4.2.1 Identifying and extracting advising acts
The data used in this study have been extracted from five data sets. To appropriately identify advising acts in the data sets, a combined method was used, derived from the traditions of institutional discourse analysis and interlanguage and cross-cultural pragmatics. The former usually considers advising as a problem-solving activity, while the latter approaches often treat advising as a speech act and analyze it in terms of the CCSARP (Cross-Cultural Speech Act Realization Project) model proposed by Blum-Kulka et al. (1989).In this study, the model was used to extract head act(s) of an advising act and then this/these head act(s) was/were put into a much wider context. This newly-combined way of examining advising acts could not only enable the advising acts to be identified in the data sets, but also enhance the understanding of how advising acts are performed in institutional interactions.This combined way has made it possible for the advising acts to be examined from both a micro-perspective and a macro-perspective.
Identifying an advising act by its illocutionary force
In this study, the basic criteria to identify an advising act are the felicity conditions proposed by Searle (1969) (see Section 2.3.1). The felicity conditions can provide the general principle to judge whether a speech act is an advising act. However, a speech act of advising is finally realized by the use of language, which mainly comprises linguistic forms and propositional contents. Many studies on advising have discussed the various linguistic strategies involved in performing a speech act of advising (e.g., Bardovi-Harlig& Hartford, 1996; Goldsmith, 2000; Hudson, 1990; Jiang, 2006; Koike,1994;Kouper, 2010; Li, 2010; Liu & Zhao, 2007; Martínez-Flor, 2005, 2010;Martínez-Flor & Fukuya , 2005).
Following the CCSARP model (Blum-Kulka et al., 1989) for speech acts of request and based on the previous classifications of advising acts made by Hudson (1990), Martínez-Flor (2005, 2010), Kouper (2010) and Li (2010) as well as the classification of request acts in Chinese developed by Rue and Zhang(2008), the speech act of advising is here classified into head acts, internal modifications and external modifications.
Head acts are classified into three main levels in terms of the degree of their directness, namely direct, conventionally indirect and non-conventionally indirect, and each level can be further classified into several sub-categories as shown in Table 4.2.
Table 4.2 Taxonomy of advising in Chines e
continued:
The different categories of advising and their linguistic realization strategies clearly show that the illocutionary force of a speech act of advising can be conveyed explicitly by its linguistic forms (especially at lexical and syntactic levels) and discourse contents. It can also be conveyed implicitly by its discourse contents with the help of context. A chart can be worked out to identify speech acts of advising in each of the data sets in terms of their linguistic forms and discourse contents with the involvement of context (see Figure 4.1).
Figure 4.1 The procedure for identifying advising acts[1]
Examining the linguistic forms is the first step to see whether an utterance conveys the illocutionary force of advising. If its linguistic forms explicitly convey this kind of illocutionary force, then it is an advising act; if it is not clear whether the linguistic forms convey this kind of illocutionary force,then its discourse contents will be examined. If the discourse contents explicitly indicate this kind of illocutionary force, then it is an advising act. In this process, context is always involved.
Advising as a problem-solving activity
As discussed in Section 2.3.2, in institutional interactions, advising is often considered as a problem-solving activity (Vehviläinen, 2001, 2009),which usually consists of several steps. To treat advising as a problem-solving activity, this section will examine advising acts in a wider context. Putting advising acts into a much wider context can draw a more precise picture of how they work in institutional interactions and how speech acts of advising relate to other speech acts. Generally, other speech acts, which are supporting moves, can be included in an advising act and they are mainly employed to perform this advising act effectively. Without them, the advising act may not achieve its communicative effects and may result in communication failure.
