本文選題：言外構(gòu)式 + 詞匯構(gòu)式模型　； 參考：《江南大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：言外構(gòu)式是認(rèn)知語言學(xué)和語用學(xué)結(jié)合的產(chǎn)物,更確切地說是構(gòu)式語法理論與言語行為理論的聯(lián)姻。言外行為通常指間接言語行為(ISA),是語用學(xué)的經(jīng)典課題之一。自二十世紀(jì)90年代末,言外行為研究出現(xiàn)了認(rèn)知轉(zhuǎn)向。最突出的表現(xiàn)在于Panther和Thornburg(1997,1998)建立了用于分析間接言語行為的言外場境認(rèn)知模型(簡稱“場境理論”)。在場境理論的啟發(fā)下,越來越多的學(xué)者開始關(guān)注言外行為的規(guī)約化和構(gòu)式化研究,言外構(gòu)式研究應(yīng)運(yùn)而生。國外學(xué)者在研究詞匯構(gòu)式模型中,將第三層的構(gòu)式視為言外構(gòu)式并將其定義為由固定成分和可變成分組成的,用來傳達(dá)特定言外之義的規(guī)約化序列(Ruiz de MendozaBaicchi,2007;MairalRuiz de Mendoza,2008,2009;BaicchiRuiz de Mendoza,2011;PerezRuiz de Mendoza,2011;Del Campo,2013)。長期以來,言外構(gòu)式作為語言研究的一方面,受到了認(rèn)知語言學(xué)家的廣泛關(guān)注,但是這些研究側(cè)重于詞匯構(gòu)式模型(LCM)下的理論研究,而很少涉及實證研究(Del Campo,2013)。而已有實證研究中,對語言實現(xiàn)的研究中,Perez(2001)未將言語行為的語言實現(xiàn)看作是構(gòu)式,而Del Campo(2013)在提取言外構(gòu)式時方法過于主觀,因此,有必要使用更為客觀的方法來提取言外構(gòu)式。此外,很少有研究涉及到言外構(gòu)式的內(nèi)部機(jī)制,尤其是其生成動因及認(rèn)知基礎(chǔ)。為了解決以上問題,本研究將深入了解言外構(gòu)式的語言實現(xiàn)、生成動因和認(rèn)知基礎(chǔ),由于構(gòu)式按其句子類型可以分為陳述句、疑問句和祈使句構(gòu)式,那么對于言外構(gòu)式內(nèi)部機(jī)制的研究則需探討三類構(gòu)式的特征,據(jù)此,我們根據(jù)Del Campo(2013)的著作,依據(jù)基本的句子類型(祈使句、陳述句和疑問句),對應(yīng)地選取三種出現(xiàn)頻率較高的言語行為(命令、建議和提供)作為研究對象,通過語料庫檢索其實現(xiàn)方式,進(jìn)而研究言外構(gòu)式生成動因以及認(rèn)知基礎(chǔ)。本研究以詞匯構(gòu)式模型為理論框架,以COCA(美國當(dāng)代英語語料庫)為語料來源,以三種言語行為動詞為檢索項來提取對應(yīng)的言語行為例句,并從這些例句中提取言外構(gòu)式,通過對這些言外構(gòu)式進(jìn)行定性和定量的樣本分析,嘗試回答以下幾個問題:1)命令、建議和提供言語行為的語言實現(xiàn)方式有哪些?2)言外構(gòu)式實現(xiàn)方式的特征是什么?是否有相似或不同之處,若有相似或不同,產(chǎn)生的動因是什么?3)言外構(gòu)式的認(rèn)知基礎(chǔ)是什么?為了回答上述問題,本文在詞匯構(gòu)式模型的指導(dǎo)下,基于解釋適切性原則(Mendoza,2014),首先對三種言語行為的語義特征進(jìn)而分析,進(jìn)而探討其語言實現(xiàn)方式,并對這些言外構(gòu)式進(jìn)行描寫、解釋和說明。研究結(jié)果顯示:(1)由于祈使句的意義條件與命令言語行為的強(qiáng)制性特征一致,所以在執(zhí)行命令性言語行為時能夠示例命令言語行為的定義成分。陳述句句子類型由于能夠展示一個要實現(xiàn)的命題,因此,建議言語行為采用陳述句構(gòu)式時能夠給予聽話者以更多的選擇性。疑問句句子類型的開放性本質(zhì)賦予了提供言語行為中聽話者更多的選擇性,因此,疑問構(gòu)式能夠表述詳述程度較高的提供構(gòu)式。此外,對于表述程度較低的言外構(gòu)式,其意義的識解還需要借助一些語言機(jī)制對其進(jìn)行編碼。而對語言實現(xiàn)的研究也驗證了:構(gòu)式是形意的配對體,形式激活意義,意義由形式表示;言語行為的語言實現(xiàn)是轉(zhuǎn)喻激活相應(yīng)的高層情景認(rèn)知模型的相關(guān)部分而實現(xiàn);根據(jù)構(gòu)式示例高層情景認(rèn)知模型參數(shù)的數(shù)量決定其不同程度的規(guī)約性。(2)語言實現(xiàn)的研究表明:1)一種語言功能對應(yīng)多種語言實現(xiàn),即一種言語行為可以由多個形式來表達(dá)。這一特征的生成動因是認(rèn)知識解。認(rèn)知主體采用不同的識解角度來觀察同一情景或事件會產(chǎn)生不同的識解,使用不同的語言表達(dá)。2)同類言外構(gòu)式中都包含有不同詳述程度的構(gòu)式。弱勢字面假說理論下,每種句子類型都可以表達(dá)不同的言外值。句子類型和言語行為的兼容性導(dǎo)致默認(rèn)解讀。三種句子類型的默認(rèn)值,在不改變言外之意的情況下,都可以通過使用不同的語言機(jī)制來表示,這就導(dǎo)致了不同詳述程度構(gòu)式的存在。3)相比陳述句構(gòu)式和疑問句構(gòu)式,祈使句構(gòu)式的構(gòu)式數(shù)量最少,這一特征的原因是弱勢字面語力假說下,陳述句和疑問句句子類型的開放程度要大于祈使句句子類型,因此前兩者可以使用更多的語言機(jī)制來表示言語行為,而后者可以使用的語言機(jī)制有限。4)每類構(gòu)式所使用的緩和和強(qiáng)化機(jī)制不同。這一特征產(chǎn)生的原因是基于禮貌原則,為了不傷害講話者,陳述和疑問類構(gòu)式更多使用緩和機(jī)制來減輕句子的語力,盡管祈使類構(gòu)式更多的使用了強(qiáng)化機(jī)制來時聽話者執(zhí)行某一行為,但是基于禮貌原則,講話者也可以不必使用過于嚴(yán)厲的句子,也可使用溫和的句子來執(zhí)行某一行為。(3)在言外構(gòu)式的識解過程中,對于需要推理的以言行事行為,轉(zhuǎn)喻擴(kuò)展和縮減為言外構(gòu)式的理解和識解提供了詳細(xì)的信息。轉(zhuǎn)喻擴(kuò)展過程中,言外構(gòu)式激活整個情景認(rèn)知模型,轉(zhuǎn)喻縮減使得言外構(gòu)式激活凸顯的部分并產(chǎn)生言外之意的識解。而在規(guī)約化構(gòu)式中,構(gòu)式可以直接激活言外之意,不需要轉(zhuǎn)喻的作用。類似地含有施為動詞的構(gòu)式也不需要轉(zhuǎn)喻,因為沒有推理的需要,而是直接激活。轉(zhuǎn)喻和隱喻并不是孤立毫無關(guān)系的,隱喻中的關(guān)聯(lián)能夠解釋場境中非事件成分與事件成分間的轉(zhuǎn)喻關(guān)系。在轉(zhuǎn)喻縮減過程中,參數(shù)化操作使得次域凸顯并執(zhí)行具體的行為。本研究以詞匯構(gòu)式模型為理論框架,探討了命令、建議和提議言語行為的語言實現(xiàn)方式,進(jìn)而總結(jié)出言外構(gòu)式語言實現(xiàn)的特征及其生成動因,最后探討了言外構(gòu)式的認(rèn)知基礎(chǔ)。此外,對于言外構(gòu)式的研究有利于挖掘構(gòu)式語法理論的應(yīng)用能力,促進(jìn)學(xué)科生態(tài)的良性發(fā)展。而對言語行為的全面研究和解釋對發(fā)展語用學(xué)的傳統(tǒng)經(jīng)典話題,大有裨益。除此之外,對于言語行為語言實現(xiàn)方式的研究有益于交流的多樣化,進(jìn)而有利于日常人際交流的順利進(jìn)行。
