本文選題：功能文體　切入點(diǎn)：《格列佛游記》　出處：《江蘇大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：本研究以功能文體學(xué)為基礎(chǔ),從及物性系統(tǒng)和語法隱喻兩個角度對比分析《格列佛游記》及其簡寫本。借助語料處理軟件UAM Corpus Tool 3.3對目標(biāo)語料的及物性過程、概念語法隱喻和人際語法隱喻進(jìn)行標(biāo)注并統(tǒng)計。研究發(fā)現(xiàn):1)原著中,按使用頻率,及物性過程依次是:物質(zhì)過程(66.39%)、關(guān)系過程(15.90%)、心理過程(11.82%)、言語過程(4.47%)、存在過程(0.94%)、行為過程(0.49%),而簡寫本中,依次是:物質(zhì)過程(55.52%)、心理過程(15.95%)、關(guān)系過程(15.34%)、言語過程(10.28%)、存在過程(1.99%)、行為過程(0.92%)。這表明,關(guān)系過程在原著中更突出,而心理過程在簡寫本中更突出。原著中80%左右的物質(zhì)過程、心理過程、關(guān)系過程和存在過程在簡寫本中被刪減,僅有20%左右在簡寫本中被保留,簡寫本中新增加的物質(zhì)過程、心理過程、關(guān)系過程和存在過程分別占7.73%、26.92%、19%和76.92%。原著中60%左右的言語過程和行為過程在簡寫本中被刪減,40%左右在簡寫本中被保留,簡寫本中新增加的言語過程和行為過程分別占29.85%和16.67%。2)原著中的概念語法隱喻的使用頻率(2.18%)高于簡寫本(0.92%);原著中大部分概念語法隱喻在簡寫本中被刪減或轉(zhuǎn)化為相應(yīng)的一致式,其中57.14%在簡寫本中被刪減,39.68%在簡寫本中轉(zhuǎn)化為一致式,僅有3.17%被保留;簡寫本中出現(xiàn)了部分新的概念語法隱喻,占簡寫本概念語法隱喻總數(shù)的66.67%。3)原著和簡寫本中均有少量情態(tài)隱喻出現(xiàn),但簡寫本中情態(tài)隱喻的使用頻率(1.53%)多于原著(1.00%)。原著中大部分情態(tài)隱喻在簡寫本中被刪減或轉(zhuǎn)化為相應(yīng)的一致式,其中65.52%在簡寫本中被刪減,31.03%在簡寫本中轉(zhuǎn)化為一致式,僅有3.45%被保留;簡寫本中出現(xiàn)了部分新的情態(tài)隱喻,占簡寫本情態(tài)隱喻總數(shù)的90%。原著和簡寫本中未出現(xiàn)語氣隱喻。以上發(fā)現(xiàn)表明,改編者采用多種策略簡化原著,以滿足英語學(xué)習(xí)者的需要。這些策略包括:刪減及物性過程;刪減概念語法隱喻和情態(tài)隱喻,使用一致式表達(dá)。本研究啟示:我國英語教學(xué)應(yīng)根據(jù)教學(xué)目標(biāo)及英語學(xué)習(xí)者現(xiàn)有水平采用原著或不同級別的簡寫本作為教學(xué)輔助材料。
[Abstract]:On the basis of functional stylistics, this study makes a comparative analysis of Gulliver's travels and their abbreviations from the perspectives of transitivity system and grammatical metaphor.With the help of UAM Corpus Tool 3.3, the process of target corpus, conceptual grammatical metaphor and interpersonal grammatical metaphor are annotated and counted.The order is: material process 55.52, mental process 15.9595, relationship process 15.34, verbal process 10.28, process of existence 1.99, behavioral process 0.92.This shows that the relational process is more prominent in the original book, and the psychological process is more prominent in the shorthand.The relationship process and the existence process accounted for 7.73% and 76.92%, respectively.About 60% of the speech and behavior processes in the original book were deleted from the shorthand and about 40% were retained in the shorthand.The frequency of use of conceptual grammatical metaphors in the original works is 29.85% and 16.67.2% respectively, which is higher than that in the shorthand book 0.92%. Most of the conceptual grammatical metaphors in the original book are deleted or converted into the corresponding consistent form in the shorthand.Among them, 57.14% were deleted from the shorthand, 39.68% were converted into consistent form in the shorthand, only 3.17% were retained, and some new conceptual grammatical metaphors appeared in the shorthand.There are a few modal metaphors in both the original and the abbreviations, but the frequency of using modal metaphors in the abbreviations is 1.53) more than 1.00 in the original works.It accounts for 90% of the total number of modal metaphors in abbreviations.There are no mood metaphors in the original and abbreviated books.These findings suggest that the editors adopt a variety of strategies to simplify the original to meet the needs of English learners.These strategies include the process of deletion and transitivity, the deletion of conceptual grammatical metaphors and modal metaphors, and the use of consistent expressions.The implications of this study are as follows: English teaching in China should be based on the teaching objectives and the current level of English learners to use the original or different levels of abbreviations as teaching aids.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：江蘇大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：H315;H314

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 宋成方;劉世生;;功能文體學(xué)研究的新進(jìn)展[J];現(xiàn)代外語;2015年02期

2 黃國文;劉衍;;語言復(fù)雜性的功能語言學(xué)研究——《愛麗絲漫游奇遇記》原著與簡寫本難易程度比較[J];外語教學(xué);2015年02期

3 陳瑜敏;黃國文;;語法隱喻框架下英語文學(xué)原著與簡寫本易讀度研究[J];外語教學(xué)與研究;2014年06期

4 姜文東;任娟;;基于語料庫的《格列佛游記》文本詞匯特征分析[J];山東廣播電視大學(xué)學(xué)報;2013年02期

5 王雪;;從主位結(jié)構(gòu)角度對比分析《格列佛游記》原本及其簡寫本[J];長春理工大學(xué)學(xué)報;2012年02期

6 聶素民;;從關(guān)聯(lián)理論視角看諷刺的差異——比較《格列佛游記》與《動物農(nóng)莊》的諷刺效果[J];江漢論壇;2010年10期

7 王欣;;系統(tǒng)功能視域中語篇分析的文體觀[J];外語學(xué)刊;2009年04期

8 潘璐;;文學(xué)文本的寫作與再寫作:原著與簡寫本關(guān)系的文體學(xué)研究[J];外語教學(xué);2008年03期

9 朱永生;;名詞化、動詞化與語法隱喻[J];外語教學(xué)與研究;2006年02期

10 申丹;;及物性系統(tǒng)與深層象征意義——休斯《在路上》的文體分析[J];外語教學(xué)與研究;2006年01期

，

本文編號：1726112