导　　师： 宗世海

学科专业： 050102

授予学位： 硕士

作　　者： ;

机构地区： 暨南大学

摘　　要： 目前，劳动争议仲裁会话在机构性谈话研究中仍未受到关注，本文对其中10场劳动争议仲裁庭审录音转写的语料进行了会话分析。 首先，我们分析了劳动争议仲裁会话如何构建话轮，总结了在由Sacks等提出的话轮交接系统下仲裁会话特有的话轮更迭规则。纵观劳动争议仲裁会话的宏观结构，其具有固定的程序性开头与结尾。与此同时，本文对劳动争议仲裁会话互动的结构种类进行了描述与归纳，并通过数据统计得出主要互动结构和典型互动结构。本文还将劳动争议仲裁会话互动结构与英国伯明翰学派IRF结构、于国栋（2009）的医患会话互动结构和廖美珍（2003）的法庭会话结构进行对比，结论是：与廖美珍（2003）的法庭会话结构类别大致相同，而英国伯明翰学派IRF结构与于国栋（2009）的医患会话互动结构则不适合用于分析。 其次，本文还针对仲裁员与申请人、被申请人，在“目的-意图原则”的推动下，各自采取的语用策略进行研究。仲裁员为查明事实，要求双方当事人如实反映情况使用的语用策略有：打断策略、重复追问策略；申请人为强调自己的权益被侵害使用的策略有：间接回答策略、直接回避策略和模糊策略；被申请人用以反驳申请人的的理由使用的策略有：推卸责任策略和刨根问底策略。 Currently, research on institutional talk about arbitration of disputes is rarely concerned.This paper analyzed ten transcriptions of employment tribunal conversation, which wererecorded from arbitration tribunal court hearings and transcribed by the author. Firstly, the paper described how employment tribunal conversation established andallocated turns, and we offered3rules of “turn-taking”, based on the “turn-taking” system putforward by Sacks. Observing the macrostructure of employment tribunal conversation, we foundit had procedural openings, endings and transitions. Meanwhile, describing the interactionalstructures of employment tribunal conversation, we classified them and pointed out the commoninteractional structure and the typical one according to the statistics. Besides, comparing to theinteractional structures of “teacher/&student” conversation in class produced by BirminghamSchool, of “doctor/&patient” communication studied by Lin Guodong /(2009/), and of courtroomconversation studied by Liao Meizhen /(2003/), we drew a conclusion that the interactionalstructures of employment tribunal conversation were almost the same with the ones studied byLiao Meizhen /(2003/), the ones studied by Birmingham School and Lin Guodong /(2009/),however, were not suitable for analyzing. Secondly, the paper studied the pragmatic strategies employed by arbitrator, plaintiff anddefendant, according to the “Goal-intention Principle” brought up by Qian Guanlian. We foundthat arbitrators employed the strategy of repeated questioning and of interruption to clarify thedispute and require both parties to speak out the truth; while the plaintiffs applied the strategiesof informing indirectly, avoiding offering information directly and of vagueness to emphasizetheir rights have been offended, whereas the defendants applied the strategies of shiftingresponsibility and of repeated questioning to support they don’t break the rules.

关 键 词： 劳动争议仲裁会话 会话结构 语用策略 目的 意图原则

分 类 号： [D90-055 D922.5]

领　　域： [政治法律] [政治法律] [政治法律] [政治法律]