【作者】 李丽；

【导师】 马文；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 外国语言文学， 2017， 博士

【摘要】 请求与回应是日常生活中频繁出现的社会行为。以往对请求与回应的研究大多基于单一例句,而不是自然发生的会话,因此不能如实地呈现请求与回应在真实谈话中的表现形式及实现过程。近年来,会话分析领域越来越多地出现对自然会话中的请求与回应进行的研究,探讨了日常谈话以及机构性谈话中请求与回应的实现过程。对机构性谈话中请求与回应的研究主要包括报警电话中的请求与回应,商业服务中的请求与回应以及医疗环境中的请求与回应,对非紧急性公共服务热线中市民发出的请求与官方做出的回应进行的研究尚不多见。如果市民发出的请求没有得到合理的回应,可能会导致市民对政府机构的不信任。鉴于此,本文对中国公共服务热线中请求与回应进行研究,探讨接线人员应当如何合理应对市民发出的请求。本文的研究目的是探索中国公共服务热线中市民发出请求与接线人员做出回应的运作机制。研究问题包括:(1)在问题陈述阶段,市民怎样陈述问题使他们的请求具有合理性,可信性以及相关性?(2)在问答阶段,主持人提出一系列问题的原因是什么?市民回答问题时为何经常提供过量信息?(3)在应答阶段,应答者对市民的请求如何做出回复?市民或主持人对各种答复分别做出何种回应?该研究的语料来源是一个直播的求助类电台节目中三百个市民的求助电话,该求助热线是政府为了解决市民遇到的问题,提供更好的公共服务而设立,政府机构工作人员对市民遇到的问题给予在线解答。作者对该语境下的请求与回应基于其所在的序列环境进行分析,从会话参与者的角度分析双方对市民遇到的问题进行协商以寻求合理解决方式的过程。研究的主要发现如下。(1)问题陈述阶段,市民通过详尽描述对事件的所见所闻使得其陈述具有可信性。市民通过把事件归因于公共服务机构或第三方的违规或失职,描述事件带来的后果,讲述自助的失败,构建请求的合理性以及相关性。当市民发出的请求具有明显的合理性时,其请求事件得以解决的资格较高,而当市民发出的请求不具有明显的合理性或者可能不合理时,其请求事件得以解决的资格较低。(2)市民完成事件陈述后,节目主持人提出一系列问题查明事件的性质以及市民对事件的立场。市民回答问题时通常提供过量信息强调其核心观点,增强其请求的合理性与可信性。(3)当应答者承认市民请求的合理性以及可靠性并且根据市民的立场与认知状态提供可行的解决方法时,他们的回答被市民接受。但是在很多情况下应答者没有做出这种回答,导致市民或主持人对其回答的阻抗。(4)当市民没有充分理解应答者的回答或需要更多信息时,应答者根据其专业知识提供市民需要的信息。当市民的阻抗源于应答者的回答中对问题的回避或者对事件合理解决方式的缺失,主持人为应答者做出适当的回答提供导向。当市民的阻抗源于他们质疑事件是否会达到解决,何时得到解决以及如何得到解决,应答者提供折中的解决方案,允许市民对事件的解决具有一定的掌控。当市民在非优先性应答之后依然请求事件得以解决,应答者根据相关法律和规定对非优先性应答做出解释。(5)主持人的阻抗主要源于应答者的回答中对问题的回避或者对事件有效彻底的解决方式的缺失。主持人在该机构谈话中起到协调者作用。主持人询问出市民对事件的立场,对应答者做出适当的回答起到引导作用。主持人在市民和应答者沟通过程中提供帮助,使得双方能够互相理解,协助双方对事件的合理解决方式进行协商。应答者在主持人的引导下找出有效彻底的解决问题的方式。通过对这些研究发现进行解释并且与前期相关研究进行比较,本研究揭示出该机构谈话的主要特征。该公共服务热线中,会话参与者把所有节目听众当作受众,不仅解决市民反映的问题本身,而且从一个问题扩展到一类问题,为广大节目听众提供公共服务。节目主持人不仅查明市民反映问题的性质,而且准确了解市民对反映事件的立场,为应答者在线做出回应提供导向,为事件的合理解决进行协调,解决双方的矛盾冲突与误解,起到了协调者的作用。基于以上发现,本研究对中国公共服务热线中会话参与者发出请求与做出回应的运作机制进行了充分的阐释。研究发现表明,中国公共服务热线中市民对应答者的阻抗大多由双方对事件的立场不同导致,应答者应当基于市民对事件的立场以及认知状态,依据相关政策规定,从双方的角度考虑问题,对市民反映的事件提出合理的解决方案。该项研究遵循会话分析的研究传统,探索了中国公共服务热线中请求与回应的运作机制。该研究阐明了如何把请求及其回应作为自然会话中的社会行为,在其发生的序列环境中对其进行系统地研究,而不是将其作为孤立的话语进行探讨。由于该研究是对公共服务热线中的请求与回应进行的实证研究,研究发现能够为公共服务热线中应答者对市民反映的问题做出合理的回答提供启示。应答者对市民的请求做出回应时,应当正视市民反映的问题,尽力解决市民的困难,消除市民的误解,考虑市民的需求以及认知状态,作为领导者从根本上解决市民反映的问题以提高服务大众的质量,允许市民对问题的解决进行监督掌控。合理回应市民的请求将有助于建立市民与政府机构之间的信任与和谐关系。更多还原

