvement into the same speech event. Some of them are deeply interested in it, some – indifferent, some are active, some – passive, some may be pleased, some – hurt or abused. Their moves in the dialogue differ: one of the speakers or a group of speakers rule the conversation – their moves determine further development of the talk, so, they have the communicative initiative in the given discourse. It applies both to cooperative dialogues and to conflicts. In the latter case one can easily see the speaker’s claims and attempts to gain the communicative initiative, to win the right to rule or control the dialogue in order to achieve one’s own goals.
If we take the above mentioned into account, several possible variants of turn-taking can be traced: ‘successful’ transition, when the speaker completes his turn, stops speaking, and only after that the other communicant takes the turn; transition after the simultaneous talk; unsuccessful attempt of the listener to take the turn; and unsuccessful attempt of the speaker to pass the turn to the listener.
The speaker and the listener signal that they are going to take the turn or to pass the turn to the partner with the help of verbal and non-verbal means. Verbal signals that accompany turn-taking are metacommunicative utterances of the speaker and the listener.
Nowadays many scientific disciplines (e.g. psychology, medicine, linguistics) investigate metacommunication as the object of great interest. The linguistic investigation of metacommunication is based on the definition of it as the explicit (verbal) communication about communication. According to G.Pocheptsov, social, psychological, physiological peculiarities of verbal communication determine the necessity of performing two functions in the process of communication: first – the communicative function, and second – the metacommunicative function [2, с. 52]. The result of verbal communication is the text in which two planes can be distinguished:
- communicative plane – the plane of sending and receiving the message itself;
- metacommunicative plane – the plane of regulating the process of verbal communication.
In the system of language there exist and continue to develop and improve special lexical devices whose functions are to provide for the effectiveness of verbal communication. These lexical elements are metacommunicative utterances (MCUs). They are explicit utterances about other utterances and communication on the whole. When speaking, the communicants exchange information. But as N.Arutyunova says, one cannot but notice that purely informative speech occupies comparatively little space on the vast field of verbal activity of the majority of people, even in case of business communication [1, с.5]. Together with different contents making the topic of the conversation, the communicants may touch upon the “techniques”: they may be interested in the manner of expressing their thoughts, the form of the expression, the attitude of the interlocutor to the given topic or some extralinguistic aspects of the conversation. Also, they may yield the floor to the partner, encourage him to take the turn or prevent him from taking the turn with the help of some special MCUs.
Let us analyse some types of MCUs which relate to turn-taking more closely.
The mechanism of turn-taking is a bi-lateral, mutually related process. On the one hand, the speaker can initiate the change of turns, signalling that he has already exhausted information and is ready to yield the floor to the partner. On the other hand, the listener may signal that he wants to share some information and is going to take the role of the speaker. Thus, all MCUs related to turn-taking can be subdivided into two main groups: MCUs produced by the speaker and MCUs produced by the listener.
1. MCUs produced by the speaker.
Here belong MCUs like: That’s all I meant (wanted) to say; There’s nothing more to add; I find no thing worth mentioning; Been at a loss for words; Can’t say more; There’s so little I could talk about; I have nothing to say on that; I’ll pass on that; That is my last word. And in Ukrainian: Оце й усе, що я хотів сказати; Тут/Мені нічого додати; Така-от моя думка etc. which signal that the speaker has nothing more to add and is ready to listen to the partner, as in the following examples:
He is a suggestion, as I have said, of a new manner. I find him in the curves of certain lines, in the loveliness and subtleties of certain colours. That is all”.
Доріанів образ наче відкриває переді мною нову манеру малювання. Його я знаходжу у вигинах певних ліній, у чарівності й ніжності певних кольорів. Оце й усе [7, с. 34]. I have always pretended to have a younger brother of the name of Ernest, who lives in the Albany, and gets into the most dreadful scrapes. That, my dear Algy, is the whole truth pure and simple.
…мусить вдавати, ніби їде до свого молодшого брата на ім’я Ернест, що мешкає в Олбені й раз у раз потрапляє в різні халепи. Оце тобі й уся правда, щира правда.
It is worth mentioning that in Ukrainian such terminating MCUs often have intensifying particles like і/й, от, таки etc.
