Home Discourse Marker Na (那) as an Interpersonal-Level Compensatory Strategy in Clinical Interviews
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Discourse Marker Na (那) as an Interpersonal-Level Compensatory Strategy in Clinical Interviews

  • Xinfang Li

    Xinfang Li is a lecturer at the School of English Education, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies. She received her Ph. D. from the Center for Linguistics and Applied Linguistics, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies. Her research interests include clinical pragmatics and conversation analysis.

    EMAIL logo
    and Yongping Ran

    Yongping Ran is a professor at the Centre for Linguistics and Applied Linguistics at Guangdong University of Foreign Studies. His research interests include interpersonal pragmatics and discourse analysis. He has publications in Journal of Pragmatics, Intercultural Pragmatics, Pragmatics and Society, and in some prominent journals of linguistics in Chinese.

Published/Copyright: January 16, 2021
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

Discourse markers (DMs) are characterized by multifunctionality in different contexts. This study addressed the use of the Chinese DM, na (那), as a solution to topical divergence, during clinical interactions with right-hemisphere-damaged (RHD) patients. Drawing on data collected from clinical interviews between psychotherapists and RHD patients, this study examined the functions of na in response to RHD topical divergence, focusing on the topic and attitudinal aspects. It was found that na was mainly employed by psychotherapists to mark a reproffer of interview topics (i. e., an attempt to return to earlier topics), and a display of disalignment and disaffiliation with RHD topical divergence. These functions of na reflect the psychotherapists’ attempts to overcome communicative problems arising from RHD topical divergence, so as to ensure the achievement of the communicative goal. Thus, na can be interpreted as a compensatory strategy for dealing with RHD topical divergence on an interpersonal level. These findings not only expand our knowledge about the function spectrum of na, but also offer insights for RHD patients’ interlocutors to enhance conversational communication with RHD patients via the compensatory strategy.

About the authors

Xinfang Li

Xinfang Li is a lecturer at the School of English Education, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies. She received her Ph. D. from the Center for Linguistics and Applied Linguistics, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies. Her research interests include clinical pragmatics and conversation analysis.

Yongping Ran

Yongping Ran is a professor at the Centre for Linguistics and Applied Linguistics at Guangdong University of Foreign Studies. His research interests include interpersonal pragmatics and discourse analysis. He has publications in Journal of Pragmatics, Intercultural Pragmatics, Pragmatics and Society, and in some prominent journals of linguistics in Chinese.

References

Archakis, A. (2001). On discourse markers: Evidence from modern Greek. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(8), 1235-1261.10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00054-0Search in Google Scholar

Bazzanella, C. (2006). Discourse markers in Italian: Towards a “compositional” meaning. In K. Fisher (Ed. ), Approaches to discourse particles (pp. 449-464). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Search in Google Scholar

Benjamin, T. , & Mazeland, H. (2013). Conversation analysis and other-initiated repair. In C. Chapelle (Ed. ), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 944-948). Boston: Wiley-Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Biq, Y. -O. (1990). Conversation, continuation, and connectives. TextInterdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 10, 187-208.10.1515/text.1.1990.10.3.187Search in Google Scholar

Blake, L. M. (2006). Clinical relevance of discourse characteristics after right hemisphere brain damage. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 15(3), 255-267.10.1044/1058-0360(2006/024)Search in Google Scholar

Bolden, G. B. (2006). Little words that matter: Discourse markers “so” and “oh” and the doing of other-attentiveness in social interaction. Journal of Communication Disorders, 56(4), 661-688.10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00314.xSearch in Google Scholar

Bolden, G. B. (2008). “So what ’s up?”: Using the discourse marker so to launch conversational business. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41(3), 302-337.10.1080/08351810802237909Search in Google Scholar

Bolden, G. B. (2009). Implementing incipient actions: The discourse marker ‘ so ’ in English conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(5), 974-998.10.1016/j.pragma.2008.10.004Search in Google Scholar

Chen, W. (2017). Functions of so in English as a lingua franca and native speech: A corpus-based study. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 40(1), 93-111+121-122.Search in Google Scholar

Clancy, P. M. , Thompson, S. A. , Suzuki, R. , & Tao, H. (1996). The conversational use of reactive tokens in English, Japanese, and Mandarin. Journal of Pragmatics, 26(3), 355-387.10.1016/0378-2166(95)00036-4Search in Google Scholar

Cumming, S. , & Ono, T. (1997). Discourse and grammar. In T. A. van Dijk (Ed. ), Discourse as structure and process (Vol. I, pp. 112-137). London: Sage.Search in Google Scholar

Fang, M. (2000). 自然口语中弱化连词的话语标记功能[Reduced conjunctions as discourse markers]. Studies of the Chinese Language, (5), 459-470+480.Search in Google Scholar

