论文部分内容阅读
摘 要：打断现象是会话交际中的一种自然现象，也是会话结构分析的一个重要课题。它反映了交际者试图控制和争话轮的意图，体现了话轮转换规则的特殊性。此文基于英语电视谈话节目《dialogue》的语料，将打断现象从目的原则和合作原则角度进行解释。文章根据目的原则将打断分为合作型的和非合作型行为，并进一步根据功能的不同,将冲突不合作性打断分为话题转换型、抢夺发言权型和不认同型三种，将合作性打断分为帮助型、认同型和澄清型打断三种。
关键词：谈话节目《dialogue》；会话打断；目的原则；合作原则；言语打断的功能
［中图分类号］H03
［文献标识码］A
［文章编号］1006-2831(2008)08-0097-5
Abstract: Interruption is a natural phenomenon in conversations and also an important topic in the analysis of conversational structures. It reflects the communicator’s attempt to take control. It is a special embodiment of the turn-taking principles. Based on the data from “dialogue” of CCTV 9, and from the perspective of function, we make further specific sub-categories.
Key words: 《dialogue》, interruption, principle of goal, cooperative principle, functions of interruption
1. 引言
笔者借助话语分析理论，对中央电视台谈话《dialogue》节目的话语结构和特征进行了一些分析，发现电视谈话节目的会话中，节目主持人和谈话嘉宾都可以为了达到获取交流信息和共同磋商意义的目的，在双方约定的规约中实施话语功能。其中有一特定的言语现象即打断现象，同样具有获取、交流信息和共同磋商意义的功能。本文借助Grice的合作原则和目的原则（参见廖美珍，2005: 1-10），并结合具体的语料对打断现象作细致的归纳和分析。
关于打断的定义，我们认为打断就是在会话一方并无放弃话轮表示的情况下，另一方立即发言，争夺说话权的行为。
Anderson和Leaper将打断的定义分为三类：第一类是广义上的打断，包括附和性重叠、不成功的打断、衬托式反馈和最小回应；第二类打断不包括衬托式反馈，但包括附和性重叠；第三类不包括任何重叠和衬托式反馈。（Anderson & Leaper, 1998: 314）但从形式上对会话打断的界定远不能揭示打断全貌，必须从更深层次上研究打断的根源和发生机制。（吴鹏，2007: 57-60）
我们根据目的原则将打断分为合作型的和非合作型，并且依据合作原则对打断现象进行了一定的语用分析。Grice(1975: 41-58)提出了“合作原则”，他认为合作是会话活动中一条首要的原则。交谈受一定条件制约，人们的交谈之所以不致成为一连串互不连贯的话语，是因为交际双方都遵循一个目的，相互配合，至少有一个互相都接受的指向，符合交际的目标和方向。言语交际中遵守合作原则确实是普遍现象，但违背该原则的谈话在日常交际中也客观存在，如审讯中审问者和被审问者之间的谈话、外交性质的谈话及新闻发布会、猜字游戏以及愚人节等场合中常有不遵守“合作原则”的地方。目的原则下的“合作”定义是这样的：“听话人实现或者帮助实现说话人的目的的任何话语行为或者努力，比如说，在可能的情况下，提供对方索要的信息等等。在目的一致的关系中，或者说当目的一致的时候，双方是合作的，合作是设定的，合作程度是高的。”（廖美珍，2005）在英语电视谈话节目，节目主持人和谈话嘉宾的目的通常是一致地进行对一个热点话题的探讨。因此双方的互动一般是高度合作的，合作是主流，不合作是少数，虽然打断多为侵入式或冲突性的改变会话主题的行为。英语谈话节目中更多的是合作性的打断，即为了配合、补充当前说话者的打断行为。根据功能的不同，可进一步将冲突性打断分为话题转换型、抢夺发言权型和不认同型三种；将合作性打断分为帮助型、认同型和澄清型打断三种。我们首先分析一下不合作的类型。
2. 非合作型打断
非合作型打断与提问目的违背导致不认同型打断和话题转换型打断。
打断者发现当前说话者正在说的话语，是和他提问方向和目的不一致的回答话语。而此刻，当前说话者并没有要停下来的意思，看样子他还要继续往下说，于是，在对方还未说完的时候，主持人就开始说话，打断对方将话题拉回主题。如果不这样，在对方将谈话转到其它内容上后，整个谈话的方向和谈话的内容会有偏离。
例1是关于2007年12月日本首相福田康夫为什么会在15天的短暂时间内形成访华的日程安排，主持人S1的打断行为动机和嘉宾的回答背离谈论的内容有关。从这个例子中我们可以看到打断的话题转换型、抢夺发言权型和不认同型三种功能。
例1
S1Moderator Yang: Now it took the two governments less than 15 days to set the agenda of the current official visit of Fukuda. And this is pretty rare and unusual considering the level of this state visit. Do you read any implications?