[Abstract]:The exterior structure is the product of the combination of cognitive linguistics and pragmatics, more specifically the marriage of the theory of constructional grammar and the theory of speech act. The outspoken behavior is usually one of the classical subjects of Pragmatics (ISA). From the end of the 90s twentieth Century, the study of the study of the outspoken behavior appeared in the cognitive turn. The most prominent manifestation was the Pant. Her and Thornburg (19971998) set up a linguistic field cognitive model for the analysis of indirect speech acts ("field theory"). Inspired by the field theory, more and more scholars began to pay attention to the study of the protocol and structure of the behavior of the speech. The third layer structure is regarded as an external structure and is defined as a regular sequence (Ruiz de MendozaBaicchi, 2007; MairalRuiz de Mendoza, 20082009; BaicchiRuiz de Mendoza, 2011; PerezRuiz de Mendoza, 2011; 2013). As one aspect of language research, style is widely concerned by cognitive linguists, but these studies focus on the theoretical research under the lexical model (LCM), and rarely involve empirical research (Del Campo, 2013). In empirical research, Perez (2001) does not consider the language realization of speech act as a structure in the study of language realization. Del Campo (2013) is too subjective to extract the outer structure, so it is necessary to use a more objective method to extract the external structure. In addition, few studies involve the internal mechanism of the outer structure, especially its generating motivation and cognitive basis. In order to solve the above problems, this study will be deeply aware of the language of the language. Realizing, generating motivation and cognitive basis, because the structure can be divided into declarative sentences, interrogative sentences and imperative sentence structures according to their sentence types, the study of the internal mechanism of the outer structure of the three types of structures should be discussed. According to this, we are based on the works of Del Campo (2013), according to the basic sentence types (imperative, declarative and interrogative sentences), It selects three higher frequency speech acts (orders, suggestions and offers) as the research object, retrieves its realization through corpus, and then studies the motivation and cognitive basis of the formation of the utterance. This study takes the lexical model as the theoretical framework, and uses the COCA (American Contemporary English Corpus) as the source of the corpus, and three kinds of words. The verbal behavior verbs are the retrieval items to extract the corresponding examples of speech acts, and extract the external constructions from these examples. Through the qualitative and quantitative analysis of these expressions, we try to answer the following questions: 1) what are the commands, suggestions and speech implementations of speech acts? 2) the special expression of the utterance. What are the signs? Whether there are similarities or differences, what are the causes of the similarity or difference? 3) what is the cognitive basis for the external structure? In order to answer the above questions, this paper, under the guidance of the lexical structure model, based on the interpretation of the principle of appropriateness (Mendoza, 2014), first analyzes the semantic features of the three speech acts, and then, then, the semantic features of the three speech acts are then analyzed. The results show that: (1) because the meaning condition of the imperative sentence is consistent with the mandatory characteristics of the command speech act, the definition of the example command speech act can be given when the imperative speech act is executed. To show a proposition to be realized, it is suggested that speech act can be given to the listener more selectively when using a statement structure. The open nature of the interrogative sentence type gives more selectivity to the listener in the speech act. Therefore, the interrogative expression can express the detailed description of the provision. In addition, The meaning understanding also needs to be encoded with some language mechanisms. The study of language realization also proves that the structure is the pairing body of the form and meaning, the form is activated and the meaning is expressed by the form; the language realization of the speech act is the correlation of the corresponding high-level