be used together with action-implicative discourse analysis and socioculturally oriented discourse analysis to study language and social interaction. This book impresses me in three ways. First, all chapters cohere strongly in theory and method, achieving theoretical consistency in organisational structure. This is not easy since the book is not written by one or two authors throughout. Instead, 42 authors with various academic and cultural backgrounds contributed to the 16 separate chapters. Despite having different focuses, all chapters cohere in the fact that they apply or develop some parts of Carbaugh’s framework. For instance, while all chapters show how key hubs of being, acting, relating, feeling and dwelling in Carbaugh’s framework are activated in local communication, some develop this framework by adding ‘temporality’ as an additional element. As such, all chapters tie closely around this framework, rendering the book a valuable CuDA ‘handbook’ for readers. Richness in data constitutes another striking feature of this book. Studies in communication must, like those in discourse analysis and pragmatics, engage with data in some way at some time (Culpeper and Gillings, 2019). The data in this book come from a wide array of communication contexts, such as health, online, environmental, educational and mass communication. Besides, these data are situated in different cultures around the world: Singapore, Latvia, Bulgaria, America, Israel, Finland, Mexico and Japan. With rich data drawn from various communication practices and situated in different cultures, the contributors can both testify to the utility of Carbaugh’s framework and bring to light the importance of cultural awareness in discourse analysis. Third, the fine combination of etic and emic approaches to cultural discourses is worthy of being recommended to researchers in discourse analysis and pragmatics. With an etic approach, the researchers rely on their theoretical understandings to describe similarities and differences in communication in different cultures and, with an emic approach, they rely on participants’ understandings to describe their own communication. Combining the two is important for making an objective analysis of and comment on local communication. Overall, the book offers massive implications for research in culture and communication. It elaborates, through data-based studies, on the concepts of discursive hubs and radiants in CuDA, and also on the important themes worthy of being explored in discourse analysis and pragmatics. As such, this book constitutes a valuable read for researchers in all these fields.

中文翻译：

---

书评：Eric A Anchimbe，Offers and Offer Refusals: A Postcolonial Pragmatics Perspective on World Englishes

与行动暗示话语分析和面向社会文化的话语分析一起用于研究语言和社会互动。这本书在三个方面给我留下了深刻的印象。首先，各章在理论和方法上的衔接性很强，在组织结构上实现了理论的一致性。这并不容易，因为这本书不是由一两个作者写的。相反，具有不同学术和文化背景的 42 位作者为 16 个独立的章节做出了贡献。尽管有不同的侧重点，但所有章节的一致之处在于它们应用或开发了 Carbaugh 框架的某些部分。例如，虽然所有章节都展示了 Carbaugh 框架中的存在、行为、关联、感觉和居住的关键枢纽如何在本地交流中被激活，有些人通过添加“时间性”作为附加元素来开发这个框架。因此，所有章节都紧密围绕这个框架，使本书成为读者的宝贵 CuDA“手册”。数据的丰富性是本书的另一个显着特点。传播研究必须像话语分析和语用学研究一样，在某个时间以某种方式处理数据（Culpeper 和 Gillings，2019）。本书中的数据来自广泛的传播环境，例如健康、在线、环境、教育和大众传播。此外，这些数据位于世界各地的不同文化中：新加坡、拉脱维亚、保加利亚、美国、以色列、芬兰、墨西哥和日本。从各种沟通实践中提取的丰富数据，以及位于不同文化中的数据，贡献者既可以证明 Carbaugh 框架的实用性，也可以揭示文化意识在话语分析中的重要性。第三，文化话语的主位与主位的巧妙结合，值得向话语分析和语用学的研究人员推荐。使用 etic 方法，研究人员依靠他们的理论理解来描述不同文化中交流的异同，而使用 emic 方法，他们依靠参与者的理解来描述自己的交流。将两者结合起来，对于客观地分析和评价本地传播具有重要意义。总的来说，这本书对文化和传播研究提供了巨大的影响。它通过基于数据的研究阐述，CuDA 中话语中心和辐射的概念，以及值得在话语分析和语用学中探索的重要主题。因此，本书对所有这些领域的研究人员来说都是一本有价值的读物。