S2Huping: I think this visit is more symbolic than substantial. Because during this such short period of time it is not possible to plan the details of the technical matters such as the East China sea issue. You can also see the symbolic nature of this visit from the fact that the Japanese party proposed to visit Qufu which is the hometown of Confucius. And this has two implications//
S1Yang: //We will go back to discuss the details of this implications of the agenda later, but Mr. Guiyunchao, do you think the domestic politics have somehow prevented him from making this visit earlier? Or do you think this is a deliberate attempt to just pay a symbolic visit like Mr. Huping has just said?
S3Gui: Definitely, I think the domestic situation has played a role in the schedule setting. The two sides agreed a long time ago that the Prime Minister would visit China this year. It is these domestic troubles that the Japanese Prime Minister is facing that prevented him from visiting China.//
S1Yang S1: //But what are these domestic issues?
（CCTV9《dialogue》节目2007年12月29日）
在目的和回答不一致的关系中，两位嘉宾回答遭到了两次打断。从这个打断来看，这一成功的多次性言语打断同时具有三种功能：1）话题转换和不认同型功能。S1的打断内容与谈话目的有关，引出了内容相关的下一话轮，日本国内局势对于访华安排的影响即S3的回答内容。实际上S1的提问是希望更多地谈到短期内谈成访华安排的原因，但答话者S2没有提到任何原因，而是提到访华的地点安排的象征意义，因而被打断。这种打断受到提问者提问目的的影响。同时显示了机构话语者的权威性。打断是不合作性的，它引出下面的内容。从S3语句的被打断来看，S3回答肯定了日本国内的情况在此次日程安排上起到了很大的作用，也提到了日本国内出现的问题但也遭到打断，原因同样是没有将问题细化，所以S1直接在S3提到这些问题时候打断并且明确问到究竟是什么国内因素；2）抢夺发言权型。在这些连续打断中我们可以看出如果出现提问者提出的问题目的和回答者回答不相符合的情况，回答者会被打断，发言权被抢夺走。打断是希望回答切题和间接引导，也显示出来主持人的专业知识水平，可以说S1是一开始知道日程安排背后是什么原因，只是希望专家进一步进行讲解。
我们接着可以从他和日本的一位专家随后的电话访谈中得到答案。
S1 Moderator Yang: //But what are these domestic issues? Let’s cross over to Prof. Takesato Watanabe from Doshiha University. Opposition leaders think that PM Fukuda is only buying time for himself and LDP (Democratic Party of Japan) to escape from the current scathing criticisms about the pension issue, which the media has labeled a “fiasco”, and the defense ministry’s so-called bribery scandal. Do you agree or do you not?
S2 Japanese Expert on Politics, Prof. Takesato Watanabe：Yes, I do. Fukuda’s Cabinet is involved in a critical situation for the two points. The first is that the dominant power in the upper house was already taken by the opposition party in July, which was caused by the pension fiasco and the defense ministry bribery scandal that you have just pointed out. The second difficulty in Fukuda’s Cabinet comes from his diplomatic policies with the U.S. and North Korea—both of which are very delicate. Japan has oil-fueling missions for American troops working in Iraq. That is why he hastened his visit to China before the New Year to change the eyes of the people in a different direction and he succeeded in some ways, with the help of China.
从这个问题可以看出从一开始S1就希望两位专家切题讲此次访华的日本国内问题和日程安排直接的关系。
3. 合作型的打断
1）帮助型打断属于合作型打断。打断为了强调重要信息。
例2
S1: In the relations between China and Japan, the most serious obstacle in the last several decades has been the historical factors and what the Japanese did during World War II in China. The two countries virtually froze the bilateral ties when Kuizomi was the Prime Minister of Japan because he paid visits to the Yasukuni Shrine that honors some of the war criminals.//
S2 Yang: //Class-A war criminals.
