顺联理论视角下标记语言well的人际功能分析-《老友记》为例

齐齐哈尔大学毕业设计（论文）PAGEII 摘要 话语标记语言这一概念是由schiffirin提出来的，是说话人为了引导和制约听话人正确理解话语而而选择的语言标记。而well作为日常生活中使用最频繁的标记语，在标记语的研究中占据着重要地位。作者从顺联理论角度出发，选取美国情景剧喜剧《老友记》第一季为研究素材对标记语语well的人际功能进行研究。在语料中well共出现351次，其中338次为话语标记语。作者结合国内外研究资料发现well的人际语用功能主要分为三种，即面子缓和功能，信息功能及情感功能，而本文也将针对这三方面结合顺联理论对标记语well进行研究。关键词:话语标记语;well;顺联理论;《老友记》；人际语用功能AbstractTheconceptofdiscoursemakerwasproposedbyschifirian，it'salanguagemakerthatthespeakertoguideandrestrictthehearertounderstandtheutterance.Andasthemostfrequentlyuseddiscoursemaker，itplaysanimportantroleinthestudyofdiscoursemakers.Thewriterfromtheperspectiveoftherelevance-adaptationtheoryandchoosestheAmericansitcomcomedy《friends》（seasonone）asthematerialtostudythediscoursemarkerwell.Inthecorpus‘well’appears351times，amongwhich338timesasadiscoursemarker.Theauthorcombinesthedomesticandforeignresearchdatadiscoverthattheinternationalinteractionfunctionsofrelevance-adaptationtheorydividedintothreetypesemotionalmaker、Face-ThreateningMitigatorandinformativemarker.Andinthispaper，thethreeexpectswillbestudiedincombinationwiththerelevance-adaptationtheorytodiscussthediscoursemarkerwell.Keywords:Discoursemarker;Well;Relevance-Adaptationtheory;《Friends》;InterpersonalInteractionFunctionContents摘要 IAbstract IIIntroduction 11RelevanceAdaptationModelTheory 31.1RelevanceTheory41.2AdaptationTheory51.3TheRelevance-Adaptationtheory2TheInterpersonalFunctionAnalysisoftheDiscourseMarkers62.1DefinitionofDiscourseMarkers……6

2.2TheCharacteristicsofDiscourseMarkers7

2.3StudiesonDiscourseMarkerWellatHomeandAboard7.3TheStudysofInterpersonalInteractionFunctionoftheDiscourseMarkerswellBasedontheRelevanceeAdaptationModelTheory93.1MethodsofStudy 113.2TheInterpersonalInteractionFunctionofDiscourseOrganization123.21WellasaFace-ThreateningMitigator123.22WellasanInformativeMarker