By treating advice-giving as a problem-solving activity, the prototypical sequential model of an advising act in the present discussion is found to be as follows: pre-sequence + advising performance sequence (or the sequence of advising performance) + post-sequence. An advising act is often performed with the help of its pre-sequence and/or post-sequence, which provide a wider context for the advising act being performed. Moreover, the pre-sequence as supportive move(s) is/are often realized by pointing out problems, making comments, or questioning, while the post-sequence as supportive move(s) is/are often realized by providing reasons or further accounts. For example,
(4-1) PhD DPPM-3:
→ 1 T3：刚才你说那个面子理论，其实我觉得你这个论文呐，难度非常大，‘Just now you mentioned the Face Theory. Actually I think you have a lot of difficulties in conducting your dissertation.’
2 T2：嗯。
‘Mm.’
→ 3 T3：我看你想解释是非常困难的。(1.0)我觉得，我觉得描写应该是你的：：就是说是一个主要的工作。‘In my opinion, if you want to interpret, it will be very difficult.I think description should be one of your main tasks.’
4 T2：嗯。
‘Mm.’
→ 5 T3：你要是想解释的话难度大了，用哪个理论我我觉得都不好使。
‘If you want to interpret, it will be very difficult, and I think no theory can work well.’
6 T2：嗯嗯。
‘Mm Mm.’
7 T3：面子理论你肯定是很肤浅的，‘The Face Theory is definitely superficial (in this context).’
8 S： 是。
‘Yes.’
9 T3：你要解释起来。所以呢我看这个，我就觉得你这个非常具有挑战性，呵呵
‘If you want to interpret, (it will be very difficult), so I think you are encountering a very big challenge (laughs softly).’
10 T2：嗯呵呵。‘Mm (laughs softly).’
11 T3： 困难我觉得表现在几个方面。一个是就是，定义的问题，XXX ((T4))已经提到了。你：：这个定义啊，就直接影响到了你的统计数据，是吧？
‘As for the difficulties, I think they lie in the following aspects.One is about the definition. XXX ((T4)) has mentioned this.Your definition will directly influence your data statistics.’
12 T2：对。
‘Right.’
13 T3： 你不定义好的话就搞不好就(..)，你你，嗯呵呵，你不定义好的话就，
‘If you cannot define it appropriately, you will not make a good(..). (laughs softly) If you cannot define it appropriately, it will be…’
14 T2：对。
‘Right.’
In this example, T3 first points out the potential problem in line 1 and the first part of line 3, and then provides his suggestions in the second part of line 3. Beginning from line 5, T3 provides some reasons for his suggestions.This excerpt of academic interaction follows the typical model of advising:pointing out the problem (pre-sequence) + giving advice (advising performance) + providing accounts (post-sequence). In the following example,T2 first gives his advice from lines 1 to 14 (the first part), and then he provides accounts (or explanations) for his advice in the second part of line 14 and in line 16.
(4-2) PhD DPPM-3:
→ 1 T2：你，你这个有几个：标准，是吧？
‘You have several criteria for this, right?’
2 S： 对对。
‘Right right.’
3 T2：形式、功能、表达，是吧？
‘Forms, functions, and (intention) expression, right?’
4 T4：嗯，嗯。
‘Mm Mm.’
5 S： 对。
‘Right.’
6 T2：能不能明确一下，是吧？
‘Can you make it clearer, can’t you?’
7 S： 对。
‘Right.’
8 T2：你比如你用一个例子，比如这个例子，你就从这几个方面先试一下，看看行不行，对不对？
‘For example, you can use an example to conduct an analysis from these several aspects to see whether it is possible.’
9 T4：是。(3.0)
‘Yes.’
10 T2：意图表达，这怎么去判断，是吧？比如说，(..) 哎，看不见的，你看不见人家意图的，对不对？
‘How to judge the intention conveyed. For example, you cannot see the intention. You can’t see other’s intentions,right?’
11 T4：是。(2.0)
‘Yes.’
12 T2：形式还可以，
‘Form can be (possible).’
13 S： 嗯。
‘Mm.’
→ 14 T2：功能还，结合语境，这个，哦：意图表达你就看不出来了哎，所以你怎么样去界定？就说，因为这是研究的出发点，也就是说，你能不能判断出哪些是真不礼貌，哪些是：假不礼貌，是吧？
‘Functions can be judged in terms of context, but it’s impossible for you to see the intention, so how can you define it? That is, because this is the starting point of your research,that is to say, how can you judge which is real impoliteness and which is false impoliteness? Right? ’
15 T4：对。
‘Right.’