S1: Yes, war criminals. That hurt the feelings of the Asian people.
（CCTV9《dialogue》节目2007年12月29日）
从形式上讲，这种打断又被称为不成功的一次性打断，S2没能成功地打断并控制话轮；从目的原则来分析，可以将这种打断定义为属于合作型的帮助型打断，强调信息日本甲级战犯，意在突出此次参拜靖国神对于中日关系的负面影响，而并非要控制话轮。
再如例3是主持人讨论媒体带有偏见和情感的报告，对日中双边关系的负面影响。
例3
S1: The media and the public of both countries have learned something from the past deterioration of bilateral ties. They have actually learned that, say, the public sentiment and sensational reports or emotional feelings would, in many cases, damage the bilateral relations and//
S2: //And give rise to nationalism.
S1: Yes, stirring up a nationalist response in the country. That is actually not very beneficial to either side.
（CCTV9《dialogue》节目2007年12月29日）
这同样是一个合作型的打断，表示附和和同意对方的观点：媒体带有偏见和情感的报告会滋生国家狭隘主义。从这些合作型的打断中我们可以看出被打断者的反应是赞成和进一步给出自己的评价和见解。
2）合作型打断中的澄清型打断。
主持人觉得当前的说话者话语内容谈及术语和观众比较陌生和不熟悉的名词和内容的时候，打断说话者，要说话者重说或给予澄清。这一类属于澄清型打断。
如例4中主持人打断澄清指出这些英中签约项目都是带有高技术附加值并和环保相关的技术产品。
例4
S1: The UK is a manufacture base. We are very good at producing high-tech adding products. Those are exactly the areas that we will be seeking, no doubt in tough competition with European companies. But these are just the exports we are seeking to increase. And if you look at some of the contracts signed during this visit to China, they are exactly in these areas.//
S2(host) : //They are mainly environment related technologies.//
（CCTV9《dialogue》节目2008年01月23日，New chapter for UK-China relations）
3）认同型打断。
主持人打断是为了作出及时的评价和鼓励对方提供更多的信息。这一类属于认同鼓励型打断。
例5
S1: Personally, I have a very strong belief that we can realize this dream of 40 billion U.S. dollars by the year 2010. I was in Britain in 1997. At that time the bilateral trade figure was a little more than 5 billion and I left in the year 2002. That is more than 10 billion. That is 11.4 billion. But last year the bilateral trade figure was 40 billion. From 2006 to 2007 the pure increase was 8.8 billion.//
S2(host): //You are a good ambassador, Mr. Ma, you know all these figures very well.
S1: You can see the potential. There are a lot of areas we can get new opportunities.
（CCTV9《dialogue》节目2008年01月23日，New chapter for UK-China relations）
此处的打断是打断者发现当前说话者正在说的话语，是他想要立即对它作出反应评价的话语。打断者不想错过这个对它作出反应的最佳时机，希望对对方提供的中英贸易的良好势头进行积极回馈，鼓励对方提供更多信息。
例6属于同一类型，主持人打断是为了作出及时的积极评价和鼓励谈话嘉宾提供更多的信息。
例6
S1(Moderator Tian Wei): How do your react to accusations raised about the capabilities after the disaster?
S2: My experience in a disaster like this is that there are always plenty of accusations following a disaster and that//
S1: //It could not be more natural.
S2: //That is right. It is a very natural part of a natural disaster in the aftermath. The repair of roads and the repair of highways are like the energy Professor Zhou is talking about. The repair of existing facilities is the first priority. People have to talk to each other, people have to travel to each other and have electricity. But I keep coming back to the most important question, that is in both of our countries, that is: How we can grow in our future now when we know so much more than we used to know about the mistakes we made in past? In the time when we face climate changes, enormous challenges, the vanishing water resources and so forth, where we are going to live? Where are they going to live? These are critical choices.
