本文通過對(duì)律師辯護(hù)（代理）詞中語用標(biāo)記語進(jìn)行分類和對(duì)其功能的闡釋來研究律師辯護(hù)（代理）詞中語用標(biāo)記語的使用特點(diǎn),旨在從中探究律師在撰寫辯護(hù)（代理）詞時(shí)所采用的普遍結(jié)構(gòu)及其策略。 本文是基于30篇律師辯護(hù)（代理）詞的描述性研究,構(gòu)建于以關(guān)聯(lián)理論和元語用意識(shí)為基礎(chǔ)的理論框架內(nèi)。其中,關(guān)聯(lián)理論作為本文主要的理論支撐用來解釋語用標(biāo)記語在律師辯護(hù)（代理）詞中是如何發(fā)揮作用的,即語用標(biāo)記語如何對(duì)聽者對(duì)辯護(hù)（代理）詞的推理方向進(jìn)行引導(dǎo)和限制,而正是因?yàn)檎Z用標(biāo)記語的限制引導(dǎo)功能,在元語用意識(shí)的趨使之下律師選擇使用語用標(biāo)記語來對(duì)整個(gè)語篇進(jìn)行策劃,編排。語用標(biāo)記語根據(jù)其功能可劃分為兩大類別:話語標(biāo)記語和態(tài)度標(biāo)記語。每類標(biāo)記語又可細(xì)分為不同的分支對(duì)辯護(hù)（代理）詞的理解起著不同的作用。 根據(jù)各類語用標(biāo)記語的功能,結(jié)合數(shù)據(jù)分析我們發(fā)現(xiàn),律師辯護(hù)（代理）詞的撰寫有相對(duì)固定的模式和策略,盡管所有的語料出自六位律師為三十個(gè)不同案件撰寫的辯護(hù)（代理）詞。本文旨在將語用標(biāo)記語的研究引入新領(lǐng)域的同時(shí)為法律從業(yè)者及學(xué)習(xí)者提供這些模式和策略用以借鑒。 

【文章來源】：廣東外語外貿(mào)大學(xué)廣東省

【文章頁數(shù)】：115 頁

【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士

【文章目錄】：
Declaration
Acknowledgement
Abstract
摘要
List of tables and figures
Chapter 1. Introduction
    1.1 Introduction
    1.2 Definition of the key terms
        1.2.1 Definition of lawyer's statement
        1.2.2 Definition of pragmatic marker
    1.3 Rationale
    1.4 Data and methodology
        1.4.1 Data
        1.4.2 Methodology
    1.5 Organization of the thesis
Chapter 2. Overview of the relevant literature
    2.1 Introduction
    2.2 Overview of literature on PMs
        2.2.1 On English PMs
            2.2.1.1 Coherence- or discourse-based approach
            2.2.1.2 Pragmatic approach
            2.2.1.3 Relevance theoretical approach
        2.2.2 On Chinese PMs
    2.3 Overview of literature on lawyers' statements
    2.4 Critique of the previous researches
Chapter 3. A description of theoretical framework
    3.1 Introduction
    3.2 Procedural meaning or propositional meaning
    3.3 A sketch of theoretical background
        3.3.1 Relevance theory
        3.3.2 Metapragmatic awareness
        3.3.3 Theoretical framework of the present study
    3.4 Summary
Chapter 4. Categorization and functionality of pragmatic markers in lawyers' statement
    4.1 Introduction
    4.2 The categorization of PMs in lawyers' statements
        4.2.1 Discourse marker
            4.2.1.1 Elaborative marker
            4.2.1.2 Contrastive marker
            4.2.1.3 Implicative marker
            4.2.1.4 Reformulation marker
        4.2.2 Attitudinal marker
            4.2.2.1 Commentary marker
            4.2.2.2 Evidential marker
            4.2.2.3 Manner of speaking marker
        4.2.3 Summary
    4.3 Relevance theoretical account for the functionality of PMs in lawyers' statements
        4.3.1 DMs' constraints on the interpretation of lawyers' statements
        4.3.2 AMs' constraints on the interpretation of lawyers' statements
        4.3.3 Summary
Chapter 5. Data analysis and discussion
    5.1 Introduction
    5.2 Data analysis
        5.2.1 Observations on the average distributions of PMs in each part of the statement
        5.2.2 Obeservations of the PMs in each lawyer's writings
        5.2.3 Obeservations of the PMs in statemetns for criminal and civil cases
    5.3 Discussion
Chapter 6. Conclusion
    6.1 Overview
    6.2 Findings
    6.3 Implications
    6.4 Limitations
    6.5 Suggestions for further research
Bibliography
Appendix


【參考文獻(xiàn)】：
期刊論文
[1]漢語語用標(biāo)記語的語義、語用分析[J]. 馮光武.  現(xiàn)代外語. 2004(01)
[2]話語標(biāo)記語的元語用分析[J]. 吳亞欣,于國棟.  外語教學(xué). 2003(04)
[3]話語標(biāo)記語的語用學(xué)研究綜述[J]. 冉永平.  外語研究. 2000(04)



本文編號(hào)：2962740