發(fā)布時間：2018-05-28 14:16

  本文選題：預(yù)設(shè) + 預(yù)設(shè)觸發(fā)語　； 參考：《西南大學(xué)》2009年碩士論文

【摘要】： 預(yù)設(shè),作為哲學(xué)和語言學(xué)關(guān)注的焦點之一,是一個爭論不斷的話題。自從德國哲學(xué)家弗雷格1892年首次提出這一概念以來,預(yù)設(shè)就引起了包括哲學(xué)家、邏輯學(xué)家、語言學(xué)家等各類學(xué)者的關(guān)注,并且在最近四十年里涌現(xiàn)出了大量關(guān)于預(yù)設(shè)的研究文獻。 研究表明,預(yù)設(shè)對語境十分敏感,與其在交際中的使用密不可分。在話語交際過程中,預(yù)設(shè)不是僅涉及語言結(jié)構(gòu)本身的一種純語言現(xiàn)象,而且是說話者發(fā)揮其主體性,組織構(gòu)建話語過程的一個基礎(chǔ)環(huán)節(jié)。在律師的法庭提問中也存在著豐富的預(yù)設(shè)。預(yù)設(shè)是律師用來制約證人的回答、在法庭審訊中贏得優(yōu)勢的一種語言策略。律師順應(yīng)證人的話語,在問題中設(shè)置語言圈套預(yù)設(shè)某個事實的存在,在直接詢問中這個預(yù)設(shè)的事實是有利于證人的,而在間接詢問中它則是不利于證人的。而法官和陪審團對證人的回答的判斷將會建立在這個預(yù)設(shè)的語境之中,并受到該語境的影響。這種語用預(yù)設(shè)是通過語音、詞匯/短語、句法、語篇四個層面的預(yù)設(shè)觸發(fā)語引發(fā)的。因此預(yù)設(shè)的使用是同法庭審訊的進展密切相關(guān)的,是受具體語境制約的,隨語境的變化不斷改變形式。 本文嘗試探討在法庭提問中律師如何運用預(yù)設(shè)這一語言策略進行意義操縱。本文通過建立一個切實可行的順應(yīng)—關(guān)聯(lián)模式(A-R模式),集中討論了預(yù)設(shè)的生成與理解過程。具體來說,本文對在法庭提問這一動態(tài)順應(yīng)過程中律師如何尋求與語境最佳關(guān)聯(lián)的預(yù)設(shè)進行了討論,并且指明了支配律師這一動態(tài)行為的元語用意識。 本文共分六章。第一章引言介紹了本文研究的基本原理、意義、數(shù)據(jù)搜集方法以及全文的結(jié)構(gòu)。第二章首先分別回顧了法律語言學(xué)及預(yù)設(shè)的相關(guān)理論,對預(yù)設(shè)觸發(fā)語進行了分類,并對法律語言學(xué)中的預(yù)設(shè)研究進行了評述。第三章列舉預(yù)設(shè)的主要研究方法,通過闡明順應(yīng)理論和關(guān)聯(lián)理論對預(yù)設(shè)的相關(guān)研究及各自的不足,建構(gòu)有助于闡述預(yù)設(shè)生成和理解過程的順應(yīng)—關(guān)聯(lián)模式(簡稱A-R模式)。第四章結(jié)合《辛普森殺妻案庭審記錄》中的片段,運用該理論模式詳細分析了法庭提問中預(yù)設(shè)的生成與理解過程。第五章再次運用順應(yīng)—關(guān)聯(lián)理論模式分析法庭提問中的預(yù)設(shè),以期在理論層面上進一步深入探討預(yù)設(shè)的生成與理解過程。第六章是結(jié)束語,總結(jié)了本文的主要研究成果及其對從法人員正確使用語言技巧的啟示,最后指出了本文研究的不足之處以及對未來研究的建議。
[Abstract]:Presupposition, as one of the focal points of philosophy and linguistics, is a controversial topic. Since the German philosopher Frege first proposed this concept in 1892, presupposition has attracted the attention of various scholars, including philosophers, logicians, linguists, etc. And in the last four decades, there has been a great deal of research on presupposition. The study shows that presupposition is sensitive to context and closely related to its use in communication. In the process of discourse communication, presupposition is not only a pure linguistic phenomenon involving the language structure itself, but also a basic link for the speaker to give full play to his subjectivity and organize the utterance process. There are also rich presuppositions in lawyers' court questions. Presupposition is a language strategy used by lawyers to restrict the answers of witnesses and gain an advantage in court hearings. The lawyer obeys the witness's words and sets the language trap in the question to presuppose the existence of a fact. This presupposition fact is beneficial to the witness in the direct questioning, but it is unfavorable to the witness in the indirect interrogation. The judge and jury's judgment on the witness's answer will be based on and influenced by the preset context. This pragmatic presupposition is triggered by presupposition at four levels: pronunciation, vocabulary / phrase, syntax and discourse. Therefore, the use of presupposition is closely related to the progress of court hearings, is restricted by specific context, and changes the form with the change of context. This paper attempts to explore how lawyers use the presupposition strategy to manipulate meaning in court questioning. This paper focuses on the generation and understanding of presupposition by establishing a feasible adaptation-association pattern. Specifically, this paper discusses how lawyers seek the presupposition of optimal relevance to context in the process of dynamic adaptation of court questioning, and points out the meta-pragmatic consciousness that dominates the dynamic behavior of lawyers. This paper is divided into six chapters. The first chapter introduces the basic principle, significance, data collection method and structure of this paper. The second chapter reviews the relevant theories of forensic linguistics and presupposition, classifies presupposition triggers and reviews the research of presupposition in forensic linguistics. Chapter three enumerates the main research methods of presupposition. By expounding the relevant research on presupposition by adaptation theory and relevance theory and their respective shortcomings, the construction of adaptation and relevance pattern (A-R pattern) is helpful to explain the process of presupposition generation and understanding. The fourth chapter analyzes the presupposition and understanding process of court questioning by using the theoretical model combined with the segment of the trial record of Simpson's wife killing case. The fifth chapter analyzes the presupposition in court questioning with the model of adaptation-relevance theory again in order to further explore the formation and understanding process of presupposition at the theoretical level. The sixth chapter is the conclusion, which summarizes the main research results and their implications for the correct use of language skills by legal officers. Finally, it points out the shortcomings of this study and the suggestions for future research.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2009
【分類號】：D90-055;H030

【引證文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 崔中良;;關(guān)聯(lián)——順應(yīng)理論研究現(xiàn)狀的調(diào)查與分析[J];沙洋師范高等專科學(xué)校學(xué)報;2010年04期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 呂淑香;關(guān)聯(lián)—順應(yīng)理論視角下的英語蓄意歧義研究[D];齊齊哈爾大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號：1947044