以往政治言談的文獻主要和政治訪問、辯論，及演說有關，但鮮少見於國會質詢。因此，此研究致力於探究台灣的國會質詢言談。藉由分析「問答交換」、 「迴避詞」、 「規避用語」，和「插話」，來揭露不同政治立場的立委是如何呈現問句，和運用插話來監督政府的政策。另外，此研究也旨於表露政府官員如何運用回應策略和插話技巧來替自己辯護。為了達到上述目的，首先研究者收集自立法院官方網站的六段質詢影片，其中包含六位立委和一位教育部長。接著藉由四個關於問句、回應、規避用語，和插話的分類準則來分析資料。此研究結果有下述四點發現:
一、具有限制回應特質的「封閉式問句」經常被執政黨和反對黨的立委使用。然而， 反對黨立委使用此「封閉式問句」更為頻繁。
二、教育部長對於執政黨的質詢問題，較傾向於提供所需要的資訊。相反的，當教育 部長面對反對黨的質詢問題時，往往給予迴避。
三、身為備詢者的教育部長運用不同程度的迴避詞和修辭性規避用語來回覆立委的問 題，其目的在於減緩政治責難或可能的挑戰，以及處理面子受損的問題。
四、立委和教育部長皆經常使用插話技巧來達到獲取話權的目的。然而，立委成功打 斷教育部長的比率較為高。
藉由分析國會質詢中的提問形式、回應策略，和插話技巧，能讓一般民眾、立委，以及政府官員對於質詢的本質獲得更深刻的理解。更重要的是，此研究期望幫助立委知悉自己在實際上，是如何提出問題來質詢政府官員。也因此，立委們能想出較好的提問方式，從官員上引出所需要的資訊，來達到監督的目的。再者，此研究也能讓政府官員了解如何為自己的政策辯護。特別是對於新進的政府官員，此研究能幫助熟悉國會質詢的情境，並且為即將到來的質詢，提供參考資料。

Previous literatures on political discourses mainly pertained to political interviews, debates, and speeches, but rarely focused on the parliamentary question time. This study, hence, aims to explore the parliamentary discourses in Taiwan by analyzing the question-reply exchanges, evasions, hedges, and interruptions to disclose how legislators with different political stances presented questions and employed interruptions to supervise government policies. The second goal of this study is to manifest how government officials employed replying strategies and interruptions to defend. To achieve these goals, firstly six videos clips of the parliamentary question time were collected from the official website of Legislative Yuan, Republic of China, where the six legislators and the Minister of MOE were involved. Then the data were analyzed by the four criteria in terms of classifying questions, responses, hedges, and interruptions.
The results of this study show that closed questions which restrain possible answers were frequently employed by the legislators from the ruling and the major opposition parties. But closed questions were employed by the opposition party legislators more often than by the ruling party legislators. It is also found the Minister tended to supply required information to the questions asked by the legislators from the ruling party. However, when the Minister was questioned by the legislators from the opposition party, he tended to evade their questions. Besides, this study finds that the respondent, the Minister of MOE, employed different levels of evasions and rhetoric hedges to the questions raised by the legislators in order to mitigate political blame or possible challenges and to cope with faces being threatened. Furthermore, this study also finds that interruptions were frequently employed by the legislators and the Minister for obtaining the speech floor from each other. In addition, it is found that the legislators from the two different parties had more successful interruption rate than the Minister did.
Through the analyses on question types, replying strategies and interruptions of the questioning time, general public, legislators, and government officials can gain insights into the essence of the parliamentary question time. More importantly, this study is expected to help legislators notice how they actually pose questions to government officials, and hence use more effective strategies to elicit required information from the government officials to achieve the goal of supervision. Moreover, this study can also provide government officials with insights into how to defend their policies. In particular, it can familiarize novice government officials with the interaction patterns in the parliamentary question time with the legislators from the ruling and opposite parties.

