Creation and functioning of the responsive sentences within the dialogical speech under the influence of linguistic and extralinguistic sentences

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

УДК 802.0-56(075.8)

Candidate of Science, Philology, Associate Professor of Translation and Linguistic Training of Foreigners Department of Oles Honchar Dnipro National University; Gagarin Avenue, 72, Dnipro, 49010, Ukraine; tel.: +38(056) 374-98-86

e-mail: Suima-irina@mail.ru;

Summary

linguistic responding dialogue sentence

Objective of the paper is to identify and analyze peculiarities of creation and functioning of responsive sentences within the dialogical speech. Object under analysis is verbal reaction to the any kind of statement, structural, lexical and semantic features of the responsive sentence, subject is the influence of linguistic and extralinguistic factors on the structure and functioning of responsive constructions.

Material of the research consists of dialogical entities containing responsive replicas, fixed on the referential books and phrasebooks in English. The paper applies descriptive, comparative and structural methods.

Finding of the analysis is the consideration of the main linguistic factors, influencing the specifics of the responsive sentences in the dialogue. It is shown the influence of linguistic and extralinguistic factors on structure and semantics of the responsive sentences within the dialogical speech.

Practical value: of the analysis results can be implemented in studies of dialogue and dialogical speech in the English language.

Results: a verbal reaction to a message of any type may depend on a significant number of linguistic and extralinguistic factors. Among the linguistic reasons, the following can be named first of all: the desire to save language resources; the use of different linguistic figures; distortion of the grammatical construction of the utterance; lexical material of the original phrase, etc. It is possible to single out the following extralinguistic causes: emotional state of the interlocutors: the nature of the relationship of talking among themselves; the attitude of the interlocutors to the topic of conversation, etc.

Key words: responsive sentence, dialogue speech, style of speech, lexical material, grammatical structure of the sentence.

Анотація

Побудова та функціонування респонсивних речень у діалогічному мовленні під впливом лінгвістичних та екстралінгвістичних факторів

Суїма Ірина Павлівна

кандидат філологічних наук, доцент кафедри перекладу та лінгвістичної підготовки іноземців

Дніпровського національного університету імені Олеся Гончара; пр. Гагаріна, 72, м. Дніпро, 49010, Україна; тел.: +38(056) 374-98-86; e-mail: Suima-irina@mail.ru;

Метою статті є визначення та аналіз особливостей створення та функціонування респонсивних речень у рамках діалогічного мовлення.

Об'єктом аналізу є словесна реакція на будь-який вид стверджень, структурні, лексичні та семантичні особливості респонсивного речення, предметом - вплив лінгвістичних та екстралінгвістичних факторів на структуру та функціонування респонсивних конструкцій.

Матеріал дослідження складається з діалогічних єдностей, що містять респонсивні репліки, зафіксовані в довідниках та розмовниках з англійської мови У роботі застосовуються описовий, порівняльний та структурний методи. У результаті дослідження розглянуто основні лінгвістичні фактори, що впливають на специфіку респонсивних речень у діалозі. Показано вплив лінгвістичних та екстралінгвістичних факторів на структуру та семантику респонсив- них речень у рамках діалогічного мовлення.

Практичне застосування: результати проведеного аналізу можуть бути використані у дослідженнях діалогу та діалогічного мовлення на матеріалі англійської мови.

Висновки: вербальна реакція на повідомлення будь-якого типу може залежати від значної кількості лінгвістичних та екстралінгвістичних чинників. Серед лінгвістичних причин перш за все можна назвати наступне: бажання зберегти мовні ресурси; використання різних мовних фігур; викривлення граматичної побудови висловлювання; лексичний матеріал стимулюючої фрази і т. д. Можна виділити наступні екстралінгвістичні причини: емоційний стан співрозмовників: характер відносин співрозмовників між собою; їх ставлення до теми розмови тощо.

Ключові слова: респонсивне речення, діалогічне мовлення, стиль мовлення, лексичний матеріал, граматична побудова речення.

Аннотация

Построение и функционирование респонсивных предложений в диалогической речи под влиянием лингвистических и экстралингвистических факторов

Суима Ирина Павловна

кандидат филологических наук, доцент кафедры перевода и лингвистической подготовки иностранцев Днипровского национального университета имени Олеся Гончара; пр. Гагарина, 72, г. Днепр, 49010, Украина; тел.: +38(056) 374-98-86; e-mail: Suima-irina@mail.ru;

Целью статьи является определение и анализ особенностей создания и функционирования респонсивних предложений в рамках диалогической речи.

