1 Introduction

This section defines the concept of disagreement expression and its "face-threatening" characteristics, highlighting its importance as an entry point for pragmatic competence research; reviews multiple perspectives on native speaker disagreement research and the current state of research in the field of second language acquisition, emphasizing the scarcity of research on Chinese L2 learners' disagreement and its heavy reliance on non-authentic interaction methods; clarifies the advantages of the corpus research paradigm and the limitations of existing research regarding insufficient attention to overall sequential structure; and finally proposes the research objective of using television talk shows as a corpus source, building a self-constructed corpus to examine the sequential structural characteristics of advanced Chinese L2 learners' disagreement, and comparing them with native speakers to reveal acquisition patterns and causes of differences.

2 Disagreement Sequence Organizational Structure

This section elaborates on the organizational structure of disagreement sequences in conversation analysis theory, taking the adjacency pair as the minimal unit, summarizing the basic disagreement sequence as "stating opinion—expressing disagreement" (T1-T2), and extending it to a three-move structure (T1-T2-T3), where T3 can be directed toward T2 for further refutation or toward T1 for developing the opinion. The research distinguishes the essential difference between disagreement and conflict, pointing out that the emergence of conflict depends on whether move three carries negative attitudes and emotions, rather than the mere existence of move three. Meanwhile, it introduces the function of insert sequences as discontinuous forms in disagreement discourse, including manifestations such as listener feedback and interactional feedback, and accordingly proposes three research questions: the structural characteristics of L2 learners' basic disagreement sequences, the semantic orientation and conflict nature of move three, and the manifestation of insert sequences.

3 Research Design

This section presents the research design of building self-constructed corpora of L2 learners and native speakers' disagreement for comparative analysis, taking 18 multilingual Chinese L2 learners from the television talk show *Informal Talks* as research subjects. The corpus was derived from transcribed texts of 20 episodes each of *Informal Talks* and *Round Table*, totaling 88,332 characters. The annotation methods included: dividing disagreement segments based on topic completeness, identifying 137 segments; annotating moves according to the basic sequence structure framework, where T3 represents the three-move basic sequence; conducting dual-attribute annotation of semantic orientation and conflict nature for move three; and performing seven-category annotation of insert sequence moves with reference to the classification of interactional skills in conversation participation.

4 Research Results

Through comparative analysis, it was found that Chinese L2 learners' disagreement sequences exhibit a "T1—T2—T3" structural characteristic, with move three appearing significantly more frequently than in native speakers; L2 learners' move three semantic orientation toward move two reached 74%, significantly higher than the more evenly distributed native speakers; L2 learners' conflictual move three accounted for 33.7%, far higher than native speakers' 2.4%; in terms of insert sequence usage, L2 learners had significantly more brief feedback and incomplete moves, and significantly less collaborative construction and continuation, indicating room for improvement in their L2 pragmatic competence.

5 Discussion

This section analyzes the organizational structure characteristics of Chinese L2 learners' disagreement sequences from three dimensions. Regarding the basic structure of disagreement sequences, native speakers exhibit a two-move characteristic of "opinion statement—disagreement," while L2 learners demonstrate a three-move characteristic of "opinion statement—disagreement—further refutation." L2 learners' sequences are vertically longer with better topic extension ability, but horizontally each disagreement move averages only 66 characters, significantly shorter than native speakers' 99 characters, indicating insufficient argumentation in individual moves and numerous brief turns that "dispute without arguing."

Regarding the semantic orientation and conflict nature of move three, L2 learners' move three clearly tends to orient toward move two, that is, directly refuting the other's viewpoint. Although this "tit-for-tat" approach brings the "pleasure of counterattack," excessive focus on the other's viewpoint while neglecting one's own argumentation easily fills the dialogue with "gunpowder." In contrast, native speakers' move three semantic orientation is evenly distributed, with "alternating offense and defense," expressing disagreement while extending their own opinions. Furthermore, L2 learners' disagreement is more likely to develop into conflict, with 65.7% of conflict cases coming from learners with individualistic cultural backgrounds, lacking rational strategies for handling differences and illocutionary force modulation abilities, and being more influenced by native culture to focus on self-will expression rather than relationship maintenance.

Regarding the characteristics of insert sequence usage, L2 learners use brief feedback (such as "dui," "yes," "queshi") more frequently, but with noticeably insufficient richness, sometimes needing to resort to native language or simple foreign language for feedback; incomplete moves occur significantly more frequently than in native speakers, with prominent turn-competition phenomena. Native speakers, however, use collaborative construction and continuation significantly more frequently, demonstrating higher listener feedback skills and interactional cooperation abilities, while L2 learners, due to heavier cognitive burden and failure to grasp cooperative patterns in disagreement discourse, participate less in turn co-construction.

6 Conclusion

This section summarizes three core findings regarding the sequential structure of advanced Chinese L2 learners' disagreement expression: the basic sequence exhibits a three-move characteristic with strong topic extension ability but insufficient single-move argumentation; move three mostly orients toward the other's discourse, with high interactivity but high conflict risk and insufficient harmony maintenance awareness; weak listener feedback ability and lack of cooperative awareness. Four pedagogical recommendations are proposed: strengthening single-move argumentation ability, cultivating balanced semantic orientation ability, enhancing illocutionary force modulation methods and "harmony as precious" cultural teaching, and enriching feedback training and authentic situational interaction practice. Finally, research limitations are noted, including failure to examine individual factor differences, topic influences, and limited sample size, with suggestions for future research to expand to natural communication situations.