REFERENCES
Alderman, R. K. (1992). The leader of the opposition and prime minister's question time. Parliamentary Affairs, 45(1), 66-76. Retrieved from http://pa.oxfordjournals.org/content/45/1/66.full.pdf
Bailer, S. (2011). People's voice or information pool? The role of, and reasons for, parliamentary questions in the Swiss parliament. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 17(3), 302-314. doi: 10.1080/13572334.2011.595123
Bavelas, J. B., Black, A., Bryson, L., & Mullett, J. (1988). Political equivocation: A situational explanation. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 7(2), 137-145. Retrieved from http://web.uvic.ca/psyc/bavelas/1988politic.pdf
Bavelas, J. B., Black, A., Chovil, N., & Mullett, J. (1990). Equivocal communication: Sage Publications, Inc.
Beattie, G. W. (1981). Interruption in conversational interaction, and its relation to the sex and status of the interactants. Linguistics, 19(1-2), 15-36. doi: 10.1515/ling.1981.19.1-2.15
Bhatia, A. (2006). Critical discourse analysis of political press conferences. Discourse & Society, 17(2), 173-203. doi: 10.1177/0957926506058057
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bull, P. (1994). On identifying questions, replies, and non-replies in political interviews. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 13(2), 115-131. doi: 10.1177/0261927X94132002
Bull, P. (1998). Equivocation theory and news interviews. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 17(1), 36-51. doi: 10.1177/0261927X980171002
Bull, P. (2000). Equivocation and the Rhetoric of Modernization: An analysis of televised interviews with Tony Blair in the 1997 British general election. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 19(2), 222-247. doi: 10.1177/0261927X00019002003
Bull, P. (2008). “Slipperiness, Evasion, and Ambiguity”: Equivocation and facework in noncommittal political discourse. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 27(4), 333-344. doi: 10.1177/0261927X08322475
Bull, P. (2012). The microanalysis of political discourse. Philologia Hispalensis, 26(1-2), 79-93. Retrieved from http://institucional.us.es/revistas/philologia/26/art_4.pdf
Bull, P., & Mayer, K. (1988). Interruptions in political interviews: A study of Margaret Thatcher and Neil Kinnock. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 7(1), 35-46. doi: 10.1177/0261927X8800700103
Bull, P., & Mayer, K. (1993). How not to answer questions in political interviews. Political Psychology, 14(4), 651-666. doi: 10.2307/3791379
Carbó, T. (1992). Towards an interpretation of interruptions in Mexican parliamentary discourse (1920-60). Discourse & Society, 3(1), 25-45. doi: 10.1177/0957926592003001002
Chen, L. C. (2007). A study of first-person pronouns in Chinese political discourse. (Master's thesis, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan). Retrieved from http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi/login?o=dnclcdr&s=id=%22095NTHU5462001%22.&searchmode=basic
Chen, Y. T. (2008). A corpus-based study of hedges in Mandarin Spoken Discourse. (Master's thesis, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan). Retrieved from http://www.airitilibrary.com/Publication/alDetailedMesh1?DocID=U0001-2807200816214800
Chilton, P. (2004). Analysing political discourse: Theory and practice. London and New York: Routledge.
Chouliaraki, L. (Ed.). (2007). The soft power of war. London School of Economics: John Benjamins Publishing.