【Abstract】 Request and response frequently occur in our social life.Most of the previous studies examined request and response based on isolated utterances rather than naturally occurring conversation,with few observations on what really occurs in the course of request and response in real life.In recent years,more and more studies examined request and response in naturally occurring conversation,including ordinary talk and institutional talk.Previous studies of request and response in institutional talk mainly focused on request and response in emergency calls,commercial services and medical encounters.Whereas,there have been few studies of request and response in nonemergency public service calls,in which callers make requests and directors of governmental agencies deliver responses.Directors’inappropriate responses to callers’ requests may cause callers’ distrust of governmental agencies.The present study,therefore,examines requests and responses in Chinese public service calls to find out how directors deliver responses to callers’requests in appropriate way.The present study aims to explore the mechanism through which callers make requests and call takers deliver responses to callers’ requests in Chinese public service calls.Research questions include:(1)How do callers establish the credibility,legitimacy and relevance of their requests to this helpline while making requests?(2)In the series of questions and answers after callers’ problem presentations,what is the role of the host and why do callers frequently deliver transformative answers to the host’s questions?(3)What responses to callers’ requests are delivered by directors of governmental agencies?What is the consequence of each sort of response?The data source of the present study is the audio recordings of 300 telephone calls to a live radio phone-in program,a public helpline set up by the government to solve citizens’ problems.Directors of governmental agencies deliver responses to citizens’ problems on the phone.Data analysis is focused on the trajectory of requests and responses in this setting.The analysis has been conducted from participants’perspective rather than on the basis of the analyst’s intuition.Utterances in conversation have been analyzed in their sequential contexts.Main findings of the present study are as follows.(1)While presenting their problems,callers usually describe their physical access to reported problems to establish the credibility of their problem presentations.Callers attribute their problems to the complained parties’ violation of social rules or failure to fulfill their responsibilities,describe consequences of their problems and account of their failed self-help to establish the legitimacy and relevance of reported problems.Callers have high entitlement to make requests when their requests are transparently legitimate,whereas they have low entitlement to make requests when their requests are possibly not legitimate.(2)After callers’ problem presentations,the host asks a series of questions to find out the nature of reported problems and callers’ stances on reported problems.In most telephone calls,callers deliver transformative answers to emphasize the fundamental point of their requests and enhance the legitimacy and credibility of their requests.(3)Directors’ responses are accepted by callers and the host,when directors admit the legitimacy and credibility of callers’ requests and provide feasible solutions to callers’ problems based on callers’ stances and epistemic status.But in many cases,directors fail to do so and their responses are resisted by callers or the host.(4)When callers’ resistance is caused by their insufficient understanding of directors’ responses or needs for more information,directors provide information that is asked for according to their professional knowledge.When callers’resistance is caused by directors’ evasions or directors’ failure to provide feasible solutions to callers’ problems,the host provides guidance for directors on delivering appropriate responses.When callers’ resistance is caused by their uncertainty about whether,when and how their problems will be solved,directors make compromises and allow callers to have control over solutions to reported problems.When callers pursue solutions to their problems after directors’ dispreferred responses,directors account for their responses according to relevant laws and institutional policies.(5)The host’s resistance mainly occurs after directors’ evasions or failure to provide feasible and radical solutions to callers’ problems.As a mediator in this helpline,the host identifies callers’ stances on reported problems and provides guidance for directors on delivering appropriate responses.The host helps callers and directors to achieve mutual understanding and negotiate about appropriate solutions to callers’problems.Directors follow the host’s guidance and find out feasible and radical solutions to callers’ problems.These findings have been explained and compared with previous studies to demonstrate main features of this sort of institutional talk.In this public helpline,participants treat all listeners of this program as the recipients of their talk.They not only negotiate about callers’ problems but also extend their conversation to other similar problems to provide public services for all citizens.After callers’ problem presentations,the host finds out not only the nature of reported problems but also callers,stances on their problems to provide guidance for directors on delivering appropriate responses.The host solves conflicts and misunderstandings between callers and directors and plays the role of a mediator in the negotiation about reported problems.Based on findings of the study,the mechanism of requests and responses in Chinese public service calls has been elaborated.Findings of the present study demonstrate that resistance in most cases of Chinese public service calls is caused by the mismatch between callers,stances and directors5 stances on reported problems and that directors should find out reasonable solutions to callers’ problems from both parties’ perspectives based on callers’ stances,epistemic status and relevant institutional policies.This study explores the mechanism of request and response in Chinese public service calls following the research tradition of conversation analysis.It demonstrates how request and response should be examined systematically in their sequential contexts based on naturally occurring conversation rather than invented examples or isolated utterances.Since this is an empirical study of request and response in public service calls,findings of this study may provide implications for directors of governmental agencies about delivering appropriate responses to citizens’ problems.While delivering responses to citizens’ requests,directors should eliminate callers’concerns and misunderstandings,take callers’ epistemic status into consideration,avoid evasions,find out radical solutions to reported problems as managers and allow citizens to have control over solutions to their problems.Appropriate responses to citizens’ problems may help to build up harmonious relationship between citizens and governmental agencies.更多还原