3.23WellasanEmotionalMarkerConclusion 17References 18Acknowledgements 20齐齐哈尔大学毕业设计（论文）PAGE17IntroductionWiththedevelopmentandpromotionoftheeconomicglobalizationaswellastheChinesereformandopeninguppolicy,thecommunicationbetweenChineseandtheforeignersisbecomingmorefrequentdaybyday,thereforethepublicitytranslationismoreandmoreimportant.Asamediumofpublicizingtotheoutside,theimportanceofthetranslationbetweenChineseandEnglishgoeswithoutsaying.However,therearestillmanyproblemsexistingintheprocessofpublicitytranslation.Manytranslationsevencannotmeetthedemandsofforeignersandthusmaketheforeignersconfused.Insuchcircumstance,ourcommunicationandexchangetowardsabroadisinfluencedandthepredicteffectcannotbeachievedasisexpected.ThepurposeofChinese-EnglishpublicitytranslationistointroduceChinatotheforeignreadersobjectively.Whetherthetranslationinthecontextoftargetlanguagecanachievecommunicativefunctionisthekeypointoftranslation.Therefore,appropriatetranslationmethodsareneededseriously.ThepublicitytranslationaimstodeliverinformationandthuspromotetheresultofcommunicationinordertoshowChinesehistoryandthepresentaswellasthefuturesystematicallyanddeeplytotheforeigncountries.Inordertobringtheimportantfunctionsofpublicitytranslationintheaspectofourdailylifeintoplayandthustopromoteeffectiveapplicationofitintotheinternationalcommunication,weneedtoknowwellaboutit.Thispaperwillbewrittenfromtheangelofcontextualfunctionstoexploretheexistingproblemsaswellastheinfluencesandthecorrespondingsolutions.Thispaperwillbebasedonthetranslationtheoryoffunctionalequivalencetheorywhichisageneralconcept.ItisfeasibletoguideC-Etranslationofpublicitymaterials.Inthetranslationprocess,thetranslatorisrequiredtobearinmindtheintendedfunctionofthetargettextandproduceaversionthatiscomprehensibleandacceptabletothetargetreaders.Forthestructureofthispaper,therearethreeparts.Chapter1introducesrelativeknowledgeaboutthefunctionalequivalencetheoryincludingthedefinitionandtheprinciples.Chapter2introducestherelativetheoriesofpublicitytranslationfromseveralaspectsincludingitsdefinitionandcharacteristicsandsoontohelppeopleknowitbetteranddeeper.InChapter3,theapplicationoffunctionalequivalencetheoryintheaspectofpublicitytranslationwillbeanalyzedindetailsfromseveralaspects.Itintroducestheroleoffunctionalequivalencetheorytowardspublicitytranslation,andthemethodofapplyingfunctionalequivalencetheory.Thepublicitytranslationfromtheperspectiveoffunctionalequivalencetheorywillbeintroducedimportantly.RelevanceAdaptationModelTheoryTherearemanytheoriesfortranslationandtherelevanceadaptationtheoryisoneofthem.Inthischaptertherelevanceadaptationtheorydividedintorelevancetheoryandadaptationtheory,wewillfromthesetwoaspectstostudyit.

1.1RelevanceTheory

1.1ThemaintheoreticalsourceofrelevancetheoryisfromFord'scognitivetheory，butitwasputforwardbyDanSperberandDeirdreWilsonin1986basedontheGriceprincipleofcooperationanditcanbefoundinthebooktheyco-authoredin1986（Relevance:CommunicationandCognition）.[1]Grice'sreasoningmodelaimstorevealtheconversationalmechanismofhumancommunication,althoughitisnotperfect.Butitexplainshowthelanguageworksandwhatitdoesandgoastepfurthertothebiasoflogicalpositivism.SW'sdefinitionofrelevancetheoryisbasedonhumancognitiveassumptions，thatishumancognitionisorientedinrelevance.Specifically,peoplepaysomeattentiontotherelevantinformation.[2]Everylanguagestartswiththeattentionofthelistener.Theresultistocreatetherelatedexpectations.S/wdefinestherelevancetheoryasthat‘Therelationshipbetweenthehypothesesofthesameseriesofcontexts’,thatisthelatterandtheprevioussentenceintheprocessoflanguage，andthecontextonwhichspeechdependshascertainconnectionsinsemanticsandpragmatics.Sothelogicalimplicationofspeechisnotonlyderivedfromnewinformationorcontextalone,buttheproductofnewinformationandcontext.Whenonlyonehypothesishasacontextualeffectinagivencontext，thisassumptionhasarelevance.Themostimportantissueofrelevancetheoryiscommunication,butwhatitscommunicationiscognitivebasedcommunication.[3]InsteadofGrice'sreasoningmodeldoestofollowtheprincipleofcooperation,orrule-basedas，orule-based，ormaxim-based.RelevancetheoryacceptsGrice'stheoryofmeaning.ButinSpauberandWilson（Sperber&Wilson1986/1995）,meaningisnotaviolationoftheprincipleofcooperation.Relevancetheoryexplainshowpeopleorganizecontextaccordingtotherelevanceofthingsintheprocessofconversationalunderstanding，andusenewinformationandknowninformationtodeducelogicalconclusions.1.2AdaptationTheoryIn1999,theSecretaryGeneraloftheBelgianInternationalInstituteofPragmatics,JefVerschueren,inhisnewbook《UnderstandingPragmatic》,systematicallyandcomprehensivelyexplainedthedynamicprocessofhumanlanguageusefromtheperspectiveofadaptation.Verschuerendefinepragmaticsas'acognitive,socialandculturaloverviewoflinguisticphenomenarelatedtotheuseofspokenlanguagesinpractice."ComprehensiveView"istheGeneralguidingideologyofadaptationtheory.Macroscopically,itreferstothecomprehensiveobservationofthephenomenonoflanguageusefromtheaspectsofcognition,societyandculture.Microscopically,itincludesacomprehensiveanddetailedexaminationoflanguageadaptationandchoosealllevelsoflanguagestructures.Adaptationtheoryexaminestheuseoflanguagefromanewperspective,whichprovidesanewwayofthinkingfortheconstructionofthewholetheoryofpragmatics.Adaptationtheorydescribesandexplainstheuseoflanguagefromfouraspects，thatis，adaptationofcontextualrelationship,dynamicadaptationoflinguisticstructureandconsciousnessofadaptationprocess.[4]Adaptationtheoryhasitsmulti-sourcetheoreticalbackgroundanddetailedlanguageexamplesasitstheoreticalbasis.Intermsoflanguageselection,itcomesfromDarwin'sevolutionaryepistemology.DarwinhisbooktheOriginofspeciesarguesthatlivingthingsmustgothroughbothnaturalselectionandadaptationinthecourseofevolution.Choiceisameans,adaptationisanaim,anditistheresult.Thenaturalselectionistopreservethevariationthathastakenplacethatisbeneficialtothelivingconditionsoflivingthings.VerschuerencreativelycombinesDar-win'stheoryofnaturalselectionwiththepracticaluseoflanguage.[5]

