Article published In:
Pragmatics and SocietyVol. 14:3 (2023) ► pp.442–460
Parentheses used as pragmatic strategies in Chinese online socialization
This paper details the use of parentheses as pragmatic strategies in Chinese network socialization. The data were collected from Weibo, Wechat, QQ and other online social platforms, and analyzed from the perspective of Cyberpragmatics. We consider the pragmatic features and functions of parentheses as an indivisible part of the whole unit in relation to emojis or graphicons. As pragmatic strategies, parentheses aid speakers in indirectly performing various pragmatic intentions, like adding supplementary information to the interaction, isolating different topics, and contrasting content between the text outside and within parentheses. Further pragmatic functions realized by parentheses include indirectly conveying intention, relieving communicative awkwardness and adjusting interlocutors expectations. We conclude that using parentheses as pragmatic strategies in network socialization is the result of the evolution of the Internet language, and varies from the use of other emojis, which directly convey intentions and meaning.
Keywords: Cyberpragmatics, parentheses, evolution, pragmatic strategy, pragmatic functions, indirectness, network socialization, Internet language
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Parentheses used in network socialization
- 3.Research methods
- 3.1Data
- 3.2Research approach
- 4.Textual features and functions of parentheses
- 4.1Textual features of parentheses
- 4.1.1Major use of state verbal phrases
- 4.1.2Frequent use of concise phrases
- 4.1.3Less frequent use of complete utterances
- 4.2Textual functions of parentheses
- 4.2.1Offering supplementary information
- 4.2.2Isolating different topics
- 4.2.3Contrasting content between outside and in parentheses
- 4.1Textual features of parentheses
- 5.Parentheses as pragmatic strategies
- 5.1Strategy for indirectly conveying intention
- 5.2Strategy for relieving awkwardness
- 5.2.1Generating self-deprecation
- 5.2.2Creating humorous effects
- 5.3Strategy for adjusting interlocutor expectations
- 5.3.1Increasing speaker expectations
- 5.3.2Lowering speaker expectations
- 6.Discussion and concluding remarks
- Acknowledgements
-
References
References
Aslan, Erhan
2017 “The
impact of face systems on the pragmalinguistic features of academic e-mail
requests.” Pragmatics and
Society 8(1): 61–84. 
Bajcar, Beata and Jolanta Babiak
2020 “Neuroticism
and cyberchondria: The mediating role of intolerance of uncertainty and defensive
pessimism.” Personality and Individual
Differences 1621.
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson
1987 Politeness:
Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chang, Wei-Lin Melody and Michael Haugh
2011 “Strategic
embarrassment and face threatening in business interactions.” Journal of
Pragmatics 431: 2948–2963.
Dainas, Ashley R. and Susan C. Herring
2021 Interpreting
emoji pragmatics. In Approaches to Internet Pragmatics: Theory and
practice. Eds. by Chaoqun Xie, Francisco Yus and Hartmut Haberland, 107–144. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Eisenchlas, Susana A.
2011 “On-line interactions as a
resource to raise pragmatic awareness.” Journal of
Pragmatics 431: 51–61.
Feng, Hairong
2015 “Understanding
cultural variations in giving advice among Americans and Chinese.” Communication
Research 42 (8): 143–1167.
Goffman, Erving
1967 Interaction
Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behaviour. New York: Doubleday and Company.
Grice, Herbert P.
1975 Logic and
conversation. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Gu, Yueguo
1990 “Politeness
phenomena in modern Chinese.” Journal of
Pragmatics 14(2): 237–257.
Haugh, Michael
2016 “ ‘Just
kidding’: Teasing and claims to non-serious intent.” Journal of
Pragmatics 951: 120–136.
Haugh, Michael and Derek Bousfield
2012 “Mock
impoliteness, jocular mockery and jocular abuse in Australian and British English.” Journal of
Pragmatics 441: 1099–1114.
Haugh, Michael and Wei-Lin Melody Chang
2019 “The
apology seemed (in)sincere”: Variability in perceptions of (im)politeness.” Journal of
Pragmatics 1421: 207–222.