（CCTV9《dialogue》节目2008年02月05日，China battles climatic extremes）
这里嘉宾说出，有人提出批评是经常在发生之后，主持人插入打断说道：“这很正常”，实际上是做出的及时的评价和希望鼓励对方提供更多的信息，接着嘉宾妙语连珠说道：“It is very natural party of a natural disaster.”，natural一词一语双关，可以看到主持人的打断的确起到鼓励对方提供更多的信息。
再如例7
S1: I think looking at this disaster this time, it reminds me of the Hurricane Katrina in the U.S. and the government’s efforts in dealing with the very large flooding problems and consequences in the U. S. Many of these issues are very similar in terms of being able to coordinate and respond and get past the natural obstacles. But overall, the governments’ approach seems to focus on both short-term and long-term, first looking at getting the people homes and restoring power, dealing with immediate consequences. But looking at the recent speeches, they also look at the bigger picture, what things can be done following the resolution of the current crisis to prevent or maybe strengthen their response capability the next time it happens.//
S2(Moderator Tian Wei)://What are the long-term messages they are getting so far?
S1: Today, President Hu is talking about the long-term challenges facing the energy sector to make sure the coal supplies are adequate and there are mechanisms in place to make sure that power shortages being experienced now don’t occur if there is a flood or some other natural disasters that may cause systematic consequences.
（CCTV9《dialogue》节目2008年2月21日，Reconstruction after severe winter storm）
当S1嘉宾提到雪灾之后中国政府的解决方案不仅立足于短期恢复供电让人们回家过春节，同时也有长期的关注点如何加强反应机制和能力。主持人抓住这个点问究竟有哪些长期的关注点。如果不打断谈话的方向和内容就会转瞬即逝。所以遭到打断之后，嘉宾提到中国国家主席对于电力部门如何建立机制，确保长期电力在自然灾害时能供电充足的内容。
4. 小结
我们根据目的原则将打断分为合作型和非合作型行为，并进一步根据功能的不同，将冲突性打断分为话题转换型、抢夺发言权型、不认同型三种；将合作性打断分为帮助型、认同型和澄清型打断三种。
参考文献
Anderson, J. K. & C. Leaper. Meta-analyses of gender effects on conversational interruption: Who? What? When? Where? And How?[J]. Sex Roles, 1998(8): 314.
Grice, H. P. Logic and conversation[A]. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (eds.). Syntax and Semantics, Vol.3, Speech Acts[C]. New York: Academic Press, 1975: 41-58.
廖美珍. 目的原则和目的分析——语用研究新途径探索(上)[J]. 修辞学习，2005(3)：1-10.
吴鹏. 会话打断研究30年的回顾与展望[J]. 河南科技大学学报，2007(3)：57-60.
关键词：谈话节目《dialogue》；会话打断；目的原则；合作原则；言语打断的功能
［中图分类号］H03
［文献标识码］A
［文章编号］1006-2831(2008)08-0097-5
Abstract: Interruption is a natural phenomenon in conversations and also an important topic in the analysis of conversational structures. It reflects the communicator’s attempt to take control. It is a special embodiment of the turn-taking principles. Based on the data from “dialogue” of CCTV 9, and from the perspective of function, we make further specific sub-categories.
Key words: 《dialogue》, interruption, principle of goal, cooperative principle, functions of interruption
1. 引言
笔者借助话语分析理论，对中央电视台谈话《dialogue》节目的话语结构和特征进行了一些分析，发现电视谈话节目的会话中，节目主持人和谈话嘉宾都可以为了达到获取交流信息和共同磋商意义的目的，在双方约定的规约中实施话语功能。其中有一特定的言语现象即打断现象，同样具有获取、交流信息和共同磋商意义的功能。本文借助Grice的合作原则和目的原则（参见廖美珍，2005: 1-10），并结合具体的语料对打断现象作细致的归纳和分析。
关于打断的定义，我们认为打断就是在会话一方并无放弃话轮表示的情况下，另一方立即发言，争夺说话权的行为。
Anderson和Leaper将打断的定义分为三类：第一类是广义上的打断，包括附和性重叠、不成功的打断、衬托式反馈和最小回应；第二类打断不包括衬托式反馈，但包括附和性重叠；第三类不包括任何重叠和衬托式反馈。（Anderson & Leaper, 1998: 314）但从形式上对会话打断的界定远不能揭示打断全貌，必须从更深层次上研究打断的根源和发生机制。（吴鹏，2007: 57-60）