Verschueren'slinguisticadaptationtheory,whichisdominatedby"ComprehensiveView",comprehensivelyexplainsthepresentsituationofhumanlanguageuseandadeepexplorationofhumanlanguageInternationalPsychologicalMechanismanditsprocessaswellastheroleofSocietyandCulture.Revealtheessenceoftheuseoflanguage.[6]Theadaptationtheoryenrichesthetheoryofcontemporarypragmatics,openuppeople'svision.Theresearchandpracticeoflanguagecommunicationhavehighmethodologicalvalueandenlighteningsignificance.1.3RelevanceAdaptationTheoryThe

mode

of

relevance

and

adaptation

is

a

new

pragmatic

mode

based

on

the

relevance

theoryand

word

adaptation,

whichhasproduced

new

sightsintolisteningcomprehension.ThedoctorYangPingtrytocombinethetwotheoriestothemostoutofhermerits.TherelevanceadaptationModelpublishedbyYangPingin2001openedthetimeofrelevanceadaptationmodelresearch.Inthisarticle,theauthoranalyzestheadvantagesanddisadvantagesofrelevancetheoryandadaptationtheory.Andtaketheessenceofitformsthemodelofrelevanceandadaptationmodel.Thetheorycanbedividedintofiveparts(1)Thepurposeofdiscoursecommunicationistofoundthebestrelevance.[7]（2）Thechoicesofspeaker’sstylesdeterminedbyhisrelevancepresumption.(3)Thespeaker’sassumptionistheresultofadaptingtocontextswhichareconsistentwiththeprinciplesofrelevance.(4）Relevance--adaptationisadynamicprocessinwhichcontextualcomponents（physicalworld,socialworld,heartworld）andlanguagestructuresadapttoeachother.（5）Relevance--adaptationistheprocessofstrategyselection.Relevance--adaptationTheoryisstillintheearlystageofdevelopment，andwhateverinEnglishteachingorliterarytranslation,wewilluseit.[8]2TheInterpersonalFunctionAnalysisoftheDiscourseMarkersDiscoursemarkershavemanyfunctions.Inthischapter,wewillanalyzetheirinterpersonalandpragmaticfunctions.2.1DefinitionofDiscourseMakerThediscoursemarkersis“sequentiallydependentelementswhichbracketunitsoftalk”3TheStudysofInterpersonalInteractionFunctionoftheDiscourseMarkerswellBasedontheRelevanceeAdaptationModelTheory.3.1MethodsofStudy3.1.1LiteraryresearchmethodThispapercollectsandcollectsrelevanttheoriesoftheCISTheoryanddiscoursemarkersthroughthewayofliteratureresearch,andreceivesrelevantexpertsandscholars'viewpointsandresearchcontents,soastoprovidecertaintheoreticalsupportforthisthesis.3.1.2caseanalysisByintroducingthelinguisticexpressionsofthecharactersinFriends,thispaperpresentstherelevanttheoriesofdiscoursemarkers.Onthisbasis,italsousesalargenumberofcharacters'languagedescriptionsinthenovelstoprovethem.3.2TheInterpersonalInteractionFunctionofDiscourseOrganizationDiscoursemarkersisacommondiscoursephenomenoninspokenandwrittenlanguages,whichisusedtoindicatethelogicalrelationshipbetweenutterances.Discoursemarkersconveynotpropositionalorsemanticmeanings,butinformationmarkersfordiscoursecomprehension.Oftenconnectedtothenexttwosegmentsofthediscourse,Utteranceconnectivesorlogicalconnectivesthatcanplayacertaindiscoursefunction.Discoursemarkersincludesomeconjunctions(e.g."and","moreover","even","although","but","if","because","so",etc.),adverbssuchas"and","moreover","even","although","but","if","because","so"andsoon.