16 T2：首先这个你要，如果都搞不清楚，你就很难去做，是吧？
‘First, you need, if you cannot make it clear, it will be difficult for you to go further. Right?’
These examples indicate that a wider context can be very helpful to see how an advising act is performed. In addition, advising can be divided into two types in terms of who establishes a context for advising performance. The first type is where the advising acts are usually performed in a context established by advice-givers themselves. For example,
(4-3) PhD DPPM-4:
→ 1 T5：我还有一个问题就是那个第四页上面，刚才几位老师都已经提到了，就这个基本假设呀，
‘I have another question; that is on the fourth page. Other teachers all mentioned it just now. The hypothesis,’
2 S： 嗯。
‘Mm.’
3 T5：基本假设，我感觉：：：哦，就是还是给我感觉就是比较哦，这个应该怎么来表述呢。在我看来这个是一个出发点吧，就是是个出发点。
‘As for the basic hypothesis, I think, well, what it impressed on me is just relatively, well, how to formulate my idea. In my opinion, this is a starting point, is just a starting point.’
4 S： 对。
‘Right.’
→ 5 T5：希望你的研究就是不是完全地回到这几个假设，
‘I hope that your research will not just go back to these hypotheses finally.’
6 R： 嗯嗯。
‘Mm Mm.’
→ 7 T5：也就是说，比较浅显哦。
‘That is to say, relatively simple.’
8 S： 嗯。
‘Mm.’
→ 9 T5：可能你这个出发点要锁定某一点，
‘Maybe your starting point needs to focus on one point.’
10 S： 嗯
‘Mm’
→ 11 T5：锁定锁定某一点，这个哦，等会儿再再说好啦。
‘Focus on some one point. As for this, wait for a moment and I will return to it.’
12 R： 嗯。
‘Mm.’
In this example, T5, by making comments on the basic hypotheses in the PhD student’s proposal (“也就是说，比较浅显哦, ” ‘that is to say, it is relatively simple’), creates a context for the performance of the advising act, that is,“可能你这个出发点要锁定某一点” (‘maybe your starting point needs to focus on one point’) and “锁定锁定某一点” (‘focus on one point’). Here, T5 constructs a context for the performance of the advising act by herself. The advising acts performed by T5 in lines 5, 9 and 11 can be called“self-introduced advising acts” as they are performed in a context constructed by the advice-giver herself.
In the second type, the advising act is performed on the basis of a context established by other advice-givers. For example,(4-4) PhD DPPM-3:
1 T3：还有那个第八章，是不是应该放到第七章的前面？(2.0)
‘Still another one. I wonder whether Chapter Eight should be placed before Chapter Seven.’
2 T2：第八章啥都没有呵。
‘There is nothing in Chapter Eight.’
3 T3：第八章是，
‘Chapter Eight is about’
4 T1：现在呵还没弄呢。
‘(Chapter Eight) has not yet been worked out.’
5 T2：哈哈哈哈哈
(laughs)
6 T1：呵呵呵
(laughs softly)
7 T3：就第八章，你谈使用环境嘛。
‘As for Chapter Eight, you can discuss the context where (the mock impoliteness) is used.’
8 S： 嗯。
‘Mm.’
9 T3：是不是应该放到哦：：
‘Should it be placed at…’
10 T2：功能性。
‘Functionality.’
11 T3：功能的前边，最后谈功能啊，反正这个你可以再考虑。
‘(place it before the chapter) discussing function. You could finally discuss functions. Anyhow you may consider (the arrangement).’
→ 12 T1：这个顺序是将来是要再再重新调的。
‘The order may be adjusted again in the future.’
13 T2：对。
‘Right.’
