會議言談插話現象之禮貌策略研究：以大學英語學習者為例

Interruptions in Meeting Talks: Politeness Strategy Use of EFL University Learners

全球化已促進商務英語溝通的實務需求與發展。在各項商務英語溝通技巧中，掌握英語會議溝通技巧已成為一大學習重點。然而，相關研究指出，對於英語非母語人士而言，英語會議溝通能力不易掌握，其中「插話技巧」的能力培養尤具挑戰。「插話」經常涵蓋威脅面子的行為及禮貌策略，因此尤具難度。以往研究鮮少探討在以英語為外語的會議溝通情境下，學習者如何使用禮貌策略。本研究包含兩項研究焦點：其一，探討大學英語學習者在英語會議溝通中的插話目的，其二，分析其在插話過程中所使用之禮貌策略。語料來自大學英語學習者之英語會議溝通內容，研究對象總計52 名，英文程度為歐洲共同語言參考標準B2-C1級。以禮貌理論為基礎，分析與歸納會議言談插話現象之目的及禮貌策略。研究結果顯示，學習者常用的插話目的主分為干擾型（intrusive）以及合作型（cooperative）。干擾型以反駁觀點（showing disagreements）與取得發言權（takingthe floor）為主，合作型以表達肯定（making positive comments）與釐清觀點（clarifying for confirmation and repetition）為主。學習者多使用迴避反駁（avoiddisagreement）與表示道歉（apology）來表達反駁觀點；在取得發言權上，學習者多使用提問及閃避詞（questions and hedges）；為釐清觀點，學習者多使用道歉（apology）；在表達肯定中，學習者則多著重於注意聽話者喜好（notice and attend tothe hearers）。綜觀學習者所使用之禮貌策略，消極禮貌策略（negative politeness）之使用頻率相對較高。根據研究結果，本研究對專業英語教學提出教學實務上的建議。

Pragmatic necessity derived from globalness has led to the practice of business English communication. Among different types of business communication, meeting skills have been a key area for professionals to develop. Previous studies have shown that meeting skills have been challenging for non-native professionals. Among a variety of meetings-related skills, the act of interrupting is difficult for non-native professionals to perform because of its inherently face-threatening nature and the practice of politeness strategies. Politeness strategy use in challenging meeting skills from EFL learners' perspectives is rarely addressed. Thus, the study investigates the main purposes of interrupting and politeness strategies used during situated meetings conducted by EFL university learners. The spoken data collected from 52 participants with English ability at level B2-C1 of the CEFR was analyzed based on Brown and Levinson's politeness theory. The results reveal that both intrusive and cooperative interruptions emerged, for the purposes of showing disagreements, taking the floor, making positive comments, and clarifying for confirmation and repetition. Negative politeness was most commonly used across different purposes of interruptions. The use of output strategies varied. Avoiding disagreements and apology were frequently adopted in interrupting for showing disagreements. Questions and hedges had the highest level of frequency in interrupting for taking the floor. Apology was a common strategy employed in interrupting for clarification. The participants tended to notice and attend to hearers in interrupting for making positive comments. Pedagogical implications were drawn based on the results.