Объектом анализа является словесная реакция на любой вид утверждений, структурные, лексические и семантические особенности респонсивного предложения, предметом - влияние лингвистических и экстралингвисти- ческих факторов на структуру и функционирование респонсивних конструкций.

Материал исследования состоит из диалогических единств, содержащих респонсивные реплики, зафиксированные в справочниках и разговорниках английского языка. В работе применяются описательный, сравнительный и структурный методы. В результате исследования рассмотрены основные лингвистические факторы, влияющие на специфику респонсивных предложений в диалоге. Показано влияние лингвистических и экстралингвистических факторов на структуру и семантику респонсивных предложений в рамках диалогической речи.

Практическое применение: результаты проведенного анализа могут быть использованы в исследованиях диалога и диалогической речи на материале английского языка.

Выводы: вербальная реакция на сообщение любого типа может зависеть от значительного количества лингвистических и экстралингвистических факторов. Среди лингвистических причин прежде всего можно назвать следующие: желание сохранить языковые ресурсы; использование различных языковых фигур; искривление грамматического построения высказывания; лексический материал стимулирующей фразы и т. п. Можно выделить следующие экстралингвистические причины: эмоциональное состояние собеседников: характер отношений собеседников между собой; их отношение к теме разговора и т. д.

Ключевые слова: респонсивное предложение, диалогическая речь, стиль речи, лексический материал, грамматическое построение предложения.

Problem statement. Dialogues, their elements, features of dialogical speech were considered in a number of studies dealt with this problem. Considering dialogue as a verbal unity, linguists emphasize that dialogical speech is created by several (at least two) speakers and defines dialogue as: «the change of the statements of two or more speakers» [1, p. 74], «the regular exchange of statements-remarks» [2, p. 119], «a series of successive replicas» [7, p. 161], «alternating exchange of sign information» [4, p. 32].

Connection with previous studies. In different way linguists called replicas in the dialogue: a stimulating message, from which the communication process usually begins, linguists call the initiative [10], «a relatively independent replica» [7-9], «circulation», «action» [5; 8; 9], etc. The responsive replica, conditioned by the original phrase, is called a «replica-reaction», «reactive replica» [2]. In this article, a replica that includes a verbal response to a particular message is called a response sentence, since the word «response», according to dictionary of English, is defined as «verbal or written answer, reaction to something (verbal or nonverbal response, reaction to something)» [7], the meaning of the word «response» includes the meanings of the words answer and reply.

Purpose and tasks statement. In the present article, an attempt is made to describe and analyze the linguistic and extralinguistic influence on the nature of responsive sentences in the context of dialogical speech.

The presentation of the main material. A verbal reaction to a message of any type may depend on a significant number of linguistic and extralinguistic factors. Among the linguistic reasons, the following can be named first of all:

- the desire to save language resources;

- the construction of the basic phrase, the reaction to which is a certain responsive sentence: the use of different linguistic figures; distortion of the grammatical construction of the utterance;

- lexical material of the original phrase: speech constructions, which are used by communication participants; the use of cliched structures;

- correctness, speed of the speech, clarity of pronunciation of the speaker; correct interpretation of the lexical units of the original phrase;

- changing the speech genre, replacing the type of communication;

- the style of the speaker, the correspondence of the style of communication to the situation, etc.

The tendency to save language means is typical for almost every language. According to the Dictionary of Linguistic Terms, linguistic economy is the striving of the speaker to save efforts in using speech as one of the reasons for changing the language. In the syntax, the economy of language means can be found in elliptical constructions, in incomplete sentences, in the omission of an official word, etc [10]. In some cases, the application of the principle of linguistic savings may not affect the course of communication, for example, when the speaker knows the subject of the conversation and it is not difficult to reconstruct the missing elements of the utterance himself: Today I saw the previous episode of the film. - It's great I will join you if you do not mind; - It's clear, I will do it for tomorrow; - Kate will come. She promised to. - Ok, let's wait for several minutes. However, excessive use of language savings can made the respondent ask the speaker again, there will be a need to clarify what has been said, its meaning: Have you been yesterday at the conference? That report was extremely long and bor- mg! - Which report? What do you mean?; They say that our new teacher has been studied in London - where did you hear it and whom from all of our teachers? I was impressed with that information they said on TV! - What do you mean? In this situation, the character of the responsive sentence, i. e. verbal reaction to the utterance, will be conditioned, first of all, by how understandable the initial message is, whether it requires clarifications or clarifications, etc.

