6.2.3 Identity shift indicated by one identity con...
Different identities in an advising sequence are not discrete; instead they overlap and interweave. One of the special cases of this kind is where the construction of one identity is embedded in the construction of another. For example,
(6-13) PhD DPPM-5:
→ 1 T3：……所以，再回到你讲的理论创新，我看你的这个表述哦：=‘…so let’s go back to your theoretical innovation. Let’s look at your formulation.’
2 S： =嗯。
‘Mm.’
3 T3：你讲三个方面创新，创新(1.0)。比如说，有助于深化加强批评语言学理论，是吧？(为……….开创………….)，之前是你怎么做。但是但是，你怎么样才能够去深化批评语言学理论呢？对不对？然后你说(开启语料库研究……..)，这不是你的意义，它是方法的意义，是吧？
‘You have mentioned three aspects of the innovation. For example, (your study) is helpful to deepen and enhance the theory of critical linguistics, right? You have done this before.But how can you deepen the theory of critical linguistics? Right?And then you said (that your study will initiate the corpus study on…). They are not the significance of your study. They are the methodological implications, right? ’
4 S： 嗯。
‘Yes.’
→ 5 T3：方法的意义。所以就是说，你这个研究如果要对批评语言学有贡献的话，你是在那些理论方面，比如说，是不是你的分析框架更加充实？是不是你的这个哦：：考虑的因素更多了，是吧？就是，就是批评语言学是一个研究的领域，作为一个研究视角，你你怎么样去深化，对不对？当然，我们通过语料库方法，这方法，方法上的创新，所以也能够使得我们深化对于这个哦：批评分析的一种深度和广度=
‘the significance of method. So that is to say, if your study contributes to critical linguistics, what theoretical aspects do they contribute to? For example, will your analytical framework be more powerful? Does your study encompass more variables? Right? Critical linguistics is a research field. As a perspective, how do you deepen the study (on theoretical aspects)? Right? Of course, we use the corpus method, but this is the innovation of the method. It can make us deepen and widen the critical analysis.’
6 S： =嗯。
‘Mm.’
7 T3：但是，是不是还有conceptual就是从概念方面，比如说，你提出：哦：从转述词汇、转述类型、转述来源。那么这三个维度是不是说，你把它建立起这样的一个分析框架就有助于深化我们对转述这样的一个批评分析呢，对不对？(2.0)我不知道，我有没有表达清楚哎，就是说，怎么样从概念框架上面去在现有的批评语言学的分析：维度，分析框架方面有所突破呢？或者有所修正呢，是吧？那这个呢是我们讲理论意义，理论意义哎。
‘But (the study can also be significant) in the conceptual dimensions. For example, you have mentioned that your study will cover the reporting words, the reporting categories and the source of reporting. Then from these three dimensions,you establish such an analytical framework, which will help to deepen our critical analysis of the reporting, right? I don’t know whether I have made my idea clear. That is to say, how can you make some breakthrough in the analytical framework of critical linguistics? Or to make some revision, right? Then this is what we often call theoretical significance.’
9 S： 嗯。
‘Mm.’
10 T3：如果说是那我这个CDA的分析非常客观用语料库，那它不是理论意义，那是你的方法意义哎=
‘If you say that it is very objective to do CDA analysis through using a corpus, then it is not the theoretical significance;rather it is the methodological significance.’
11 S： =嗯。
‘Mm’
12 T3：然后通过比较。比较有什么好处呢，对不对？因为：你：通过不同语言的这个，哦：：标题，新闻标题的转述，那么我们有个文化的视角，对不对？有一个：：哦：不同意识形态的比较，视角来进行比较了。所以，就看怎么样能够使：得，哦我们的这个理论贡献啊、哦理论价值啊，因为到时候人家写评语就是，怎么呢如何写得更加具体，而不是说，啊这个研究深化了批评语言学，太笼统了。那么是在哪一个方面=
‘Then through comparison. What are the advantages of comparison? Right? Because you study the reporting of the news headlines through comparing different languages, we will have a cultural perspective, right? The comparison is about the different ideologies, an ideological perspective.That is, how can you make our theoretical contributions and significance more specific because this will be easier for others to make their comments on your dissertation (in the future). If you only say your study deepens the research of critical linguistics, it is too general. Which specific aspect will(your study be significant at)’
13 S： =嗯。
‘Mm’
14 T3：是不是在理论框架上面，还是在理论框架的完善上面你做出了贡献。(7.0)
‘whether you will make some contributions to the theoretical framework or to the improvement of the (existing) theoretical framework.
In this example, in the pre-sequence of the advising act, T3 first constructs the default identity of an expert by making comments on the theoretical innovation of the dissertation presented by S in her proposal, in lines 1 and 3.
From lines 5 to 14, T3 gives his advice, in the sequence of advising performance. In this process, T3 constructs an identity of an amiable expert by exploiting question tags marked by “对不对?” (‘right?’) and “是吧?”(‘right?’). At the same time, T3 also constructs the identity of a collegial researcher by employing the inclusive we such as “我们通过语料库方法” (‘We use the corpus method’) and “所以也能够使得我们深化对于这个哦：批评分析的一种深度和广度” (‘so it can also make us deepen and widen the critical analysis.’) in line 5, and “那这个呢是我们讲理论意义” (‘then this is what we often call theoretical significance’) in line 7, and “那么我们有个文化的视角”(‘Then we will have a cultural perspective’) and “我们的这个理论贡献啊”(‘our theoretical contributions’) in line 12.
However, the salience of the degree of these two identities is different in this context. The construction of the identity of a collegial researcher is embedded in the construction of the identity of an amiable expert. In this sense, the identity of an amiable expert is at the primary level and that of a collegial researcher is at the secondary level in this context. Although these two identities are constructed with different importance and salience, the way they are constructed demonstrates the dynamic process of identity construction in this type of institutional interaction.