Morita2012a
| Morita2012a | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Morita2012a |
| Author(s) | Emi Morita |
| Title | Deriving the socio-pragmatic meanings of the Japanese interactional particle ne |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Interactional Linguistics, Particle, Japanese |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2012 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Journal of Pragmatics |
| Volume | 44 |
| Number | 3 |
| Pages | 298–314 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.12.004 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
In my previous work, I argued that the use of ne in conversation explicitly creates a sanctioned space in which participants can negotiate issues of interactive alignment in the moment ( Morita, 2005). Many sociolinguistic, psycholinguistic, and cognitive linguistic studies of ne, however, offer a wide range of higher-level interpretations that they claim speakers and listeners attribute to this particle, such that speakers use ne to mark “sharedness of information”, “politeness”, “femininity”, or “over-friendliness” – none of which seem to be relevant to the basic organizational function performed by ne itself.
The purpose of this paper is to show how my previous analysis of ne as a negotiation tool for resolving contingency problems can be understood with respect to the impressionistic interpretations provided by other theorists. I argue that impressions of differential stance taking are only possible when participants can rely on ne's fundamental function at the micro-level interaction as their base. Such thematization of interactive alignment may then lead to impressionistic hearings that invoke concepts of higher-order sociality, such as “politeness”, “neediness”, “coerciveness”, and (according to certain ideologies) “femininity”. I thus attempt to show here how these seemingly incongruous understandings of the Japanese interactional particle ne can be simultaneously correct.
Notes
