国外特殊人群会话修正研究:现状与启示

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2024.03.009

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

特殊人群的会话修正研究可揭示其与正常人群在语用与认知能力方面的异同,为这一人群的临床诊断与干预实践提供参考,因而受到国内外研究者的关注。采用文献计量方法与内容分析法,对Web of Science核心合集与Scopus两个数据库所收录的特殊人群会话修正研究全面分析,梳理发现:国外特殊人群会话修正研究的发文量呈波动性增长趋势,且实证研究成为主流。实证研究主要基于诱发语料,采用横向实验设计,聚焦认知障碍特殊人群,探究他们是否具备会话修正能力以及实施会话修正时存在的障碍,并结合特殊人群自身与外部因素进行阐释。此外,实证研究详细评析设备辅助干预与非设备辅助互动干预的有效性。整体而言,实证研究呈现出三种发展趋势:研究对象趋向多样化;研究语料趋向自然化;研究内容不断深化。梳理结果及相应建议对推动国内特殊人群研究的深化及干预康复实践具有重要意义。

关键词: 会话修正, 特殊人群, 实证研究, 研究现状, 启示

Abstract:

Studies on conversation repair can reveal the similarities and differences between special populations and normal populations in terms of pragmatic and cognitive abilities. It can provide some references for clinical diagnosis and intervention practices. Therefore, the related studies have attracted the attention of researchers at home and abroad. This paper conducts a systematic review of studies on conversation repair of special populations from Web of Science Core Collection and Scopus by use of bibliometric and content analytic research methods. It is found that foreign studies on conversation repair of special populations show fluctuations in growth, and the empirical studies are in the majority. Based on elicited data, concentrated on patients with cognition impairment, the empirical studies have mainly adopted cross-sectional design to explore whether they have the ability to conduct conversation repair, and to explore whether they have some disorders when they conduct conversation repair. Besides, combined with personal factors and external factors, the empirical studies have explained the mechanism behind conversation repair and analyzed the effectiveness of equipment-supported and non-equipment-supported intervention methods. On the whole, the empirical studies show three trends: (1) the subjects tend to be more diverse; (2) the conversation data tend to be more natural; (3) the research contents tend to deepen constantly. Such results have certain significance for promoting in-depth studies and intervention for special populations in China.

Key words: conversation repair, special populations, empirical studies, present situation, enlightenment

中图分类号:

G760

马博森, 张来运, 曾小荣. 国外特殊人群会话修正研究:现状与启示[J]. 当代外语研究, 2024, 24(3): 83-95.

MA Bosen, ZHANG Laiyun, ZENG Xiaorong. An Overview of Foreign Studies on Conversation Repair of Special Populations: Present Situation and Significance[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2024, 24(3): 83-95.