In this example, T3 constructs a context for himself to perform an advising act, and then T1 performs an advising act directly in line 12, based on the context established by T3. The advising act performed by T1, here, can be called an “embedded advising act” as it is embedded in a context created by others.
Extracting advising acts
This section will introduce how each advising act was extracted by identifying its beginning and its ending from each data set[2]. Several criteria will be followed.
Firstly, one advising act is directed at one topic and at the same time, it must be performed by one advice-giver. For example,(4-5) PhD DPPM-1:
→ 1 T5：还有你这个中间儿，有个theme argument，
‘Still the one in the middle, theme argument,’
2 S： 嗯。
‘Mm.’
3 T5：你指的宾语，是吧？
‘You refer to the object, right?’
4 S： 嗯，它应该是，大部分时候它是做宾语，[但是在]
‘Yes, it should be. In most cases, it is the object, but’
→ 5 T5： [这我]第一次看到这个
术语，反正肯定是在形式语言学中，应该，因为你很容易和后面你从语用的角度解释这个定指和不定指的那个搞混。因为功能，它的，特别系统功能语言学，它的theme是在前面的。
‘This is the first time I have met this term. Anyway, it is (a term) in formal linguistics. You should (…), because it is very easy to mix it up with the definiteness and indefiniteness that you will explain later from the perspective of pragmatics.Especially in the Systemic Functional Linguistics, the theme is located before it.’
6 T3：嗯嗯嗯。
‘Mm Mm Mm.’
7 T5：Theme-rheme structure，就是given-new structure，
‘Theme-rheme structure, that is, given-new structure’
8 S： 嗯。
‘Mm.’
9 T5：(…) 功能的这个，这个
‘the one concerning functions’
10 S： 嗯。
‘Mm.’
11 T5：这个information structure来解释，
‘This can be explained by information structure.’
12 S： 嗯。
‘Mm.’
13 T5：你的这个是definite, indefinite, 是吧？
‘What you refer to is definite, indefinite, right?’
14 S： 嗯。
‘Yes.’
→ 15 T5：所以你要，对你(..)=
‘So you need to (clarify your terms).’
16 S： =对对对=
‘Right right right.’
17 T5：=不要搞混了。
‘Do not mix them up.’
In this example, T5 starts an advising act by focusing on one topic in line 1, and then shows his concern in line 5, and offers his suggestions in line 15 and line 17, which finally ends this advising act.
The topic is judged in terms of its main content. For example, one advice-giver can give one or several piece(s) of advice about the title of the dissertation. If the topic changes to the definition of one of the terms involved in the dissertation, it will be considered as the ending of this topic, i.e., the ending of this advising act. In most cases, the advice-giver uses some explicit linguistic markers to show the transition to another topic. For example,
(4-6) PhD DPPM-3:
……
→ 1 T1：就是它两个交际者之间的关系，这是你要考虑怎么去做，是这种情况。还有一个就是这个，你这里边的一些这个，实现了说话人哪些语用功能那个啊，我都觉得啊“功能”这个词用的不合适，‘As for the relationship between the two communicators, you need to consider how to deal with this issue. Another one is what pragmatic functions expressed by the speakers are realized in your study. I think the word ‘function’ is not appropriate here.’
2 S： 嗯。
‘Mm.’
3 T1：应该是实现了说话人的语用意图，这是它的东西，‘It should realize the speaker’s pragmatic intention. This is(what it conveys).’
4 T2：嗯。
‘Mm.’
5 T1：而不是功能，它应该是意图，我有什么语用意，我有什么意图，我有意图在那里放着，我是用什么言语表达方式是另外一回事，对不对？同样一个意图它有不同表达方式，
‘(It is) not the function. It should be the intention. What pragmatic intentions I have. What pragmatic intentions I have.Where should I place the intentions? What form of speech I use to express my intentions is another thing, right? Similarly, the same intentions can be expressed in different ways.’
6 T2：嗯嗯嗯。
‘Mm Mm Mm.’
7 T1：也就是不是语用功能，它是语用意图，
‘That is, it’s not pragmatic function; it is pragmatic intention.’