Clayman, S. E. (1988). Displaying neutrality in television news interviews. Social problems, 35, 474-492. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/800598?uid=3739216&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21103788276721
Clayman, S. E. (2001). Answers and evasions. Language in Society, 30(03), 403-442. Retrieved from http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=92883
Cornelia, I. (2006). Parliamentary discourses. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (pp. 188-197). Oxford: Elsevier. Retrieved from http://www.elsevier.com/books/encyclopedia-of-language-and-linguistics-14-volume-set/brown/978-0-08-044854-1
Cornelia, I. (2010). Analytical perspectives on parliamentary and extra-parliamentary discourses. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(4), 879-884. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.09.015
Dohrenwend, B. S. (1965). Some effects of open and closed questions on respondents' answers. Human Organization, 24(2), 175-184. Retrieved from http://sfaa.metapress.com/content/u5838w33858455u3/
Dou, W., Zhang, X., George, W., & Clark, J. (2008). Cross-cultural pragmatic analysis of evasion strategy at Chinese and American regular press conference. Intercultural Communication Studies, 1(3). Retrieved from http://commcourses.com/iic/?page_id=351
Finlayson, A. (2001). The problem of the political interview. The Political Quarterly, 72(3), 335-344. doi: 10.1111/1467-923X.00393
Functions & powers. (2014). Legislative Yuan of Republic of China. Retrieved May 15, 2014, from http://www.ly.gov.tw/en/01_introduce/introView.action?id=8
Galasinski, D. (1996). Pretending to cooperate. How speakers hide evasive actions. Argumentation, 10(3), 375-388. doi: 10.1007/BF00182202
Goldberg, J. A. (1990). Interrupting the discourse on interruptions: An analysis in terms of relationally neutral, power-and rapport-oriented acts. Journal of Pragmatics, 14(6), 883-903. doi: 10.1016/0378-2166(90)90045-F
Greatbatch, D. (1986). Aspects of topical organization in news interviews: The use of agenda-shifting procedures by interviewees. Media, Culture & Society, 8(4), 441-455. doi: 10.1177/0163443786008004005
Gruber, H. (1993). Political language and textual vagueness. Pragmatics, 3(1), 1-28. Retrieved from http://elanguage.net/journals/pragmatics/article/view/175
Hübler, A. (1983). Understatements and Hedges in English. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing.
Hamilton, M. A., & Mineo, P. J. (1998). A framework for understanding equivocation. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 17(1), 3-35. doi: 10.1177/0261927X980171001
Harris, S. (1991). Evasive action: How politicians respond to questions in political interviews. In P. Scannell (Ed.), In Broadcast Talk (pp. 76-99). London: Sage.
Harris, S. (2001). Being politically impolite: Extending politeness theory to adversarial political discourse. Discourse & Society, 12(4), 451-472. doi: 10.1177/0957926501012004003
Holly, W. (1989). Credibility and political language. In R. Wodak (Ed.), Language, power and ideology: Studies in political discourse (pp. 115-135). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Hyland, K. (1996). Writing without conviction? Hedging in science research articles. Applied Linguistics, 17(4), 433-454. doi: 10.1093/applin/17.4.433
Jalilifar, A. R., & Alavi, M. (2011). Power and politics of language use: A survey of hedging devices in political interviews. Journal of Teaching Language Skills (JTLS), 3(3), 43-66. Retrieved from http://jtls.shirazu.ac.ir/?_action=articleInfo&article=377
Johansson, M. (2008). Presentation of the political self: Commitment in electoral media dialogue. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 27(4), 397-408. doi: 10.1177/0261927X08322482
Jucker, A. H. (1986). News interviews: A pragmalinguistic analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
Kline, S. L., Simunich, B., & Weber, H. (2009). The use of equivocal messages in responding to corporate challenges. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 37(1), 40-58. doi: 10.1080/00909880802592623
Lakoff, G. (1973). Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2(4), 458-508. doi: 10.1007/BF00262952
Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lin, C. W. (2003). Discourse Analysis: A brief study of mitigating strategies in language interaction in Taiwan. Chia-nan Annual Bulletin, 29, 319-333. Retrieved from http://lib.chna.edu.tw/bulletin/files/v29_319_333.pdf
Lin, P. C. (2013). A case study on speech fluency and interruption in debate discourse. (Master's thesis, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan). Retrieved from http://etds.lib.ncku.edu.tw/etdservice/view_metadata?etdun=U0026-2306201318285400
