A Study Of Impoliteness In Conflict Talk In Counseling Discourse

In our daily communication,conflict talk is one of the complicated phenomena that happen frequently between interlocutors.Though conflict talk has been explored from different perspectives in many studies,most of them still focus on analyzing impoliteness within the framework of politeness with an aim to minimize people’s impolite behavior and maximize their polite acts.With a focus on two types of participants,the client and the counselor,and their interaction,this thesis is an attempt to investigate impoliteness in conflict talk in counseling discourse with a view to maximize people’s understanding of impoliteness and promote a society of harmony.Based on Bousfield’s(2008)impoliteness framework and Spencer-Oatey’s(2015)Rapport Management Model,this study is an attempt to address the following four research questions:First,what kinds of impoliteness strategies are used by clients and by counselors in conflict talk in counseling discourse?Second,what kinds of impoliteness response patterns are used between clients and between clients and counselors in conflict talk in counseling discourse?Third,what are the causes of impoliteness?Fourth,how do people regulate these two kinds of relationships?In order to answer the aforesaid four questions,this study mainly proceeded in four steps:(1)Data collection.In this process,156 episodes of one family therapy were downloaded.Every episode was watched by the author herself twice.In sum,246 fragments of conflict talk were selected.(2)Data classification.The selected fragments were classified into two categories according to their relationships:those between clients,and those between clients and counselors.(3)Transcription.Episodes of conflict talk from video recordings were transcribed and annotated into textual materials.(4)Data analysis.In this step,Bousfield’s(2008)impoliteness strategies and impoliteness response patterns as well as Spencer-Oatey’s(2015)Rapport Management Model were applied to answer the aforementioned four research questions respectively.Through analyzing the data,some conclusions can be arrived at:(1)Compared with the impoliteness strategies used by counselors,the impoliteness strategies used by clients are more diverse.First,the client not only applies many strategies that are already identified by Bousfield(2008),but also uses other strategies that have not been identified before.Second,in conflict talk between clients,the client tends to use various offensive strategies and defensive strategies.(2)A comparison of the impoliteness response patterns used in conflict talk between clients with those applied in conflict talk between clients and counselors shows that both similarities and differences exist.Though in these two kinds of relationships,response patterns proposed by Bousfield have been found,they are different in that the conflict between clients is more intense with more turn-taking,more role-shifting,more interruptions and more short sentences.What is more,different from the cases of conflict talk between clients,the arguments between clients and counselors are always solved finally by the counselor’s persuasion.(3)The causes of impoliteness can be grouped into three categories:face,rights and goals,which correspond to the three bases of Spencer-Oatey’s(2009)Rapport Management Model.(4)People regulate their rapport in conflict talk given that they hold different rapport orientations,and that they are influenced by contextual variables and social conventions.This study is significant both theoretically and practically.Theoretically,the finding,that five strategies which are not proposed by Bousfield(2008)have been found is an enrichment of the list of output impoliteness strategies.Practically,through analyzing impoliteness strategies and impoliteness response patterns,this thesis may help people to have a better understanding of impoliteness and apply impoliteness strategies and impoliteness response patterns flexibly in order to maximize the pragmatic effect and build a more harmonious society.