6.1 Identity Modification in Academic Advising Seq...
The identity modification mainly refers to the case that the default identity of an expert, which is often constructed in the pre-sequence of an advising act, is dynamically modified to make salient one aspect of an expert in the sequence of advising performance and/or the post-sequence of this advising act. For example,
(6-1) PhD DPPM-4:
1 T3：在感觉上，最后这个，
‘I think, the last one’
2 S： 哦。
‘Mm.’
3 T3：最后两章(两章里面的..)，等于是你这个论文的构架。实际上你已经回答了这 个第一个问题。
‘In the last two chapters, that is the framework of your dissertation. In fact you have answered the first research question.’
4 S： 哦，是在？=
‘Hmm, where is it?’
5 T3：=本身你这个像X老师((T2))说的，前面四个，后面三个它本身就说，
‘Just as Teacher X ((T2)) has said, (there are four questions in the previous part and now three questions. They don’t correspond to each other.)’
6 S： 不对应，好像。
‘It seems that (they don’t correspond to each other.)’
→ 7 T3：一定要把自己的思路理清楚，你到底要回答几个问题，
‘You must organize your thought clearly. (How many questions)are you going to answer on earth?’
8 S： [前边的好像更清楚一些]
‘The previous ones are much clearer.’
9 T3：[不需要给那么多]，你不需要给那么多问题。
‘You don’t need to present so many questions. You don’t need to present so many questions.’
10 S： 噢。
‘Oh (I see).’
11 T3：你只需要给你研究的问题就OK了。
‘What you need to do is just to present your research questions.’
12 S： 噢。
‘Oh (I see).’
13 T3：这是，这是，这是一个。
‘This is one (of my suggestions.) ’
14 S： 嗯。
‘Mm.’
In this example, T3 first points out the problems in S’s proposal from lines 1 to 5, which is the pre-sequence, and then T3 gives his advice in lines 7, 9 and 11, which belong to the sequence of advising performance. In the pre-sequence, T3 constructs his default identity of an expert and then this identity is dynamically modified and slightly adjusted in the sequence of advising performance through the use of intensifiers in “一定” (‘must’) and“你到底要” (‘(How many questions) are you going to answer on earth?’) in line 7 and the discourse style with a high imposition on the advice-receiver such as“你不需要” (you don’t need) in line 9 and “你只需要” (‘you only need’) in line 11. These strategies employed to modify the default expert identity are presented one after another in the sequence of the advising performance.Consequently, the default expert identity is dynamically modified to be the identity of an authoritative expert.
In the dynamic process of academic advising, the default expert identity can also be modified to be the identity of a knowledgeable expert, as shown by Ex.(6-2), which has been used in Section 5.1.1.
(6-2) PhD DPPM-1:
1 T1：这个：：，(1.0)这个有时候说话太绝对了。
‘Sometimes you’ve made some too absolute claims.’
2 T4：嗯嗯。
‘Mm Mm.’
3 T3：哎对。
‘Right.’
4 T1：这个XX大学((某高校))的那个XXX ((已毕业博士))他也研究汉语的这个：存现句，当时他的博士论文我看了，我看他挺unify的。‘XXX ((the name of the person)) from XX ((the name of the university)) University has also conducted a study on the Chinese existential sentences. I have read his doctoral dissertation and I think his dissertation is very coherent.’
5 T2：呵呵呵。
(laughs softly)
6 T1：就在认知语言学的框架下，对这个汉语的存现句进行了系统的研究，你这个你这上面也没有提到他。
‘(XXX has) conducted a systematic study on the Chinese existential sentences. However, you didn’t mention his study here.’
7 S： 哦。
‘Um.’
→ 8 T1：可能你不知道。
‘Perhaps you don’t know (this study).’
→ 9 S： 我是没看过。
‘(It’s true that) I haven’t read it.’
→ 10 T1：博士论文。另外，另外呢，还有这个(2.0)这个XX ((某高校))的像XXX ((已毕业博士))啊，这些人，对汉语的存现句进行了详细的分类，他分成十几种类型，然后每一种不同的，然后汉语每一种不同的类型，是不是它这个处理上，就是在这个解释上是不是它有差异或者什么呢。你也没有分类，这个，汉语的存现句比英语的复杂多了，英语“there is,” “there are,” 什么“there appears,”“there happens”还有什么，就这个。汉语的存现句它复杂多了，你知道吧？这些人都对汉语的存现句都进行了详细的分类，那你是不是也要分个类啊？
‘(XXX’s) doctoral dissertation. Besides, there are other studies like the one conducted by XXX from XX University. They have classified the Chinese existential sentences and put them into dozens of categories. And each category was examined to see if there is any difference between them. However, you didn’t make a classification here. Chinese existential sentences are much more complex than English ones. (English existential expressions) like “there is,” “there are,” “there appears,”“there happens” etc., (which are limited in number. The Chinese (existential sentences) are much more complex, and you know that, right? All of these people (I’ve mentioned) have conducted a detailed classification of the Chinese existential sentences, so I wonder if you also conduct a classification of them.’