[9]Just",""is,""too,""exceptionally,""suddenly,""is,""actually,"andsoon,interjections(suchas"ah,""?","oh,""yes,""uh,"etc.)andcertainphrasesorclauses(like,"youknow,""Imean,""tellthetruth,"etc.)and"yougetit,""Idon'tmeanyou","bytheway,""ifI'mnotmistaken,"andsoon.Discoursemarkershavethefunctionoforganizingdiscourse.Discoursemarkersdonotchangethetruevaluemeaningoftheutterance,buttheyareconnectedwitheachother.Turnaround,callattention,addinformation,correctinformation,hesitatetomarkandotherimportantfunctions,inadditiontotheycanalsoleadtotopics,changetopics,endthetopic,itsultimategoalistopromotecommunication,Inordertoachievethedesiredcommunicativeintentionandcommunicativeeffect,somediscoursemarkerscanalsoexpressthemoodofexpressionandreflectthefeelingscausedbythecontentoftheotherparty'sdiscourse,suchaspraise,surprise,ridicule,dissatisfaction,etc.,andcanalsobeusedasanattitudemarker.[10]Anattitudetowardthecontentofone'swords,suchasacceptance,refusal,acceptance,refusal,consent/disapproval,acknowledgment,etc.,mayalsoconveyamessagetotheotherparty,suchasquestions,answers,protests,etc.Requests,measures,compliance,fulfillment,attention,promises,invitations,notifications,narratives,complaints,etc.3.21WellasaFace-ThreateningMitigatorIncommunication,peopletendtobepolitetoothers,theywantotherstobepolite,orinotherwords,peopleareawareoftheexistenceoffaceorreducethethreatofface.Therefore,the"good"intheactualconversationisamisunderstandingormisunderstandingtoreducethefacethreat.Inthedata,"good"meansthisfunctionandsuggeststhattheaudiencemayneedsomeadditionalcognitiveprocessing.Inthethreeway,"good"isthedatasignalprovidedtolisteners,andeverythingisgood,solongaswecanestablishcommonunderstandingandexpectation,becausewecananticipateorpresupposeaudiences.First,itoftenrequirestheaudiencetofocusontheongoingpsychologicalassessmentasawarningtoanaccidentoradifferentfollow-up.[11]Thecontradictionbetweenthespeakerandtheaudiencemaybecontradictoryor"adirectdenial"(Blakemore,2002:130).6.9%)ofallcasesof"well"inthedatasuggestedthiskindofsubtleefforttosavefacewhencontradictiontoaforegoingassumptionhappens.(1).Phoebe:Ohno,Rach,nono,youknowyou'reneversupposedtowakeasleepingbaby.Rachel:WellIcandowhateverIwant,Imadeher,comeonlittlegirl,hi!(2).Joey:Oh,sometimesweusethesameextrasfordifferentparts.It'sokay.Phoebe:Well,it'snotokay,becauseIgaveaverymemorableperformanceasthenurse.AndnowsuddenlyI'mthewaitress?That'sgonnaconfusemyfans.(3).Phoebe:No!No,shesaidyouactuallyproposedtoher.Ross:WellIdidn't!Ididn'tpropose!(pause)Unlessuh一(pause)DidI?Ihaven'tsleptinfortyhoursand一itdoessoundlikesomethingIwoulddo.Thesignalissecondonlytotheprevioushypothesisandmaintainsfacialexpression,althoughitisstillchallenging,moreindirect,mild,andeffortstomitigatethepragmaticeffects.However,althoughitsuggeststhatsomethingsmaynotbedesirable,but"good"(thinkingisusuallyashortpause,allowing)asamildwarning,tosomeextent,expectationsarenotmet,softeningitsstrength,makeitbecomegentle,noteasytowear,becauseithavebeengivendueconsideration.Therefore,"good"needstoarousethelisteners'needforextraproceduralefforts,butitseemstoreduceorcoordinatethesuggestioneffect,thatis,thefollowingwordsmaydeviatefromthepreviousoptionsdiscourse.[12]Intheninthseason,the"good"exampleof12.6%(N=5)showsthesimplicityandcoordinationofusingthismethod.Inthiscase,thenegativemayalsobeobvious.(4).Mr.Geller:Getbackinthere!(pointstothecloset)I'llguardthedoor!Monica:Well,that'sokaydad,we-wecanwaituntillater.