How effective are the things people say to apologize? Effects of the realization of the apology speech act

被引:202
作者
Scher, SJ
Darley, JM
机构
[1] UNIV COLL CARIBOO,KAMLOOPS,BC V2C 5N3,CANADA
[2] PRINCETON UNIV,PRINCETON,NJ 08544
关键词
D O I
10.1023/A:1025068306386
中图分类号
H0 [语言学];
学科分类号
030303 ; 0501 ; 050102 ;
摘要
The Cross-Cultural Speech Act Realization Project (Blum-Kulka, House, & Kasper, 1989a) has identified five components of an ''apology speech act set'': five strategies that speakers use to apologize. This study examines the effects of four of those strategies (illocutionary force indicating device, expression of responsibility, promise of forebearance, and offer of repair) on the judgements made by hearers about the speaker and about the apology. Each of the strategies is shown to have an independent effect in improving reactions to the speaker. Further, the magnitude of these effects appear to be roughly similar for each of the strategies. The things people say to apologize do seem to be effective in accomplishing the self-presentational goals of apologizers.
引用
收藏
页码:127 / 140
页数:14
相关论文
共 35 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1989, ADV DISCOURSE PROCES
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1977, COMPUTATIONAL HDB ST
[3]  
AUSTIN JL, 1962, HOW TO DO THINGS WOR
[4]   APOLOGIES - JAPANESE AND AMERICAN STYLES [J].
BARNLUND, DC ;
YOSHIOKA, M .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERCULTURAL RELATIONS, 1990, 14 (02) :193-206
[5]  
Blum-Kulka S., 1989, CROSS CULTURAL PRAGM, P37
[6]   REQUESTS AND APOLOGIES - A CROSS-CULTURAL-STUDY OF SPEECH ACT REALIZATION PATTERNS (CCSARP) [J].
BLUMKULKA, S ;
OLSHTAIN, E .
APPLIED LINGUISTICS, 1984, 5 (03) :196-213
[7]  
Brown P., 1978, QUESTIONS POLITENESS, P56, DOI DOI 10.1017/CBO9780511813085
[8]   DEVELOPING A MEASURE OF SOCIOCULTURAL COMPETENCE - THE CASE OF APOLOGY [J].
COHEN, AD ;
OLSHTAIN, E .
LANGUAGE LEARNING, 1981, 31 (01) :113-134
[9]  
Cohen J., 1983, APPLIED MULTIPLE REG
[10]   CHILDRENS REACTIONS TO TRANSGRESSIONS - EFFECTS OF THE ACTORS APOLOGY, REPUTATION AND REMORSE [J].
DARBY, BW ;
SCHLENKER, BR .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1989, 28 :353-364