Holmes, Janet, Meredith Marra and Bernadette Vine
2012 Politeness
and impoliteness in New Zealand English workplace discourse. Journal of
Pragmatics 441: 1063–1076.
Horgan, Mervyn
2020 “Urban
interaction ritual Strangership, civil inattention and everyday incivilities in public
space.” Pragmatics 30(1): 116–141.
Kiesling, Scott F. and Elka G. Johnson
2010 “Four
forms of interactional indirection.” Journal of
Pragmatics 421: 292–306.
Leech, Geoffrey
1983 Principles
of
pragmatics. London: Longman 1983.
Leech, Geoffrey and Mick Short
2007 Style
in Fiction-A Linguistic Introduction to English Fictional Prose (2nd
Edition). London: Routledge.
Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, Barbara
2020 “Culture-driven
emotional profiles and online discourse extremism.” Pragmatics and
Society 11(2): 262–291.
Locher, Miriam A. and Richard J. Watts
2005 “Politeness
theory and relational work.” Journal of Politeness
Research 1 (1): 9–33.
Luo, Luxin
2018 “Variations
of Online Punctuation: Bracket+.” Journal of Shenyang
University (Social
Science) 20(04): 472–476.
Mak, Bernie Chun Nam
2020 “Doing business and
constructing identities through small talk in workplace instant messaging.” Pragmatics and
Society 10(4): 559–583.
Mey, Jacob L.
2001 Pragmatics: An
Introduction (second
edition). Oxford: Blackwell [1993].
2018 Review of Osamu Sawada 2018.
Pragmatic aspects of scalar modifiers: The semantics-pragmatics interface. Pragmatics and
Society 9(4): 654–656.
2021 Expanding pragmatics: Values,
goals, ranking, and internet adaptability. In Approaches to Internet
Pragmatics: Theory and practice, ed. by Chaoqun Xie, Francisco Yus and Hartmut Haberland: 27–45. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Miller, Elizabeth R.
2013 “Positioning selves, doing
relational work and constructing identities in interview talk.” Journal of Politeness
Research 9(1): 75–95.
Morini, Massimiliano
2013 The
Pragmatic Translator: An Integral Theory of Translation. London, New Delhi, New York, N.Y. and Sydney: Bloomsbury.
Norem, Julie K.
2008 “Defensive pessimism, anxiety,
and the complexity of evaluating self-regulation.” Social and Personality Psychology
Compass 2(1): 121–134.
Placencia, Maria Elena, Amanda Lower and Hebe Powell Birkbeck
2016 “Complimenting
behaviour on Facebook Responding to compliments in American English.” Pragmatics and
Society 7(3): 339–365.
Rosenthal, Robert, and Lenore Jacobson
1968 Pygmalion
in the classroom: teacher expectation and pupils’ intellectual development. New York, N.Y.: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Searle, John R.
1975 “Indirect speech
acts.” In Syntax and Semantics. Speech
Acts, ed. By Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan, 59–82. New York, N.Y.: Academic Press.
Shen, Jiaxuan
2016 Nouns
and Verbs. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
Watts, Richard J.
2003 Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Xie, Chaoqun, Francisco Yus, and Hartmut Haberland
eds. 2021 Approaches
to Internet Pragmatics: Theory and practice. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Yip, Jesse W.C.
2020 “Directness of advice giving
in traditional Chinese medicine consultations.” Journal of
Pragmatics 1661: 28–38.
Yus, Francisco
2005 Attitudes
and emotions through written text: the case of textual deformation in Internet chat
rooms. Pragmalingua 131: 147–176.
2011 Cyberpragmatics:
Internet-Mediated Communication in Context. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
2014 “Not
All Emoticons Are Created Equal.” Linguagem em
(dis)curso 14 (3): 511–529.
2017 “Contextual
constraints and non-propositional effects in Whats App communication.” Journal of
Pragmatics 1141: 66–86.