我们根据目的原则将打断分为合作型的和非合作型，并且依据合作原则对打断现象进行了一定的语用分析。Grice(1975: 41-58)提出了“合作原则”，他认为合作是会话活动中一条首要的原则。交谈受一定条件制约，人们的交谈之所以不致成为一连串互不连贯的话语，是因为交际双方都遵循一个目的，相互配合，至少有一个互相都接受的指向，符合交际的目标和方向。言语交际中遵守合作原则确实是普遍现象，但违背该原则的谈话在日常交际中也客观存在，如审讯中审问者和被审问者之间的谈话、外交性质的谈话及新闻发布会、猜字游戏以及愚人节等场合中常有不遵守“合作原则”的地方。目的原则下的“合作”定义是这样的：“听话人实现或者帮助实现说话人的目的的任何话语行为或者努力，比如说，在可能的情况下，提供对方索要的信息等等。在目的一致的关系中，或者说当目的一致的时候，双方是合作的，合作是设定的，合作程度是高的。”（廖美珍，2005）在英语电视谈话节目，节目主持人和谈话嘉宾的目的通常是一致地进行对一个热点话题的探讨。因此双方的互动一般是高度合作的，合作是主流，不合作是少数，虽然打断多为侵入式或冲突性的改变会话主题的行为。英语谈话节目中更多的是合作性的打断，即为了配合、补充当前说话者的打断行为。根据功能的不同，可进一步将冲突性打断分为话题转换型、抢夺发言权型和不认同型三种；将合作性打断分为帮助型、认同型和澄清型打断三种。我们首先分析一下不合作的类型。
2. 非合作型打断
非合作型打断与提问目的违背导致不认同型打断和话题转换型打断。
打断者发现当前说话者正在说的话语，是和他提问方向和目的不一致的回答话语。而此刻，当前说话者并没有要停下来的意思，看样子他还要继续往下说，于是，在对方还未说完的时候，主持人就开始说话，打断对方将话题拉回主题。如果不这样，在对方将谈话转到其它内容上后，整个谈话的方向和谈话的内容会有偏离。
例1是关于2007年12月日本首相福田康夫为什么会在15天的短暂时间内形成访华的日程安排，主持人S1的打断行为动机和嘉宾的回答背离谈论的内容有关。从这个例子中我们可以看到打断的话题转换型、抢夺发言权型和不认同型三种功能。
例1
S1Moderator Yang: Now it took the two governments less than 15 days to set the agenda of the current official visit of Fukuda. And this is pretty rare and unusual considering the level of this state visit. Do you read any implications?
S2Huping: I think this visit is more symbolic than substantial. Because during this such short period of time it is not possible to plan the details of the technical matters such as the East China sea issue. You can also see the symbolic nature of this visit from the fact that the Japanese party proposed to visit Qufu which is the hometown of Confucius. And this has two implications//
S1Yang: //We will go back to discuss the details of this implications of the agenda later, but Mr. Guiyunchao, do you think the domestic politics have somehow prevented him from making this visit earlier? Or do you think this is a deliberate attempt to just pay a symbolic visit like Mr. Huping has just said?
S3Gui: Definitely, I think the domestic situation has played a role in the schedule setting. The two sides agreed a long time ago that the Prime Minister would visit China this year. It is these domestic troubles that the Japanese Prime Minister is facing that prevented him from visiting China.//
S1Yang S1: //But what are these domestic issues?
（CCTV9《dialogue》节目2007年12月29日）
在目的和回答不一致的关系中，两位嘉宾回答遭到了两次打断。从这个打断来看，这一成功的多次性言语打断同时具有三种功能：1）话题转换和不认同型功能。S1的打断内容与谈话目的有关，引出了内容相关的下一话轮，日本国内局势对于访华安排的影响即S3的回答内容。实际上S1的提问是希望更多地谈到短期内谈成访华安排的原因，但答话者S2没有提到任何原因，而是提到访华的地点安排的象征意义，因而被打断。这种打断受到提问者提问目的的影响。同时显示了机构话语者的权威性。打断是不合作性的，它引出下面的内容。从S3语句的被打断来看，S3回答肯定了日本国内的情况在此次日程安排上起到了很大的作用，也提到了日本国内出现的问题但也遭到打断，原因同样是没有将问题细化，所以S1直接在S3提到这些问题时候打断并且明确问到究竟是什么国内因素；2）抢夺发言权型。在这些连续打断中我们可以看出如果出现提问者提出的问题目的和回答者回答不相符合的情况，回答者会被打断，发言权被抢夺走。打断是希望回答切题和间接引导，也显示出来主持人的专业知识水平，可以说S1是一开始知道日程安排背后是什么原因，只是希望专家进一步进行讲解。
我们接着可以从他和日本的一位专家随后的电话访谈中得到答案。
S1 Moderator Yang: //But what are these domestic issues? Let’s cross over to Prof. Takesato Watanabe from Doshiha University. Opposition leaders think that PM Fukuda is only buying time for himself and LDP (Democratic Party of Japan) to escape from the current scathing criticisms about the pension issue, which the media has labeled a “fiasco”, and the defense ministry’s so-called bribery scandal. Do you agree or do you not?