(5).Phoebe:I'm...I'mjust...I'mtheworstpersonever.HowcanInottellDavidthatI'mseeingMike?Monica:Maybehedidn'tgiveyouachance.Phoebe:Hesaid:"Areyouseeingsomeone?"AndIsaidno...Monica:Oh,well...Thathadbeenyourwindow.Phoebe:Yeah!Imean,Idon'tknow6).Chandler:…(looksatchina)hey,waitaminutethisisn'tthechinawepickedout...Monica:Iknow,afteryouleftthestore,Ichosedifferentones.Chandler:Why?Monica:Well,nooffensehoney,butyourtasteisalittlefeminineforme.(7).Phoebe:No.(opensthebox)wk一getoffyoursister!Ohmygod,whatarewegonnado?Wehave7rats.Sowhatifeachofthemhas7rats?Andtheneachofthosehave7rats?That'slike…(startscountingwithherfingers)That'smathIcan'tevendo!Whatarewegonnado?Mike:Well,Iknowthisisgonnasoundcrazy,but,wecouldnotlettheboxofratsruinourlives.Again,thehearer's"good"signal"notsuitable"(Klerk,2005:2005)proposedtoresignorconcessions,insomecasesthereisnogoodorbad,forexample,inthefaceofthecurrentrelationshipbetweenmutualunderstanding,"Oh,Ithinkwecanonlyacceptit".Inthiscase,accordingtoboringer.(1989,citingSchourup,2001:1031),theidentificationofdiscoursemarkersisstillobvious.[13]Fromtheperspectiveofrelevancetheory,theuseof"good"canberegardedasasignaltothelistener.Itisassumedthatthehypothesisthatthespeakerthinksthesituationisrelatedisthathe/shedoesn'tseemtobeawareofit.Allusethe"data"6.9%(n=9)showedthatthistypeofresignationoracceptance,soastogivethelisteneraspecialpurpose.[14](8).Rachel:ImeanIgotnewsforyoumister,Emma'snoteasy.Ross:Well,that'swhatI'mherefor.(Emmastartscryingagain)Wantmetogetthat?Rachel:Noit'sreallyOK.Monica!(9).Ross:WasthereanythingyoudidwrongwithEmma?Rachel:Yes,ofcoursethereis!Okay?I'mnotinsane!Ross:Well,whatwasit?Rachel:Hiccups.(10).Chandler:Nono!Ijustlovethewayyoulook...Iamwarm...foryourform.Monica:OK...Youknowtheoldclassics,youknow,"Youlooknice"?They'restillOK.Chandler:Wellyesyes...Youlooknicecanmeanthatyourfacelooksnice.IwanttocomplimentyourBODYImean...Iwouldn'tchangeit...atall.Andmorespecifically,Iwouldn'twantanythingtogetanybigger.Monica:OK3.22WellasanInformativeMarkerUsually,thespeakerseemstoneedtohaveacommonunderstandingofwhattheaudienceistalkingabout.Onewayistouse""torepresentthetopicconversion,thewordsinfrontandthefollowingwordsend(svartik,1980,listKlerk,2005:1196).Inthiscase,thebestcorrelationandconsistencyfromthetopicwithoutthisbias(SperberWilson,1995),so"good"isusedtosendasignaltotheaudience,andeverythingisverygood,theupcomingwordisnotexpected,butstillknowthatthespeakerneedstochange.[15]Inasense,theaudienceisaskedtoreexaminethebackgroundofthehypothesis,andtheword"good"isasignalofthenecessarycognitiveadjustment.Therefore,ChesterfelrodCarlson(1984,blacker,2002:141142)referstothetransitiontoaneasytoidentifytransitionfunction.Topicorclosedpromotionhasanimportantbreakdownofinterpersonalrelationshipsandiscarefullyevaluatedbythespeakerandtheaudience.Becausethespeaker'sinterestandattentionoftheaudience(SperberWilson,1995),usersneedtosignal("good"),theyarefullyawareofthischangemaynotbeobedientpeople,butitisworththeefforttokeepupwiththehearermaintainmutualunderstandingoftheenvironment.Inacorpus,7.6%(n=13)uses"good"torepresentthefocusofthediscussion,sometimesmarkingtheendofthedialogue(see15).[16](11).Chandler:Rosshadaring?!Andhewasgonnapropose?Joey:Iguess.Chandler:Andyoudiditfirst?!Thisisgonnakillhim!Youknowhowmuchhelovestopropose!Joey:Iknow!Iknowit'sawful.Chandler:Well,whatdidshesay?Joey:(happily)Shesaidyes.