<?xml version="1.1" encoding="utf-8"?>
<article xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="http://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.1/xsd/JATS-journalpublishing1-mathml3.xsd" dtd-version="1.1" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">HASS</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Humanities Arts and Social Sciences</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn>3066-8301</issn><eissn>3066-831X</eissn><publisher><publisher-name>Art and Technology</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.61369/HASS.2025070021</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Article</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title>名词性称谓词在交际中的话语缓和功能生成</title><url>https://artdesignp.com/journal/HASS/1/7/10.61369/HASS.2025070021</url><author>李婷玉</author><pub-date pub-type="publication-year"><year>2025</year></pub-date><volume>1</volume><issue>7</issue><history><date date-type="pub"><published-time>2025-09-20</published-time></date></history><abstract>本研究聚焦于名词性称谓词在交际中所发挥的话语缓和功能。作为重要且复杂的语言资源，名词性称谓词不仅承载了交际双方关系、礼貌程度与亲疏远近等社会信息，还在语用层面体现出策略性价值。现有研究虽已从语义学、语用学及社会&amp;mdash;礼貌学等多角度探讨话语缓和，但在具体语境下如何通过名词性称谓词实现缓和功能，仍有待系统阐明。本文在综述 Lakoff、Fraser、Sbis&amp;agrave; 等学者关于话语缓和的理论基础之上，结合 Briz所提出的语义&amp;mdash;语用型与严格语用型缓和分类，进一步考察名词性称谓词在交际中的缓和机制与表现方式。研究表明，名词性称谓词通过呼语功能不仅可识别和定位交际对象，还能在冗余使用中激活多重语用价值，如缓和、强化、讽刺与认同等。其中，亲昵与团结型称谓往往通过积极礼貌实现缓和，而等级性或尊称类称谓则更多通过消极礼貌发挥作用；至于家庭语境中的不对称称谓，则因亲密性与共同经验而表现为团结取向。本文的研究不仅丰富了话语缓和的语用学探讨，也为理解称谓词的社会功能与礼貌机制提供了新的视角。</abstract><keywords>名词性称谓词,话语缓和,人际关系</keywords></article-meta></front><body/><back><ref-list><ref id="B1" content-type="article"><label>1</label><element-citation publication-type="journal"><p>&amp;nbsp;[1]Navarro-Carrascosa,C.(2021).An&amp;aacute;lisis pragmaling&amp;uuml;&amp;iacute;stico de las formas nominales de tratamiento en la comunidad de habla LGTBI(Tesis doctoral,Universitat de Val&amp;egrave;ncia).&amp;nbsp;[2]Montero Curiel,P.(2011).Las formas nominales de tratamiento en el habla juvenil de Extremadura.Revista de estudios extreme&amp;ntilde;os,67(1),47-68.&amp;nbsp;[3]Carricaburo,N.(2015).Las f&amp;oacute;rmulas de tratamiento en el espa&amp;ntilde;ol actual.Madrid:Arco/Libros.&amp;nbsp;[4]Castellano Ascencio,M.D.(2012).Cortes&amp;iacute;a verbal y f&amp;oacute;rmulas de tratamiento nominales en el habla de Medell&amp;iacute;n.Ling&amp;uuml;&amp;iacute;stica y literatura,33(62),123-139.&amp;nbsp;[5]Eggins,S.,&amp;amp;Slade,D.(1997).Analysing Casual Conversation.Londres:Cassell.&amp;nbsp;[6]Lakoff,G.(1973).Hedges:A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts.Journal of Philosophical Logic,2(4),458-508.&amp;nbsp;[7]Overstreet,M.(2011).Vagueness and hedging.En G.Andersen&amp;amp;K.Aijmer(Eds.),Pragmatics of Society(pp.293-318).Berl&amp;iacute;n/Boston:De Gruyter.&amp;nbsp;[8]Fraser,B.(1980).Conversational mitigation.Journal of Pragmatics,4(4),341-350.&amp;nbsp;[9]Martinovski,B.,Mao,W.,Gratch,J.,&amp;amp;Marsella,S.(2005).Mitigation theory:an integrated approach.En B.Bara,L.Barsalou,&amp;amp;M.Bucciarelli(Eds.),Proceedings of Conference on Cognitive Science(pp.1407-1412).New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.&amp;nbsp;[10]Czerwionka,L.(2012).Mitigation:The combined effects of imposition and certitude.Journal of Pragmatics,44(10),1163-1182.&amp;nbsp;[11]Albelda,M.,&amp;amp;Estell&amp;eacute;s,M.(2021).De nuevo sobre la intensificaci&amp;oacute;n pragm&amp;aacute;tica:revisi&amp;oacute;n y propuesta.Estudios Rom&amp;aacute;nicos,30,15-37.https://doi.org/10.6018/ER.470321.&amp;nbsp;[12]Arundale,R.B.(2006).Face as relational and interactional:A communication framework for research on face,facework,and politeness.Journal of Politeness Research,2,193-216.&amp;nbsp;[13]Ba&amp;ntilde;&amp;oacute;n Hern&amp;aacute;ndez,A.M.(1993).El vocativo:propuesta para su an&amp;aacute;lisis ling&amp;uuml;&amp;iacute;stico.Barcelona:Octaedro.&amp;nbsp;[14]Hern&amp;aacute;ndez Flores,N.(2013).Actividad de imagen:caracterizaci&amp;oacute;n y tipolog&amp;iacute;a en la interacci&amp;oacute;n comunicativa.Pragm&amp;aacute;tica Sociocultural/Sociocultural Pragmatics,1(2),175-198.&amp;nbsp;[15]Caffi,C.(2006).Metapragmatics.En J.L.Mey(Ed.),Concise encyclopedia of pragmatics(pp.625-630).Oxford:Elsevier.&amp;nbsp;[16]Caffi,C.(1999).On mitigation.Journal of Pragmatics,31(7),881-909.&amp;nbsp;[17]Briz,A.(2005).Atenuaci&amp;oacute;n y cortes&amp;iacute;a verbal en la conversaci&amp;oacute;n coloquial:su tratamiento en la clase de ELE.En Actas del programa de formaci&amp;oacute;n para profesorado de ELE(pp.227-255).2006.&amp;nbsp;[18]Villalba,C.,&amp;amp;Kern,B.(2017).Apelaci&amp;oacute;n y Atenuaci&amp;oacute;n:Comparaci&amp;oacute;n intergen&amp;eacute;rica entre juicios orales y debates parlamentarios espa&amp;ntilde;oles.Revista de Ling&amp;uuml;&amp;iacute;stica Te&amp;oacute;rica y Aplicada(RLTA),55(2),169-195.https://doi.org/10.4067/.</p><pub-id pub-id-type="doi"/></element-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>