S2 Japanese Expert on Politics, Prof. Takesato Watanabe：Yes, I do. Fukuda’s Cabinet is involved in a critical situation for the two points. The first is that the dominant power in the upper house was already taken by the opposition party in July, which was caused by the pension fiasco and the defense ministry bribery scandal that you have just pointed out. The second difficulty in Fukuda’s Cabinet comes from his diplomatic policies with the U.S. and North Korea—both of which are very delicate. Japan has oil-fueling missions for American troops working in Iraq. That is why he hastened his visit to China before the New Year to change the eyes of the people in a different direction and he succeeded in some ways, with the help of China.
从这个问题可以看出从一开始S1就希望两位专家切题讲此次访华的日本国内问题和日程安排直接的关系。
3. 合作型的打断
1）帮助型打断属于合作型打断。打断为了强调重要信息。
例2
S1: In the relations between China and Japan, the most serious obstacle in the last several decades has been the historical factors and what the Japanese did during World War II in China. The two countries virtually froze the bilateral ties when Kuizomi was the Prime Minister of Japan because he paid visits to the Yasukuni Shrine that honors some of the war criminals.//
S2 Yang: //Class-A war criminals.
S1: Yes, war criminals. That hurt the feelings of the Asian people.
（CCTV9《dialogue》节目2007年12月29日）
从形式上讲，这种打断又被称为不成功的一次性打断，S2没能成功地打断并控制话轮；从目的原则来分析，可以将这种打断定义为属于合作型的帮助型打断，强调信息日本甲级战犯，意在突出此次参拜靖国神对于中日关系的负面影响，而并非要控制话轮。
再如例3是主持人讨论媒体带有偏见和情感的报告，对日中双边关系的负面影响。
例3
S1: The media and the public of both countries have learned something from the past deterioration of bilateral ties. They have actually learned that, say, the public sentiment and sensational reports or emotional feelings would, in many cases, damage the bilateral relations and//
S2: //And give rise to nationalism.
S1: Yes, stirring up a nationalist response in the country. That is actually not very beneficial to either side.
（CCTV9《dialogue》节目2007年12月29日）
这同样是一个合作型的打断，表示附和和同意对方的观点：媒体带有偏见和情感的报告会滋生国家狭隘主义。从这些合作型的打断中我们可以看出被打断者的反应是赞成和进一步给出自己的评价和见解。
2）合作型打断中的澄清型打断。
主持人觉得当前的说话者话语内容谈及术语和观众比较陌生和不熟悉的名词和内容的时候，打断说话者，要说话者重说或给予澄清。这一类属于澄清型打断。
如例4中主持人打断澄清指出这些英中签约项目都是带有高技术附加值并和环保相关的技术产品。
例4
S1: The UK is a manufacture base. We are very good at producing high-tech adding products. Those are exactly the areas that we will be seeking, no doubt in tough competition with European companies. But these are just the exports we are seeking to increase. And if you look at some of the contracts signed during this visit to China, they are exactly in these areas.//
S2(host) : //They are mainly environment related technologies.//
（CCTV9《dialogue》节目2008年01月23日，New chapter for UK-China relations）
3）认同型打断。
主持人打断是为了作出及时的评价和鼓励对方提供更多的信息。这一类属于认同鼓励型打断。
例5
S1: Personally, I have a very strong belief that we can realize this dream of 40 billion U.S. dollars by the year 2010. I was in Britain in 1997. At that time the bilateral trade figure was a little more than 5 billion and I left in the year 2002. That is more than 10 billion. That is 11.4 billion. But last year the bilateral trade figure was 40 billion. From 2006 to 2007 the pure increase was 8.8 billion.//
S2(host): //You are a good ambassador, Mr. Ma, you know all these figures very well.