Like the tendency to excessive saving of speech resources, the desire for «redun-dancy» of speech in the dialogue is also an essential factor that determines the nature of the responsive sentence. So, the speaker gives too much unnecessary details without any need for this, and the interlocutor is forced to clarify something, ask again, try not to get confused in the details and determine the main meaning of the statement.

The next linguistic factor that determines the nature of the response in dialogical speech is the construction of the very starting phrase, the reaction to which is the response. Changing the grammatical construction of the statement is likely to cause the respondent to misunderstand the meaning of the statement, what the interlocutor intended to say, since the original statement will be somewhat ambiguous. In this case, the intonation will also play an important role: Where you have been yesterday - Me?; You! Do it! - Now? Me? In the examples given, the grammatical structure of the initial statements enables the respondent to differently understand the question and, even if the statement or question is correctly understood, the speaker himself gives the second communication participant the opportunity to ask again and thus gain time to come up with an answer. The use of different linguistic figures also influences the communication process and, to some extent, determines the used responsive. For example, repeating in the original phrase can make the interlocutor think, ask something, or be indignant that he understands everything, does not need to be repeated; metaphors and comparisons, as well as phraseological phrases, may not be understood by the interlocutor or interpreted in their own way, etc.

As one of the most significant, presumably, linguistic factor that determines the nature of responsive sentences in dialogical speech, it is necessary to note the lexical filling of the initial expression, the reaction to which is a certain response. The lexical material used by the speaker largely determines the course of communication and the nature of the answer that will follow this kind of statement. The use of different speech units - evaluation vocabulary, emotionally-colored, formal-business, etc. - will naturally cause the interlocutor a different reaction. So, the answer to the curse is likely to be also cursing or, at least, replicas indicating the respondent's desire to clarify why the interviewee says exactly what it is connected with and the like: You are stupid! - But more intelligent than you are!; You are absent-minded and you do not use your brains in the appropriate way! - Could you be so kind to explain why you have made such a conclusion that you are cleverer than me! The use of evaluative vocabulary also determines the response / reaction to the utterance. In most cases, the interlocutor will express his attitude to what the speaker estimates, and, perhaps, will offer his assessment or ask for reasons: It is the best film I have ever seen! - You tell that because you have seen only few films! As for me it is not so good!; The lecture we heard today was very boring! - But it is only your opinion! The majority of our group was satisfied with it; Her dancing is not appropriate for showing it in our theater! - Why do you think so? The audience applauded her.

The correspondence of the lexical material used in the communicative situation is also important. The nature of the answer is determined by the spoken words used by the interlocutor. So, for example, the opposite reaction will cause statements such as You must write this report today! and It would be good if you write this report today. The use of cliched speech turns to some extent makes the interlocutor also look for suitable cliches for an answer: I am glad to see you! -1 am glad to see you too!; How are you? - Fine! And how are you?; Please, do not hesitate to contact me when you need it! - Thank you, I am also at your disposal! The nature of the original phrase itself largely determines the reaction to it: if something is offered, one must agree or refuse, if the interlocutor does not agree, he will argue or stop the conversation if the interlocutor thanks, he will necessarily say You are welcome or something in this kind.

The correctness, the rate of speech, the clarity of the pronunciation of the speaker, the correct interpretation of the lexical units of the original phrase are also among the most significant linguistic factors that determine the nature of the responsive sentence. As in the situation with the economy of language facilities, it depends on these parameters how much the interlocutor will understand and accept the initial message and how communication will continue to continue.

Replacing the type of communication or replacing the speech genre, along with the linguistic parameters described above, which cause a verbal reaction to a particular utterance, can be of decisive importance in using the responsive sentence to the respondent and in determining whether the conversation will continue at all. For example, when a dialogic speech turns, rather, into a monologue of one of the speakers, another participant in the communication, after some time will try to end this conversation or translate it into another topic: You know, I am going to visit Spain this summer! My mother spoke with her friend, she just returned from the trip and she agreed to give me all the details of her journey, money expenses etc. - Great! But I have no time I must speak with you later!