situational cognitive model of the metonymy activation. Part of it is realized; according to the number of parameters of the cognitive model of high level Situational Cognition Model of the structure example, the specification of different degrees is determined. (2) the study of language realization shows that 1) a language function corresponds to multi language realization, that is, a speech act can be expressed in many forms. The same construal angle to observe the same situation or event will produce different construal and use different language to express.2) the same kind of outer structure contains different constructional expressions. Under the theory of disadvantaged literal hypothesis, each sentence type can express different external values. The compatibility of sentence types and speech behavior leads to the default solution. The default value of the three sentence types can be expressed by using different language mechanisms without changing the meaning of the words. This leads to the existence of the existence of.3 in different detailed constructions. Compared with the declarative sentence structure and the interrogative sentence structure, the structure number of the imperative sentence is the least. The reason is the weak literal language force false reason. As a result, the openness of the declarative and interrogative sentence types is greater than the imperative sentence type. Therefore, the former two can use more language mechanisms to represent speech behavior, and the latter can use the language mechanism limited.4). The relaxation and reinforcement mechanism used in each category is different. The reason is based on the politeness original. In order not to harm the speaker, the statement and the interrogative structure are more used to mitigate the force of the sentence. Although the imperative category uses more strengthening mechanisms to perform a certain act, the speaker can not use a strict sentence or use a mild sentence based on the politeness principle. (3) in the process of the interpretation of the external structure, a detailed information is provided for the understanding and construal of the speech act, the metonymy extension and the reduction to the outer structure. In the metonymy extension, the outer structure activates the whole situational cognitive model, and the metonymy reduction makes the part of the prominence of the expression of the expression of the speech. In the formative form, the structure can directly activate the meaning, not the function of metonymy. Similarly, the constructions containing the applied verbs do not need metonymy, because there is no need for reasoning, but direct activation. Metonymy and metaphor are not isolated and unrelated, and the relevance in metaphor can explain the middle of the field. The metonymy relationship between event components and event components. In the process of metonymy reduction, the parameterized operation makes the sub domain highlight and perform specific behavior. This study uses the lexical model as the theoretical framework to explore the language realization of the command, suggestion and proposed speech act, and then summarizes the characteristics of the realization of the utterance language and its birth. In addition, the study of utterance is beneficial to mining the application ability of the constructional grammar theory and promoting the benign development of the subject ecology. The comprehensive study and interpretation of speech act will be of great benefit to the development of the traditional classical questions of pragmatics. The study of ways of realization is beneficial to the diversification of communication and is conducive to the smooth progress of daily interpersonal communication.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：江南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：H314.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 谷峪;林正軍;;WAY構(gòu)式高能產(chǎn)性的范疇化網(wǎng)絡(luò)擴(kuò)展機(jī)制研究[J];西安外國語大學(xué)學(xué)報;2017年01期