Very often the speaker does not only signal that he terminates the turn but with the help of special MCUs directly encourages the listener to take the turn, or as Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson term it, “uses current-speaker-selects-next techniques” [4, p. 701]. One of the most frequently used techniques is the affiliation of a tag question to a turn’s talk. Tag questions may be of two types: grammatically dependent constructions which are added to a sentence or separate interrogative sentences which may be complete or incomplete. Inexperienced translators often confine themselves to the simplest чи не так? phrase when translating English tag questions into Ukrainian, although the latter may have various realizations: правда/правда ж? еге ж? що скажете? etc. For example
I have always pretended to have a younger brother of the name of Ernest, who lives in the Albany, and gets into the most dreadful scrapes. That, my dear Algy, is the whole truth pure and simple.
…мусить вдавати, ніби їде до свого молодшого брата на ім’я Ернест, що мешкає в Олбені й раз у раз потрапляє в різні халепи. Оце тобі й уся правда, щира правда [5, с. 306].
It is worth mentioning that in Ukrainian such terminating MCUs often have intensifying particles like і/й, от, таки etc.
Very often the speaker does not only signal that he terminates the turn but with the help of special MCUs directly encourages the listener to take the turn, or as Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson term it, “uses current-speaker-selects-next techniques” [4, р.701]. One of the most frequently used techniques is the affiliation of a tag question to a turn’s talk. Tag questions may be of two types: grammatically dependent constructions which are added to a sentence or separate interrogative sentences which may be complete or incomplete. Inexperienced translators often confine themselves to the simplest чи не так? phrase when translating English tag questions into Ukrainian, although the latter may have various realizations: правда/правда ж? еге ж? що скажете? Etc I am always smart! Aren’t I, Mr Worthing? [8, р. 248]
Я завжди такою виглядаю. Чи не правда, містере Ворзінг? [5, с. 309].
Well, that is no business of yours, is it, Cecil? [9, р. 306].
Але це, здається, вас не стосується, Сесіле, - хіба не так? [6, с. 274]
You are not to go to lunch there; of course you understand that? [9, р. 29].Ви не поїдете на цей сніданок – бодай це вам зрозуміло? [6, с. 258]
Another technique which allows the speaker to exit from the turn and select the next speaker is a direct request, order or demand to speak. MCUs used in this case are usually imperative constructions like the following: Now tell me…; Please go on. You express yourself so wonderfully; You must explain it to me. I don’t understand it; Do tell me…; Speak, for goodness’ sake! Do speak; Come, what else do you have to say? Speak out and don’t be thinking etc, which are rendered with the help of similar imperative constructions in Ukrainian (кажи вже; говоріть-бо; годі мовчати), although other grammatical structures are not uncommon. In Ukrainian there are numerous idiomatic expressions which serve the same pragmatic aim – to make the listener speak (Чом мовчиш як риба? Чи ти, бува, язика проковтнув? Не мовчи, ніби води в рот набрав). Let us consider the example:
Algernon: Come, old boy, you had much better have the thing out at once.
Jack: My dear Algy, you talk exactly as if you were a dentist. It is very vulgar to talk like a dentist when one isn’t a dentist. It produces a bad impression.
Algernon: Well, that is exactly what dentists always do. Now, go on! Tell me the whole thing [8, р. 247].
Елджернон. Облиш це грання, любий братчику, - викладайся краще до кінця.
Джек. Мій любий Елджі, логіка в тебе чисто мов у того дантиста. Це вкрай вульгарно – говорити, як дантист, коли ти хтось інший. Цим ти вводиш людей в оману.
Елджернон. Але ж дантисти саме це завше й роблять. Годі вже крутить хвостом. Я мушу знати, що воно й до чого [5, с.305]. Here, the imperative utterance Now, go on! is rendered through the idiom Годі вже крутить хвостом. The last MCU (imperative construction in English) is translated with the help of the indicative mood structure with the modal verb мушу, which expresses strong necessity and thus in no way violates the pragmatic meaning of the utterance – demand to speak.