11 S： 就是我是=
‘I’m just (…).’
12 T1：=因为你是研究Chinese 哦：existential construction=
‘Because what you’re studying is the Chinese existential construction.’
13 S： =对，我觉得=
‘Yes. I think’
14 T1：=你也没有分类，你就光举了一些例子，就是说，当然这个在你以后的研究当你肯定也是对不同的存现句进行分类吧，对吧？
‘You haven’t made a classification of them, and you have just listed some examples. That is to say, of course you will definitely make a classification of the Chinese existential sentences in your study in the future, right?’
15 T3：对。
‘Right.’
→ 16 T1：你要根据你的这个，理论框架也可能要分类，要根据人家前面的分类，他有哪些合理的、不合理的地方，对吧？嗯，这方面的研究非常非常多。我从你这个，这个，后面的这个文献当中发现，(2.0)你要是从，那个，这个什么，哦这个，就是CNKI你打一个“存现句”或者“存在句”，哇！都找出相当多的。我我就看了你这个，我就在那个，在那个CNKI我就打了一下，找出这么多呵呵，你这里面都没有。呵呵。
‘You need to make a classification of (the Chinese existential sentences) in terms of your theoretical framework and the previous classifications. You need to examine what is reasonable and what is not reasonable in the previous classifications, right? There are a lot of studies related to the classification. I have found from references you’ve listed at the end of your proposal… If you search CNKI, you will find that there are a lot of studies on the Chinese existential sentences.I have read your references. I searched CNKI and I found so many relevant studies, which you didn’t refer to in your proposal. (laughs softly)’
17 T3：嗯呵呵。
‘Mm (laughs softly).’
18 T1：对不对？汉语的存现句的研究是非常多的。我又把XXX ((前文提到XX大学已毕业博士))的那个博士论文拿出来看了一下。他后面呢，关于存现句的那个引的那个参考文献最起码有，有40多篇，你这里面=
‘(You haven’t refer to those studies,) have you? There are a lot of studies on Chinese existential sentences. I read XXX’s (who is from XX University and has obtained his PhD degree)doctoral dissertation again. He listed at least 40 articles or books related to existential sentences in his references, but in your proposal,’
19 S： =对。
‘Right.’
20 T1：只包括了非常小的一部分。(2.0)另外呢，像“王冕死了父亲”根本不是存现句。
‘(Your reference) only includes a very small part. Besides, the sentence like “Wang Mian si le fuqin” is not an existential sentence at all.’
In this example, T1 first points out the problems in the claim made by S in his dissertation proposal, in line 1. From line 3, immediately after mentioning one of the PhD dissertations he has read, in lines 4 and 6, T1 points out that S has not referred to this important literature in his proposal, in lines 6 and 8, and T1 mentions some other previous studies related to the S’s study and, in line 10, points out that S has not classified the Chinese existential sentences. This is the pre-sequence of the advising act, in which T1 constructs the default identity of an expert through pointing out the problems in S’s proposal and then this identity is dynamically modified to be the identity of an authoritative expert, through making linguistic choices, as discussed in Section 5.1.1.
Based on the pre-sequence, T1 gives one piece of advice in the final part of line 10 and offers accounts, in line 12, and gives another piece of advice, in line 14, and continues to give another piece of advice, in the first part of line 16. This is the sequence of advising performance, in which T3 dynamically constructs the default identity of an expert. This identity is again modified to be the identity of a knowledgeable expert by T3 in the post-sequence of this advising act by showing that he knows well of the previous studies, in lines 16 and 18.
In the following example, the default identity of an expert is dynamically modified to be the identity of a modest expert.(6-3) PhD DPPM-4:
→ 1 T5：然后还有一个，最后一个问题呐，第九页上面，第九页上面你有好几个地方都提到了那个会话分析和批评话语分析
‘Then I have another question, the last one, on page nine. On page nine you mentioned conversation analysis and critical discourse analysis at several places.’
2 S： 嗯。
‘Mm.’
3 T5：作为两种截然不同的研究路径
‘as two entirely different research approaches.’
4 S： 嗯。
‘Mm.’