8 T2：对。
‘Right.’
9 T1：就是实现了哪些语用意图，这么一个，可能会更好一些。
‘That is what pragmatic intentions have been realized. (Doing it like this) is even better.’
10 T2：嗯。
‘Mm.’
11 T1：你这个功能和意图，这个
‘As for the functions and intentions (of using mock impoliteness)’
12 S： 嗯嗯。
‘Mm Mm.’
→ 13 T1：用语上你要调调整，就是这些术语，我觉得应该更注意一下，好
吧？
‘You should adjust your wording. That is, these are the terms I think you should pay attention to, ok?’
14 S： 嗯。
‘Ok.’
→ 15 T1：这是一个。另外一个，从你这个，很小的问题，很小的问题就是这个，从开题报告里面，这将来你要做论文的时候，要要非常，密切注意的一个问题，非常非常小的一些问题，就是你个人的语言表达问题。
‘This is one (issue/suggestion). Another one is about a very small problem, very small problem in your proposal. You should give close attention to your personal expression when you write your dissertation in the future. This is a very very small problem. ’
In this example, T1 first finishes one advising act and starts another one in line 1 marked by “还有一个就是这个” (‘still another one is this’) and this advising act is finished in line 13 and marked by “这是一个” (‘this is one of them’) in line 15 and starts another one in the same line marked by “另外一个” (‘another one’).
Secondly, if the topic keeps unchanged, and the advice-giver, who is performing an advising act, is interrupted by another advice-giver, who then offers a piece of advice based on the context constructed by the first advice-giver, the advice given by the second advice-giver is considered as one advising act, no matter whether its content is similar to the one provided by the first advice-giver. Ex.(4-4), which is presented here again, serves to illustrate this.
(4-4) PhD DPPM-3:
1 T3：还有那个第八章，是不是应该放到第七章的前面？(2.0)
‘Still another one. I wonder whether Chapter Eight should be placed before Chapter Seven.’
2 T2：第八章啥都没有呵。
‘There is nothing in Chapter Eight.’
3 T3：第八章是，
‘Chapter Eight is about’
4 T1：现在呵还没弄呢。
‘(Chapter Eight) has not yet been worked out.’
5 T2：哈哈哈哈哈
(laughs)
6 T1：呵呵呵
(laughs softly)
7 T3：就第八章，你谈使用环境嘛。
‘As for Chapter Eight, you can discuss the context where (the mock impoliteness) is used.’
8 S： 嗯。
‘Mm.’
9 T3：是不是应该放到哦：：
‘Should it be placed at…’
10 T2：功能性。
‘Functionality.’
11 T3：功能的前边，最后谈功能啊，反正这个你可以再考虑。
‘(place it before the chapter) discussing function. You could finally discuss functions. Anyhow you may consider (the arrangement).’
→ 12 T1：这个顺序是将来是要再再重新调的。
‘The order may be adjusted again in the future.’
13 T2：对。
‘Right.’
In this example, after T3 finishes his advising in line 11, T1 provides his suggestion immediately in line 12, on the basis of the context constructed by T3 from line 1. These two advising acts are performed by T3 and T1 respectively, focusing on the same topic, i.e., the arrangement of the different parts of the dissertation. They are two advising acts because they are performed by two advice-givers respectively.
Finally, if one topic (the first topic) introduced by one advice-giver is finished, stopped or interrupted by that individual or by another advice-giver,who introduces another topic (the second topic) and performs an advising act focusing on this newly introduced topic, but the first advice-giver then returns to the first topic and continues to perform an advising act, then this is considered as a new advising act because this situation violates the sequential continuation of the topic.
It should be noted that the same advice-giver can give several pieces of advice, focusing on the same topic. However, if these satisfy the three criteria simultaneously, they can be considered as one advising act, that is, these several pieces of advice are included in one advising sequence.
Based on these criteria, 395 advising sequences were collected across five data sets. Among them, the self-introduced advising acts are 292, while the embedded advising acts are 103.