Автор: Пользователь скрыл имя, 19 Октября 2011 в 18:45, курсовая работа
The interpretation of human’s emotional states and feelings, as a special form of the reflection of reality, is generally adopted. There is a great number of the shades of these states. Unfortunately, language doesn’t have enough number of words to transmit all possible shades of these feelings. Exploration of emotional speech is an actual and insufficiently studied problem in contemporary linguistics. The great number of different opinions about including emotionality into the sphere of linguistic analysis, the absence of systemic description of its characteristics explain such situation.
INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………….3
PART ONE. SURPRISE AS A FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN EMOTION……………………………………………………………......…………...5
PART TWO. SURPRISE TOKENS…………………………....……………….……7
2.1. Surprise as a display of (sub)cultural and category memberships…...…..10
2.2. Surprise as a vehicle for other actions………………………………...….12
2.3. Surprise as an alternative to other actions……………………………......13
CONCLUSIONS..…………………………………………………………………...15
REFERENCES…………………………………………………
CONCLUSIONS
We have shown how surprise is constructed and deployed in everyday social interaction through the use of reaction tokens. Further, we have examined why this is done, in specific interactional contexts.
We have built upon Goffman’s (1978) pioneering work on “response cries,” providing empirical evidence in support of his claim that these apparently spontaneous, uncontrolled “exclamatory imprecations” (p. 798), which we call reaction tokens, are fundamentally interactional events. We have shown empirically that expressions of surprise conveyed through surprise tokens are not involuntary emotional eruptions but interactionally organized performances. First, surprise tokens typically are produced after talk analyzably designed to elicit surprise from its recipient: for example, by using devices such as pre-announcements, negative observations, and extreme case formulations to build a surprise source turn. Second, surprise is not necessarily produced on one occasion only, but can be recycled: surprise tokens can be produced on multiple occasions to the same surprise source without (apparently) thereby losing their as-if-visceral character. Third, surprise tokens also can be delayed by practices such as silence, displays of ritualized disbelief, and other repair initiations.These practices themselves appear to constitute mini-performances of surprise, thus rendering the surprise token an extension, upgrade, or confirmation of an earlier intimation of surprise rather than an immediate visceral reaction to the unexpected. All of these observations support our analysis of
surprise as an interactional achievement.
We have moved well beyond Goffman’s notion of “response cries” as “creatures of social situations” (p. 814), not only in our specification of how surprise tokens work, but especially in our examination of what they can be used to do. We have shown that surprise provides a potent interactional resource for social members, and that the expression (and withholding) of surprise is thick with culture. In performing as-if-visceral surprise in response to talk designed to elicit it, people confirm for each other a shared, taken-for-granted world, defined by a set of norms, values, and expectations, of which the surprising behavior or event constitutes a breach. The interactional uses of surprise that we have identified are the reflection and reproduction of a normative world; the production and reinscription of membership categories; affiliation and disaffiliation; and the management of the local
moral order.
The
work presented above contribute substantially to the interactional tradition
of studying emotion, specifically surprise. Our key contribution has
been to separate the personal experience
of encountering the unexpected (the psychology of surprise)
from the public display of finding something counter to expectation
(the social expression of surprise). Further, in analyzing surprise
displays in some detail, we have shown not only that these are interactionally
organized performances, but also that these performances accomplish
an array of social actions. In this way we also regard our work, specifying
how one particular aspect of human behavior is produced and socially
managed in situ, as a contribution to the broad tradition of ethnomethodological
and conversation-analytic work in sociology.#2843—Social
Psychology Quarterly—VOL. 69 NO. 2—69203–W
REFERENCES
Reaction an Emotion? // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. – 1985
Brace Jovanovitch College, 1990. - 287 p.
5th ed. – New York:Wiley, 2003.
Tokens in Conversation // Social Psychology Quarterly, 2006. - №2. – Рр.
150-182.
Информация о работе Expression of surprise in modern English