(12).Mike:BecauseIwastoldI'dgetafreedinner,whichIdidn't.AndthatI'dmeetaprettygirl.WhichIdid.Phoebe:That'strue.(pause)Well,isanythingyoutoldmeaboutyourselftrue?Mike:MynameisMike,andIdoplaypiano.(13).Waiter:Youcan'torderuntilyourentirepartyhasarrived.Restaurantpolicy.Joey:Well,howaboutthis:Anothertableleaves,right?Butthere'sstillsomefoodleftontheirplace,OK,what'stherestaurant'spolicyaboutpeopleeatingthat?(14).Rachel:That'sgreat,great.Sodoyouhaveanyquestionsforus?NannyCandidate:Notreally.Rachel:Allright.Well,thankyousomuchforcoming(They'restandingupandmaketheirwaytothedoor)Oneoftheothercognitiveeffectsachievedbyusing"well"iswhenitsignalsachangeinturntaking.Firstly,itisused,occasionally,asabidforthefloor,interjectinginthemiddleofothers'discourse.Inasense,suchusescanberegardedasproceduralsignalsthatthehearers)shouldadjusthis/theircognitivecontextofhowthediscourseisproceeding,andmakeallowanceforapossible"lackoffit"betweenwhatthespeakerandhearerbelievetoberelevant.Throughthisuseof"well",thespeakerseemstobesearchingforachanceorrighttostartspeaking.6.4%(n=27)casesof"well"areunderthisuseinthedata.[17](15).Phoebe:OK,soisn'ttherealittlepartofyouthatwantstogetupthere?Monica:Justalittlebut...it'sjustsoscary!Idon'tevenknowwhatIwouldsing.Mike:WellI'vegotabookaround...Monica:"DeltaDawn"(16).Phoebe:...Ihadahardlife,mymotherwaskilledbyadrugdealer...Monica:Yourmotherkilledherself!Phoebe:Shewasadrugdealer!Ross:Well,anyway,itwasagoodthingPhoebeknewhim,because(menacingly)Iwasabouttodosomeseriousdamage!Phoebe:laughinOkay...(17).David:Oh,you'regoingtoMinsk?Mike:…Imight.David:Really?Ifyoudo,comeinthespring.It'sjustlovelythere.Phoebe:Okay,well...guys?David:Right.GoodbyePhoebe."Theprefacehasabadresponsetothisproblem."(Lakoff,1973b,shifflin,1987:102)"this"issometimesusedasasignofdeficiency.Whenahypothesisisnotcompletelyconsistentwiththepreviousconsistencyoption(schifflin,1987103),"good"meansthatthespeakercannotorcannotsatisfytheexpectationsoftheaudience.Forexample,whentherespondentintentionallygivesenoughanswers,orisunwillingtoputforwardclearquestionsorfailstoprovidedirectanswers,thereisnoheartinthequestions/answers,intherespondent'sresponder'swords.Thismeansthatheneedsextraprogrameffortstounderstandthereasonsfortheshortageandtoprovidemoreinformationorconversation.Furtherexplanationisneeded.[18]Yes,bothsidesneedtocompromiseontheexistingimplementationofsituationalassumptions.Intheninthandnineteenth(4.5%)"good"data,14ofthemappearedinthequizasasignthatthespeakerhadmorewords.(18).Joey:Ishestillmadatus?Rachel:Well,youmorethanme,buthecan'tstaytoomadatme.Imean,Ijusthadhisbaby.Joey:That'snotfair!Ican'tdothat.(19).Phoebe:Wow,youguysgowaybackthen.Sowhatareyouuptothesedays?Mike:Well,I'malawyer.Joey:Mike,"attorneyatlaw"!(20).Phoebe:(exciteclJNo!It'sagreattime,comein...!WOW,hi...Ohmygosh!Whatareyoudoinghere?AreyoubackfromMinsk?David:Well,justforacoupleofdays.uhm...I'mheretoexplaintothepeoplewhogaveusourgrant,whyit'sapositivethingthatwespentalltheirmoneyanduhm...accomplisheduhm...nothing.(21).Ross:...nudepicturesofAnnaKournikova?Imean,she'sneverevenwonamajortournament!Chandler:Well,ItriedBillyJeanKing,but...伍ossglaresathim)youknow,youandMonicahavethesame"I'mgonnakillyou"look...?Icanusuallymakeitgoawaybykissingher