Together with the type of communication or the speech genre of communication, the nature of the verbal response can be determined by the speaker's communication style and, in particular, by the style of the communicative situation. For example, conversational style of speech can be understood by the interlocutor as a sign of friendship, and can be perceived as familiarity, which will also influence the course of further communication and the respondent's response to this or that saying: Hello! I am John! - Nice to meet you!; Hi, old man! Tell me how I can get to the bus station! - Excuse me, I am not from this city! If the interlocutor starts to talk in an official business style, then the second participant of the communication will most likely also choose the appropriate speech speed, which does not go beyond the formal business style: In most forms of partnerships, each partner has unlimited liability for the debts incurred by the business. - But what are the three most prevalent types offor-profit partnerships?

Thus, analyzing the main, in our opinion, linguistic factors that determine the nature of responsive sentences in dialogical speech, we come to the conclusion that all the reasons considered (economy of linguistic means, the structure of the initial phrase, its grammatical construction, the lexical material of the message, the subjective characteristics of the speech of the speaker: correctness, clarity, etc., stylistic features of the utterance, etc.), combined with extralinguistic factors affect the course of further communication.

Response sentence (verbal reaction) is almost always due to a number of linguistic and extralinguistic factors.

According to the dictionary-reference «Terms and concepts of linguistics», extra- linguistic factors are parameters of the extralinguistic social reality, which cause changes in the language both global and private [6]. With reference to respondent utterance, it is possible to single out the following extralinguistic causes, which determine the structure and semantics of the syntactic units under consideration:

- emotional state of the interlocutors (both the speaker and the respondent): Hello! How are you? - Let's speak about it tomorrow!; Help me with my home task, please! - Oh, with pleasure!;

- the nature of the relationship of talking among themselves: Nice to meet you! - Nice to meet you too!; And, I am waiting for your interesting story about yesterday's events! - Do not bother me!

- the attitude of the interlocutors to the topic of conversation: Have you ever been at the theater? -1 hate it!; What can you tell about this singer? - She sings better then dances!

- desire or unwillingness to answer the question or provide the requested information: And where have you been? - Nowhere, Did you count heads? Eleven, including me; What's your address? - Sorry, but that's strictly confidential.

- trying to offer more / less information than the interlocutor requires: Excuse me. Are your parents here? My parents live in Paris., Nothing to Chicago? - There's nothing to Chicago, New York, Nashville;

- features of the nature of the interlocutors: Can you, please, explain this term again? -1 do not like repeating the sane things for several times!; I saw your classmate yesterday? - Really? Who it was? Where? Why did not you tell me earlier?;

- knowledge or ignorance of the requested information: Any idea how this happened? - No; How late's the restaurant open? - 8:30 every night; Can you show me the way to the nearest bank? -1 am not a local citizen, sorry!;

- the course of the most communicative situation: Change 150. - Quarters or nickels? - Quarters are fine. - You said we'd go for ice cream. - I lied!;

- desire to avoid answering the question, to translate the conversation to another topic, and sometimes even to learn something from the interlocutor: Did you watch the news this morning? - Have they said something important?; Are you tired? - Why do you always ask me so stupid questions?; What are you doing here? - What do you think?

- the limitedness of the interlocutors (or at least one of them) in time: What are you doing? Do not move. - Can I talk to you for a minute? - Quickly.

Let's consider the factors listed above more detailed. As one of the main extralin- guistic factors, we single out the emotional state of the speakers, which, of course, significantly affects the communication process. Depending on the above-mentioned reason, the responsive replica (responsive sentences) in the examples given can be very different: 1) Hello! How are you? - Let's speak about it tomorrow !; I do not have a duty to write for you! Fifty-fifty; It's better not to speak about it!; Great, thank you! And how are you?; Never better, etc. 2) Help me with my home task, please! - Oh, with pleasure !; I have no time!; I do not know how to do it!; I do not remember the information you need!; Ok, please, show what should I do!; Ok, let's see what can I do for you, etc. Much depends on the characteristics of the initiating replica and how it is built: I say! -1 have no time!; Excuse me, can I ask you one question? - Of course, please!

Conclusions

Another important factor is the nature of the relationship between the speakers: both personal and social. Social relations are manifested only in certain types of interactions between people, namely, social, in the process of which these people embody their social status and role in life, and the statuses and roles themselves have quite clear boundaries and very strict regulations. Social relations give mutual certainty to social positions and statuses. For example, the relationship in the trade between the main factors is the mutual certainty of the seller and the buyer in the process of making the transaction (purchase and sale). Thus, social relations are closely related to social interactions, although these are not identical concepts that denote the same thing. On the one hand, social relations are realized in the social practices (interactions) of people, on the other hand, social relations are a prerequisite of social practices - a stable, normatively fixed social form through which social interaction becomes possible [1; 2]. Hence, the nature of relations between people determines and to some extent regulates their communication and even how they react to each other's questions and messages. For example, if the subject's interlocutor says: Please, can you go to the business trip instead of me? then, the speaker is likely to answer something like: I have another duties in this company!; We had definite reasons for letting you to go there!; No, I cannot, etc. But, if the boss of the speaker asks the same question, the person who must answer something will have to agree to go, or, at least, to bring reasonable arguments why not.