5 T5：这个表述和观点可能
‘the formulation and idea may (be problematic).’
6 S： 嗯：[它这个是：：]
‘Hmm it is’
7 T5： [在这个，嗯]
‘At this’
8 S： 就是前面那个她她们提出，
‘As for this view, they have proposed it before.’
9 T5：对
‘Right.’
10 S： 就是那个De Fina，哦，Fina就是那个Schiffrin她们提出的，就2006年她们那个在
‘This is put forward by De Fina and Schiffrin in 2006 in their(edited book).’
11 T5：嗯。
‘Mm.’
12 S： 嗯，我看文献叫那个discourse，嗯(2.0)叫那个Discourse and Identity
‘Hmm let me see, the title of the book is Discourse and Identity.’
13 T5：[对，你可能引用了]
‘Yes, maybe you have quoted (their words).’
14 S： [她们的话，嗯就说是]
‘their words, that is’
→ 15 T5：[对，对的，引用了] 她们的话，对，我有那个书Discourse and Identity
‘Yes yes, (I think) you may have quoted their words. I have that book, Discourse and Identity.’
16 S： 嗯。
‘Mm.’
17 T5：引用了她们的观点
‘(You have) quoted their view.’
18 S： 嗯。
‘Mm.’
19 T5：但是，我只是想说，从我接触的来看，
‘But I want to say from what I have known that’
20 S： 嗯。
‘Eh.’
21 T5：最起码在国内的研究中间哦，
‘At least in the studies at home’
22 S： 嗯。
‘Mm.’
23 T5：倒是没有认为这两个是截然不同啊，
‘but no one thinks that these two approaches are entirely different.’
24 S ： 嗯。
‘Mm.’
25 T5：你别的地放也讲到什么
‘You also mentioned at other places that’
26 S： 嗯嗯。
‘Mm Mm.’
27 T5：两个极端啊[等等]。
‘two extremes and so on’
28 S： [嗯嗯]。
‘Mm Mm.’
29 T5：事实上你可能研究不需要用到这个，你说使它
‘In fact you may not need these views here. You said that’
30 S： 嗯嗯。
‘Mm Mm.’
31 T5：既然是形成互补嘛，
‘they are complementary.’
32 S： 嗯嗯。
‘Mm Mm.’
33 T5：对吧？
‘Right ?’
34 S： 嗯。
‘Yes.’
35 T5：为了突出你自己的这个互补你就把它说成是截然不同。
‘To highlight the complementarity you have argued, you say that these two approaches are entirely different.’
36 S： 呵呵
(laughs softly)
37 T5：其实
‘In fact’
38 T1：呵呵
(laughs softly)
→ 39 T5：其实呵呵，(...)它并不是这样的呵，我自己这么认为，你可以稍微modify一下。
‘In fact, it is not like this. I myself think so. You could slightly modify (your wording).’
40 S： 对，哦行行行。
‘Yes. Ok ok ok.’
41 T1：嗯。
‘Mm.’
42 S： 就措辞嗯。
‘just my wording.’
In this example, T5 constructs the default identity of an expert by making comments on and showing her doubts on the claim made by S in his proposal, from lines 1 to 5. After S’s response to her comments and doubts on the claims, from lines 6 to 11, from lines 13 to 17, T5 makes a positive comment on S’s response, i.e., that S has quoted the claim made by De Fina et al., thus constructing her default identity of an expert again. This identity is then modified to make salient the authoritative aspect of an expert by pointing out that the claim quoted by S from De Fina et al. is not appropriate,as indicated by the discourse contents from lines 19 to 35, where suggestions are also provided. In line 39, in order to mitigate the illocutionary force of her advising, T5 makes salient the modest aspect of an expert by using the linguistic forms “我自己这么认为” (‘I myself think so’) and “你可以” (‘you could’).
Generally, T5 dynamically modifies her default identity of an expert and make salient the authoritative aspect and the modest aspect of an expert in different stages of this dynamic interaction. This identity modification serves to satisfy communicative needs in the current context of the interaction.
This section has demonstrated how the default expert identity is dynamically modified to be more specific in an ongoing process of interaction(or different stages of advising interaction). The different aspects of the
expert identity are, to some extent, similar to the different leader identities constructed in e-mail requests which have been carefully examined by Ho(2010a, 2010b). However, Ho’s (2010a, 2010b) studies has not highlighted the dynamic process of constructing different leader identities. In this sense, the present study contributes to the understanding of the dynamic process of personal identity construction. The next section will present another type of the dynamic construction of identity in academic advising, namely the identity shift.