Fischer, K. (2006). Towards an understanding of the spectrum of discourse particles: introduction to the volume. In K. Fischer (Ed. ), Approaches to discourse particles (pp. 1-20). North Holland: Elsevier.10.1163/9780080461588Search in Google Scholar

Fraser, B. (1990). An approach to discourse markers. Journal of Pragmatics, 14(3), 383-398.10.1016/0378-2166(90)90096-VSearch in Google Scholar

Fraser, B. (1999). What are discourse markers? Journal of Pragmatics, 31(7), 931-952.10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00101-5Search in Google Scholar

Furman, R. , & Özyürek, A. (2007). Development of interactional discourse markers: Insights from Turkish children’s and adults’ oral narratives. Journal of Pragmatics, 39(10), 1742-1757.10.1016/j.pragma.2007.01.008Search in Google Scholar

Haselow, A. (2019). Discourse marker sequences: Insights into the serial order of communicative tasks in real-time turn production. Journal of Pragmatics, 146(1), 1-18.10.1016/j.pragma.2019.04.003Search in Google Scholar

He, H. F. (1998). 连词“ 那么” 的口语用法[Colloquial usage of the connective “name”]. Language Planning, (1), 15-16.Search in Google Scholar

Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kegl, J. , & Poizner, H. (1991). The interplay between linguistic and spatial processing in a right-lesioned signer. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 13(1), 38-39.Search in Google Scholar

Kitzinger, C. (2013). Repair. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds. ), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 229-256). Chicester: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Kovarsky, D. (1990). Discourse markers in adult-controlled therapy: Implications for child centered intervention. Journal of Childhood Communication Disorders, 13(1), 29-41.10.1177/152574019001300105Search in Google Scholar

Lai, Y. -h. , & Lin, Y. -t. (2012). Discourse markers produced by Chinese-speaking seniors with and without Alzheimer ’s disease. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(14), 1982-2003.10.1016/j.pragma.2012.09.002Search in Google Scholar

Lee, S. -H. , & Tanaka, H. (2016). Affiliation and alignment in responding actions. Journal of Pragmatics, 100(1), 1-7.10.1016/j.pragma.2016.05.008Search in Google Scholar

Li, X. (2016). A pragmatic study of the acceptability of topical divergence in clinical interviews. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies.Search in Google Scholar

Li, X. , & Ran, Y. (2020). Interactional consequences of topical divergences in clinical interviews: Indications of pragmatic impairment. Journal of Pragmatics, 157, 39-52.10.1016/j.pragma.2019.12.005Search in Google Scholar

Liang, J. M. (2002). “ 这- ” 、“ 那- ” 的语用与话语功能研究[A study of the pragmatic and discourse functions ofzheandna”]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.Search in Google Scholar

Lyu, S. X. (1980). 现代汉语800 词[800 words in modern Chinese]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.Search in Google Scholar

Marini, A. (2012). Characteristics of narrative discourse processing after damage to the right hemisphere. Seminars in Speech and Language, 33(1), 68-78.10.1055/s-0031-1301164Search in Google Scholar

Miracle, W. C. (1991). Discourse markers in Mandarin Chinese. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University.Search in Google Scholar

Myers, P. S. (2005). Profiles of communication deficits in patients with right cerebral hemisphere damage: Implications for diagnosis and treatment. Aphasiology, 19(12), 1147-1160.10.1080/02687030500331585Search in Google Scholar

Perkins, M. (2007). Pragmatic impairment. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486555Search in Google Scholar

Preisler, B. (1986). Linguistic sex roles in conversation: Social variation in the expression of tentativeness in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110862973Search in Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. , Jefferson, G. , & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53(2), 361-382.10.1353/lan.1977.0041Search in Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (1990). On the organization of sequences as a source of “coherence” in talk-in-interaction. In B. Dorval (Ed. ), Conversational organization and its development (pp. 51-77). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Search in Google Scholar

Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis (Vol. 1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511791208Search in Google Scholar

Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511611841Search in Google Scholar

Simmons-Mackie, N. N. , & Damico, J. S. (1996). The contribution of discourse markers to communicative competence in aphasia. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 5(1), 37-43.10.1044/1058-0360.0501.37Search in Google Scholar

Simmons-Mackie, N. N. , & Damico, J. S. (1997). Reformulating the definition of compensatory strategies in aphasia. Aphasiology, 11(8), 761-781.10.1080/02687039708250455Search in Google Scholar

Steensig, J. , & Drew, P. (2008). Introduction: Questioning and affiliation/disaffiliation in interaction. Discourse Studies, 10(1), 5-15.10.1177/1461445607085581Search in Google Scholar

Stivers, T. (2008). Stance, alignment, and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41(1), 31-57.10.1080/08351810701691123Search in Google Scholar