图/表 5

图1

表1

图2

图3

表2

参考文献 29

[1]	Barnes, S. & A. Ferguson. 2015. Conversation partner responses to problematic talk produced by people with aphasia: some alternatives to initiating, completing, or pursuing repair[J]. Aphasiology 29 (3): 315-336.
[2]	Barnes, S. & S. Bloch. 2019. Why is measuring communication difficult? A critical review of current speech pathology concepts and measures[J]. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 33(3):219-236.
[3]	Barnes, S. & S. Bloch. 2020. Communication disorders, enchrony, and other-participation in repair[J]. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 34(10-11):887-893.
[4]	Barstein, J., G. E. Martin, M. Lee & M. Losh. 2018. A duck wearing boots?! Pragmatic language strategies for repairing communication breakdowns across genetically based neurodevelopmental disabilities[J]. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research 61(6): 1-14.
[5]	Beeke.. S., F. Beckley, F. Johnson, et al. 2015. Conversation focused aphasia therapy: investigating the adoption of strategies by people with agrammatism[J]. Aphasiology 29(3):355-377. pmid: 25632169
[6]	Brady, N. C. & J. W. Halle. 2002. Breakdowns and repairs in conversations between beginning AAC users and their partners [A]. In J. Reichle, D. R. Beukelman & J. C. Light (eds.). Exemplary practices for beginning communicators: Implications for AAC[C]. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes. 323-351.
[7]	Cassie, R. 2001. Conversational topic shifting and its effect on communication breakdowns for individuals with hearing Loss[J]. The Volta Review 102 (2): 45-56.
[8]	Dressler, R. A., E. H. Buder & M. P. Cannito. 2009. Rhythmic patterns during conversational repairs in speakers with aphasia[J]. Aphasiology 23(6):731-748.
[9]	Keen, D. 2005. The use of non-verbal repair strategies by children with autism[J]. Research in Developmental Disabilities 26(3): 243-254. pmid: 15668075
[10]	Klein, W. 2021. Managing trouble spots in conversation Other-initiated repair elicitations produced by a bilingual youth with autism[J]. Pragmatics 31(2):225-249.
[11]	Martin, G. E., J. Barstein, S. Patel, M. Lee, L. Henry & M. Losh. 2020. Longitudinal analysis of communication repair skills across three neurodevelopmental disabilities[J]. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 55(1):26-42.
[12]	Meadan, H., J. Halle, M. M. Ostrosky & L. DeStefano. 2008. Communicative behavior in the natural environment: Case studies of two young children with autism and limited expressive language[J]. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities 23(1): 37-48.
[13]	Merrison, S. & A. J. Merrison. 2005. Repair in speech and language therapy interaction: Investigating pragmatic language impairment of children[J]. Child Language Teaching and Therapy 21(2):191-211.
[14]	Orange, J. B., K. M. Van Gennep, L. Miller & A. M. Johnson. 1998. Resolution of communication breakdown in dementia of the Alzheimer’s type: A longitudinal study[J]. Journal of Applied Communication Research 26 (1):120-138.
[15]	Price, J. R., A. Vizoso, T. Ellerbee, et al. 2018. Communication breakdowns and repair strategies of children with down syndrome[J]. Advances in Neurodevelopmental Disorders 2(1):16-24.
[16]	Schegloff, E. A., G. Jefferson & H. Sacks. 1977. The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation[J]. Language 53 (2):361-382.
[17]	Sidnell, J. 2010. Conversation Analysis: An Introduction[M]. Malden, Massachusetts: Wiley-Blackwell.
[18]	Sigafoos, J., E. Drasgow, J. W. Halle, et al. 2004. Teaching VOCA use as a communicative repair strategy[J]. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 34 (4):411-422. pmid: 15449516
[19]	Wilkinson, R. 2019. Atypical interaction: conversation analysis and communicative impairments[J]. Research on Language and Social Interaction 52 (3):281-299. doi: 10.1080/08351813.2019.1631045
[20]	Willoughby, L., H. Manns, I. Shimako, et al. 2014. Misunderstanding and repair in tactile Auslan[J]. Sign Language Studies 14 (4):419-443.
[21]	程燕华、马博森. 2022. 高功能孤独症儿童与普通儿童会话修正行为对比研究[J]. 中国特殊教育(2): 28-36.
[22]	黄立鹤、杨晶晶. 2020. 老年人语用话语研究现状与趋势分析[J]. 解放军外语学院学报(2):18-25.
[23]	李杰、陈超美. 2017. CiteSpace:科技文本挖掘及可视化[M]. 北京: 首都经济贸易大学出版社.
[24]	李晓燕. 2019. 高功能自闭症儿童会话发展与康复:特质中心疗育模式[M]. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社.
[25]	马博森、倪文君、曾小荣. 2021. 自闭症儿童与正常儿童的他发自我修正策略对比研究[J]. 语言战略研究(6): 23-32.
[26]	邱均平、张晓培. 2011. 基于CSSCI的国内知识管理领域作者共被引分析[J]. 情报科学(10): 1441-1445.
[27]	邵磊. 2022. 认知障碍老年患者会话修正中的重复研究[D]. 南京: 南京理工大学.
[28]	沈淑婷. 2022. 自然话语中自闭症儿童多模态自我发起自我修正行为研究[D]. 杭州: 浙江财经大学.
[29]	谭淑文、马文. 2022. 失语症医患交际中“阻碍源”应对策略的会话分析研究[J]. 外语教学(5): 15-22.

障碍类型	文献数量	占比(%)
认知障碍	47	36.15
语言障碍	29	22.31
听力障碍	28	21.54
混合障碍	17	13.08
言语障碍	7	5.38
流畅度障碍	2	1.54