S1: You can see the potential. There are a lot of areas we can get new opportunities.
（CCTV9《dialogue》节目2008年01月23日，New chapter for UK-China relations）
此处的打断是打断者发现当前说话者正在说的话语，是他想要立即对它作出反应评价的话语。打断者不想错过这个对它作出反应的最佳时机，希望对对方提供的中英贸易的良好势头进行积极回馈，鼓励对方提供更多信息。
例6属于同一类型，主持人打断是为了作出及时的积极评价和鼓励谈话嘉宾提供更多的信息。
例6
S1(Moderator Tian Wei): How do your react to accusations raised about the capabilities after the disaster?
S2: My experience in a disaster like this is that there are always plenty of accusations following a disaster and that//
S1: //It could not be more natural.
S2: //That is right. It is a very natural part of a natural disaster in the aftermath. The repair of roads and the repair of highways are like the energy Professor Zhou is talking about. The repair of existing facilities is the first priority. People have to talk to each other, people have to travel to each other and have electricity. But I keep coming back to the most important question, that is in both of our countries, that is: How we can grow in our future now when we know so much more than we used to know about the mistakes we made in past? In the time when we face climate changes, enormous challenges, the vanishing water resources and so forth, where we are going to live? Where are they going to live? These are critical choices.
（CCTV9《dialogue》节目2008年02月05日，China battles climatic extremes）
这里嘉宾说出，有人提出批评是经常在发生之后，主持人插入打断说道：“这很正常”，实际上是做出的及时的评价和希望鼓励对方提供更多的信息，接着嘉宾妙语连珠说道：“It is very natural party of a natural disaster.”，natural一词一语双关，可以看到主持人的打断的确起到鼓励对方提供更多的信息。
再如例7
S1: I think looking at this disaster this time, it reminds me of the Hurricane Katrina in the U.S. and the government’s efforts in dealing with the very large flooding problems and consequences in the U. S. Many of these issues are very similar in terms of being able to coordinate and respond and get past the natural obstacles. But overall, the governments’ approach seems to focus on both short-term and long-term, first looking at getting the people homes and restoring power, dealing with immediate consequences. But looking at the recent speeches, they also look at the bigger picture, what things can be done following the resolution of the current crisis to prevent or maybe strengthen their response capability the next time it happens.//
S2(Moderator Tian Wei)://What are the long-term messages they are getting so far?
S1: Today, President Hu is talking about the long-term challenges facing the energy sector to make sure the coal supplies are adequate and there are mechanisms in place to make sure that power shortages being experienced now don’t occur if there is a flood or some other natural disasters that may cause systematic consequences.
（CCTV9《dialogue》节目2008年2月21日，Reconstruction after severe winter storm）
当S1嘉宾提到雪灾之后中国政府的解决方案不仅立足于短期恢复供电让人们回家过春节，同时也有长期的关注点如何加强反应机制和能力。主持人抓住这个点问究竟有哪些长期的关注点。如果不打断谈话的方向和内容就会转瞬即逝。所以遭到打断之后，嘉宾提到中国国家主席对于电力部门如何建立机制，确保长期电力在自然灾害时能供电充足的内容。
4. 小结
我们根据目的原则将打断分为合作型和非合作型行为，并进一步根据功能的不同，将冲突性打断分为话题转换型、抢夺发言权型、不认同型三种；将合作性打断分为帮助型、认同型和澄清型打断三种。
参考文献
Anderson, J. K. & C. Leaper. Meta-analyses of gender effects on conversational interruption: Who? What? When? Where? And How?[J]. Sex Roles, 1998(8): 314.
Grice, H. P. Logic and conversation[A]. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (eds.). Syntax and Semantics, Vol.3, Speech Acts[C]. New York: Academic Press, 1975: 41-58.
廖美珍. 目的原则和目的分析——语用研究新途径探索(上)[J]. 修辞学习，2005(3)：1-10.
吴鹏. 会话打断研究30年的回顾与展望[J]. 河南科技大学学报，2007(3)：57-60.