Stivers, T. (2011). Knowledge, morality and affiliation in social interaction. In T. Stivers, L. Mondada, & J. Steensig (Eds. ), The morality of knowledge in conversation (pp. 3-24). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511921674.002Search in Google Scholar

Tay, D. (2011). Discourse markers as metaphor signalling devices in psychotherapeutic talk. Language & Communication, 31(4), 310-317.10.1016/j.langcom.2011.02.001Search in Google Scholar

Travis, C. E. (2006). The natural semantic metalanguage approach to discourse markers In K. Fisher (Ed. ), Approaches to discourse particles (pp. 219-242). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Search in Google Scholar

Tseng, M. -Y. (2013). Dan as a discourse marker, metadiscourse device and metapragmatic marker: Examples from the evaluation reports of Taiwan’s higher education sector. Journal of Pragmatics, 50 (1), 108-128.10.1016/j.pragma.2013.01.011Search in Google Scholar

Wang, W. (2017). From a conditional marker to a discourse marker: The uses of dehua (的话) in natural Mandarin conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 117, 119-138.10.1016/j.pragma.2017.06.007Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Y. F. , Tsai, P. H. , & Ling, M. Y. (2007). From informational to emotive use: Meiyou ( ‘ no ’ ) as a discourse marker in Taiwan Mandarin conversation. Discourse Studies, 9, 645-669.10.1177/1461445607081271Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Y. F. , Tsai, P. H. , & Yang, Y. T. (2010). Objectivity, subjectivity and intersubjectivity: Evidence from qishi ( ‘ actually ’ ) and shishishang ( ‘ in fact ’ ) in spoken Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(3), 705-727.10.1016/j.pragma.2009.07.011Search in Google Scholar

Wu, R. R. (2006). Initiating repair and beyond: The use of two repeat-formatted repair initiations in Mandarin conversation. Discourse Processes, 41(1), 67-109.10.1207/s15326950dp4101_5Search in Google Scholar

Wu, X. , & Lei, L. (2016). Functions of you know and I mean in academic seminar siscussions by ELF speakers. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 39(3), 288-303+374.Search in Google Scholar

Wu, X. F. , & Yin, S. L. (2012). 说“那么” [On “na(me)”]. Journal of Fuzhou Universiy (Philosophy and Social Sciences), (5), 87-96.Search in Google Scholar

Xian, L. X. , & Li, Y. J. (2015). 汉语话语标记研究综述[A review on the research of Chinese discourse markers]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Editions), (01), 122-127.Search in Google Scholar

Zhang, L. (2015). “问题是”的话语标记化[A discourse marker: “Wentishi”]. Studies in Language and Linguistics, 35(02), 28-32.Search in Google Scholar

Zheng, Y. J. , & Luo, Y. H. (2013). 自然口语中“ 这/那” 的话语立场表达研究[On stance taking of “zhe(这)/na(那)” in spoken Chinese]. Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies, (1), 96-104.Search in Google Scholar

Acknowledgements

This study is supported by the following projects: the Chinese Ministry of Education (MOE) Humanities and Social Science Research Funding (18YJC740042), the Research Project of Guangdong Planning Office of Philosophy and Social Science (GD16CWW05), and the MOE Key Research Project of Humanities and Social Science (16JJD740006) conducted by the Center for Linguistics and Applied Linguistics (CLAL), Guangdong University of Foreign Studies (GDUFS). It is also supported by both the Department of Education of Guangdong Province and the Center for Linguistics and Applied Linguistics at Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, P. R. China for the frontier research and its theoretical innovations in interpersonal pragmatics (“ 人际语用学前沿研究与理论创新” 项目) (2018WZDXM006). We would like to thank the reviewers for their comments and suggestions on earlier versions of this manuscript.

Appendix

Transcript Symbols

SymbolUse
=Indicates the break and subsequent continuation of a single utterance.
(0.0)A number in parenthesis indicates the time, in seconds, of a pause in speech.
-Indicates a short untimed pause within an utterance.
.Indicates a stopping fall in tone falling pitch or intonation.
?Indicates a rising inflection rising pitch or intonation.
,Indicates a continuing intonation a temporary rise or fall in intonation.
textIndicates the speaker is emphasizing or stressing the speech.
(())Annotation of non-verbal activity or vocalizations that are not spelled recognizably.
( )Speech which is unclear or in doubt in the transcript.
. . .Indicates that an utterance is being reported only in part, with additional speech coming before, in the middle of, or after the reported fragment, depending on the location of the ellipses.
Published Online: 2021-01-16
Published in Print: 2020-11-25

© 2020 FLTRP, Walter de Gruyter, Cultural and Education Section British Embassy

Downloaded on 22.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/CJAL-2020-0028/html
Scroll to top button