3.23WellasanEmotionalMarkerInactualconversation,languageisapause.Insuchacase,"good"can'tbeperfect,butitisdefectiveorusedtoexpresshesitationordelay,thatistosay,thespeakermayneedtimetomeditate.AsSchourupsays,"good"isoftena"2001:1026",whichisusedtoindicatethestateofthespeaker'smentalstate.Thewordisusedtounderstandthis,andthespeakerisconsideringhis/herviewofthecurrentsituation(oratleastshe/hethinksit'sstaterelated)andthepossibilityoftheaudience'scurrentstate.[19]Inadditiontotheretrospectivefeaturesinherentinthedeliberationsof"good",theuseofthewordalsoputforwardsomesuggestionsforcomplyingwithcertainthings;italsoimpliedthesignificanceoftheplan.Inthissense,"good"isa"Schulp"(1985),indicatingthatthespeakeristhinkingorthinkingabouthimself.Basedonhackercorrelationmodel,users'audiencesareclear,andwhattheysayisindeedrelated,buttheirabilityishardtoexpresspartoftheirextraeffortneeds.Inotherwords,aslongastheaudienceunderstandsthatthespeakerisnotenoughtoacertainextent,itmeans"everythingisgood".41.9%(176)inadatasignalusingthe"good",thisistheseriousconsiderationofthelistener.155ofthemwereobviouslyindecisiveorprocrastinating(see23-27)..Sally:It'shard,isn'tit?There'salmostnotimeforasociallife.[20]Imean,whereareyougonnameetsomeone?Ross:Well,let'ssay,Idon'tknow,youmetsomeoneinthepediatrician'soffice.(23).Mike:ButRachelIthoughtshejusthadababywithRoss.Phoebe:Yeahwell(pause)yeahyouknow,Emma'sbirthcertificatemightsayGellerbuthereyessayMookurgee.(24).Rachel:...that'snowthethirdsignthatIshouldnotleaveEmma.(herdaughter)Ross:Oh,whatweretheothertwo?Rachel:Well,let'ssee.Thefirstoneis:Idon'twantto.And,youknow,I'mnotgoing.(25).Phoebe:Wow.Whereisyourluggage?David:(thinksforawhile)Damnit!Phoebe:A-Allright,well...I'llcallthecabcompany.(26).Phoebe:Well...butDavid,just...Ijustwantyoutoknowthat...that...youknow.te