Lu, P. C. (2006). A study of interruption behavior in Mandarin mother-child conversation. (Master's thesis, National Chengchi University, Taipei,Taiwan). Retrieved from http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi/login?o=dstdcdr&s=id=%22G0925550051%22.&searchmode=basic
Murata, K. (1994). Intrusive or co-operative? A cross-cultural study of interruption. Journal of Pragmatics, 21(4), 385-400. doi: 10.1016/0378-2166(94)90011-6
Obeng, S. G. (1997). Language and politics: Indirectness in political discourse. Discourse & Society, 8(1), 49-83. doi: 10.1177/0957926597008001004
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
Rasiah, P. (2010). A framework for the systematic analysis of evasion in parliamentary discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(3), 664-680. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.07.010
Republic of China legislative election. (2012). Retrieved May 15, 2014, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_China_legislative_election,_2012
Roger, D. B., & Schumacher, A. (1983). Effects of individual differences on dyadic conversational strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(3), 700-705. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.45.3.700
Sánchez de Dios, M., & Wiberg, M. (2011). Questioning in European parliaments. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 17(3), 354-367. doi: 10.1080/13572334.2011.595129
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696-735. doi: 10.2307/412243
Salager-Meyer, F. (1994). Hedges and textual communicative function in medical English written discourse. English for Specific Purposes, 13(2), 149-170. doi: 10.1016/0889-4906(94)90013-2
Salmond, R. (2004). Grabbing governments by the throat: Question time and leadership in New Zealand's parliamentary opposition. Political Science, 56(2), 75-90. doi: 10.1177/003231870405600209
Schegloff, E. A. (1968). Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist, 70(6), 1075-1095. doi: 10.1525/aa.1968.70.6.02a00030
Schegloff, E. A. (1988). From interview to conrontation: Observations of the Bush/Rather encounter. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 22(1-4), 215-240. doi: 10.1080/08351818809389304
Schegloff, E. A. (2000). Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language in Society, 29(01), 1-63. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/4168983?uid=3739216&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21103788276721
Tannen, D. (1983). When is an overlap not an interruption? One component of conversational style. In R. J. DiPietro, W. Frawley & A. Wedel (Eds.), The first Delaware symposium on language studies (pp. 119-129). Newark, DE: University of Delaware Press.
Taweel, A. Q., Saidat, E. M., Rafayah, H. A., & Saidat, A. M. (2011). Hedging in Political Discourse. The Linguistics Journal, 5(1). Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com/abstract?direct=true&profile=ehost&scope=site&authtype=crawler&jrnl=17182301&AN=90680629&h=DyXieA0e9K%2fpCWXOcWRl26bwDCoEaNdEJC%2fROj2BWxnMzYykQ2L6icj%2bV0x1ZZhAqYHp2sJZM%2bFn2X0QafFavA%3d%3d&crl=c
Varttala, T. (2001). Hedging in scientifically oriented discourse: Exploring variation according to discipline and intended audience. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Tampereen Yliopisto, Finland). Retrieved from https://tampub.uta.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/67148/95144-5195-3.pdf?sequence=1
West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1983). Small insults: A study of interruptions in cross-sex conversations between unacquainted persons. In B. Thorne, C. Kramarae & N. Henley (Eds.), Language, gender and society (pp. 102-117). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Wiberg, M. (1995). Parliamentary questioning: Control by communication? Parliaments and Majority Rule in Western Europe, 179-222. Retrieved from http://www.uni-potsdam.de/db/vergleich/Publikationen/Parliaments/chapter06.pdf
Wilson, J. (1990). Politically speaking: The pragmatic analysis of political language: Basil Blackwell Oxford. Retrieved from http://www.amazon.com/Politically-Speaking-Pragmatic-Analysis-Political/dp/0631165010
Wu, H. C. (2002). A development study of Chinese children's conversational overlapping. (Master's thesis, Fu Jen Catholic University, Taipei, Taiwan). Retrieved from http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi?o=dnclcdr&s=id=%22090FJU00462002%22.&searchmode=basic
Yang, P. L. (2013). A critical discourse analysis of Taiwan's national debate on economic ties with China. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics, 11(2), 83-103. Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com/abstract?direct=true&profile=ehost&scope=site&authtype=crawler&jrnl=17294649&AN=90283351&h=58R1Vb8sx7DNuE9Jc7BpIoAun64BVotKXWKuGgUhebqr0NgZkrZ5AqBOSYmlksNM6bYmLrLFvTSfZ%2bgPhOTPeA%3d%3d&crl=c
Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8(3), 338-353. doi: 10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X