2. MCUs produced by the listener.
Alongside the speaker, the listener may be the initiator of a turn-change producing special MCUs which signal that he is ready to acquire the communicative role of speaker. MCUs used in this case vary greatly in level of formality and appropriateness to different situations. Here belong: If I may, Mr. Chairman; I wonder if I might say something; Can I just come in here; Now you listen to me; Please let me say that…; I would like to meddle in if I may; Let me explain myself; I want to be heard; For your information etc. Such communicative situations are characterized by a successful, non-problematic transition of the turn, because both speaker and listener are interested in a smooth flow of the conversation as in the following examples:
Lord Henry laughed. “And what is that?” he asked.
“I will tell you”, said Hallward; but an expression of perplexity came over his face.
“I am all expectation, Basil”, continued his companion., [10, р. 18].
Лорд Генрі засміявся.
- Ну й що ж то за таїна?
- Добре, я розповім тобі… - збентежено озвавсь Голворд.
- А я, Безіле, охоче вислухаю, - з поривом у голосі мовив його товариш. “Come, let us sit down and try what the new chef here is like, and then you will tell us how it all came about”.
“There is really not much to tell,” cried Dorian as they took their seats at the small round table. “What happened was simply this”.
Сідаймо краще до столу та погляньмо, що тут новий шеф-кухар утяв. Тоді ви нам і розповісте все, як годиться.
Та тут і не багато що розповідати, - почав Доріан, коли вони сіли за невеликий круглий стіл. – А сталася все це ось як. …. In the given examples the interlocutors establish a kind of mutual agreement which helps them avoid conflicts and struggle for speakership. But such an agreement and control of the situation do not always exist, especially if one of the partners (or both of them) is a garrulous person whose level of activity during the conversation is very high and often uncontrollable. Then different conflicting situations characterized by verbal struggle for speakership or by breaking the rules and norms of conversational organization may take place. For example: “Basil!” cried the lad, clutching the arms of his chair with trembling hands and gazing at him with wild startled eyes.
I see you did. Don't speak. Wait till you hear what I have to say.
Безіле! – скрикнув Доріан. Руки його, тремтячи вп’ялися в поруччя крісла, дико перелякані очі втупились у художника.
Бачу, ви завважили. Не пере-бивайте, Доріане, заждіть, доки почуєте, що я скажу.
Іn both examples, the attempts of the listener to gain the floor are opposed by the speaker’s intention to continue his turn, which is expressed with the help of the MCUs Don't speak. Wait till you hear what I have to say and I must speak, and you must listen. You shall listen. The strong demand for speakership which is expressed in the last MCU with the help of the modal verb shall is rendered in Ukrainian through non-verbal means, namely exclamatory intonation (indicated by the exclamatory mark).
Not infrequently, the listener may resort to interruptions in order to take his turn. Depending on the social context the listener may ask, advise, demand etc. that the speaker should yield the floor. The most acceptable from the point of view of their ethics and politeness are the MCUs-interruptions like the following: One moment, Mr. …; I’m rather interested in …; Wait a bit; Hold on a minute; Let me put my word in; I suppose that’s my cue to say…etc. Another kind of interruptions are direct demands for the speaker to yield the floor: Hold your tongue; Shut up; Stop talking; Oh, cut it out; Be quiet; Drop it; Stop that. Their Ukrainian equivalents are Облиш; Припини; Замовкни; Що за нісенітниці; Заждіть-но; Цитьте; etc. They are usually used in conflicts and highly emotional situations, as in the following examples “What you have to do is this…”
“Stop, Gray. I don't want to know anything further. Whether what you have told me is true or not true doesn't concern me [10, р. 167]. Вам треба зробити тільки ось щоСтривайте, Грею! Я не хочу далі слухати. Мені байдуже, правду ви кажете чи ні [7, с. 1].
“Stop!” faltered Dorian Gray, “stop! You bewilder me… Don't speak” [10, р. 30].
- Годі-бо! Годі! – затинаючись, пробелькотів Доріан Грей. – Ви приголомшили мене… Не говоріть більше! [7, с. 41].
Taking into consideration the above mentioned examples, we may conclude that in both English and Ukrainian there are numerous MCUs related to turn-taking which are constantly used by listener and speaker to organize the conversation. When rendering them, the translator may deviate from the original grammatical form and use various transformations provided that the pragmatic meaning of this or that utterance is preserved.