2 張瀟尹;熊紅芝;;話語禮貌理論視角下的中日“請求—拒絕”行為對比研究[J];浙江外國語學(xué)院學(xué)報;2017年01期

3 張克定;;祈使性條件構(gòu)式的言者意圖及其動因[J];外語教學(xué)與研究;2016年05期

4 馮紹鋒;馮志偉;;間接言語行為多維視角研究[J];魯東大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2015年03期

5 楊坤;;認(rèn)知構(gòu)式語法的基本思想及最新發(fā)展[J];西南大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2015年01期

6 鄒春玲;王浩然;;言外轉(zhuǎn)喻屬性模式的微觀操作層面分析[J];外語學(xué)刊;2014年01期

7 鄒春玲;;“XISY”言外轉(zhuǎn)喻構(gòu)式論證[J];外語學(xué)刊;2012年05期

8 劉莉;鄒春玲;;言外轉(zhuǎn)喻“屬性強(qiáng)加聯(lián)想”模式的合理性分析[J];外語學(xué)刊;2011年06期

9 侯建波;;從詞匯到構(gòu)式——LCM模式評述[J];北京第二外國語學(xué)院學(xué)報;2011年02期

10 陳香蘭;申丹;;轉(zhuǎn)喻與語境:“What’s X doing Y?”構(gòu)式轉(zhuǎn)喻思維的限制性因素[J];外語教學(xué)與研究;2010年02期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 李秀娟;基于語料庫的言外構(gòu)式的語用化研究[D];四川外國語大學(xué);2014年

，

本文編號：1996560