In many cases, one of the leading factors is the very theme of the conversation and the attitude of the speakers to it. In different ways, the interlocutor can perceive the speaker's statements about politics, religion, traditions, relations in the family, etc. The reaction to this kind of message can be both approving - the interlocutor will express his support and add something else to what has already been said, as well as neutral, disapproving, and even may serve as the beginning of a verbal interaction: It is terrible! Nothing to look at! - Do not think that you are aware of the art of cinema!; These new reforms of the British parliament are so unnecessary! - And, maybe you can explain why, the great politician?!

The desire / unwillingness of the interlocutor to answer the question posed or express his opinion on any occasion is also one of the fundamental factors that determine the responsive sentence. In responsive replicas, in such cases, so-called «communicative sabotage» is often used, or in other words, an attempt to get out of the conversation. The basis of communicative sabotage is the latent opposition, the internal resistance of the addressee, which ultimately amounts to a violation of the principle of cooperation [1; 3; 4].

Prospectives of the research. Thus, extralinguistic factors, along with linguistic factors, determine the character and structural features of the responsive sentences in dialogical speech. The prospectives of the further research on the mentioned problem consists in more detailed description and analysis of the linguistic and extralinguistic factors influencing the process of communication.

Bibliographic references

1. Гуревич В. В. Теоретическая грамматика английского языка. Сравнительная типология английского и русского языков: учеб. пособие. 2-е изд. Москва: Флинта: Наука, 2004. 168 с.

2. Ермолаева М. Е. Английский язык в диалогах. Москва: ТК Велби, Проспект, 2006. 136 с.

3. Зиновьева Л. А., Омеляненко В.И. Все фразы и диалоги английского языка. Ростов-на- Дону: Феникс, 2012. 16 с.

4. Меньшиков И. И. Типология респонсивных предложений в современном русском языке. Меньшиков И. И. Избранные труды по лингвистике. Днепропетровск: Нова ідеологія, 2012. С. 85-100.

5. Carnie Andrew. Syntax. Oxford, Blackwell Publishers, 2001. 383 p.

6. Crystal D. Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. 491 p.

7. Encyclopedia of language and linguistics / edited by Keith Brown. 2-nd edition, Elsevier Science, 2005. 9000 p.

8. Gleason H. A. J. Linguistics and English Grammar. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1965. 519 p.

9. Iriskulov A. T. Theoretical Grammar of English. Tashkent, 2006. 64 p.

10. Leech G., Deucher M., Hoogenraad R. English Grammar for today. Macmillan, 1982. 224 p.

Reference

1. Gurevich, V. V. (2004), Theoretical Grammar of the English language. Contrastive typology of the English and Russian languages [Teoreticheskaja grammatika anglijskogo jazyka. Sravnitel'naja tipologija anglijskogo i russkogo jazykov], Moscow, 168 p.

2. Ermolaeva, M. E. (2006), The English language in dialogues [Anglijskij jazyk v dialogah], Moscow, 136 p.

3. Zinov'eva, L. A., Omeljanenko, V. I. (2012), All phrases of the English language [Vse frazy i dialogi anglijskogo jazyka], Rostov-na-Donu, 165 p.

4. Men'shikov, I. I. (2012), “Typology of the responsive sentences in the modern Russian language” [“Tipologija responsivnyh predlozhenij v sovremennom russkom jazyke”], Iz- brannye trudypo lingvistike, Dnipropetrovsk, pp. 85-100.

5. Carnie, Andrew (2001), Syntax, Oxford, 383 p.

6. Crystal, D. (1995), Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English language, Cambridge, 491 p.

7. Keith, Brown (2005), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics, Oxford, 9000 p.

8. Gleason, H. A. J. (1965), Linguistics and English Grammar , New York, 519 p.

9. Iriskulov, A. T. (2006), Theoretical Grammar of English, Tashkent, 64 p.

10. Leech, G., Deucher, M., Hoogenraad, R. (1982) English Grammar for today, Oxford, 224 p.

Надійшла до редколегії 05.04.2018

Размещено на Allbest.ru