互文性指語(yǔ)篇中引用他人話語(yǔ)或包含其它語(yǔ)篇的片段。自這一概念提出以來(lái),學(xué)者們從結(jié)構(gòu)主義到解構(gòu)主義進(jìn)行了研究。論文以互文性的語(yǔ)用合作原則為理論框架,以中美文學(xué)學(xué)位論文文獻(xiàn)綜述部分為對(duì)象,采用語(yǔ)料庫(kù)研究法和對(duì)比分析法,輔以語(yǔ)料庫(kù)工具Wmatrix,探究轉(zhuǎn)述動(dòng)詞和互文形式的使用及頻率,進(jìn)而從質(zhì)、量等準(zhǔn)則分析其言語(yǔ)行為功能,以揭示所隱藏的文化價(jià)值觀關(guān)系。研究發(fā)現(xiàn)如下:(1)從轉(zhuǎn)述動(dòng)詞的使用來(lái)看,中美雙方分別使用了50種和52種轉(zhuǎn)述動(dòng)詞。極性上,在積極動(dòng)詞的使用方面,中美雙方所占比例近似相同;在消極動(dòng)詞的使用方面,美方所占比例明顯高于中方;在中性動(dòng)詞的使用方面,中方所占比例明顯高于美方。通過(guò)對(duì)轉(zhuǎn)述動(dòng)詞的研究,可以歸納出互文形式的語(yǔ)用類型及分布。其中,中美雙方使用頻率最高的形式為言語(yǔ)行為轉(zhuǎn)述、思維行為轉(zhuǎn)述和提及,而自由間接引語(yǔ)的使用頻率較低。差異方面,中方突出使用思維行為轉(zhuǎn)述、直接引語(yǔ)和人物提及,而美方則突出使用言語(yǔ)行為轉(zhuǎn)述,間接引語(yǔ)和文本提及。(2)互文性異同體現(xiàn)了雙方語(yǔ)用功能的異同性。從合作原則的四條準(zhǔn)則來(lái)看,雙方在提及、直接引語(yǔ)和自由直接引語(yǔ)的使用遵循了質(zhì)和方式的準(zhǔn)則,提高了清晰性和可信度,避...

【文章頁(yè)數(shù)】：104 頁(yè)

【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士

【文章目錄】：
Acknowledgements
摘要
ABSTRACT
Chapter One INTRODUCTION
    1.1 Background of the Study
    1.2 Objectives of the Study
    1.3 Significance of the Thesis
    1.4 Outline of the Thesis
Chapter Two LITERATURE REVIEW
    2.1 Theoretical Study of Intertextuality
        2.1.1 Structural views
        2.1.2 Post-structural views
        2.1.3 Deconstructional views
        2.1.4 Pragmatic view and cross-cultural view
    2.2 Practical Study of Intertextuality
        2.2.1 Applied research in literature
        2.2.2 Applied research in translation
        2.2.3 Applied research in linguistics
    2.3 Summary
Chapter Three THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
    3.1 Pragmatic Classification of Intertextuality
        3.1.1 Direct speech
        3.1.2 Indirect speech
        3.1.3 Free direct speech
        3.1.4 Free indirect speech
        3.1.5 Narrative report of speech/ thought act
        3.1.6 Mention
    3.2 Pragmatic Functions of Intertextuality
        3.2.1 For informativeness of speech with the maxim of quantity
        3.2.2 For credibility of speech with the maxim of quality
        3.2.3 For clarity of speech with the maxim of manner
        3.2.4 For relevance of speech with the maxim of relation
    3.3 Cross-Cultural Contrast of Pragmatic Functions
        3.3.1 Masculinity versus femininity
        3.3.2 Power distance
        3.3.3 Uncertainty avoidance
        3.3.4 Individualism versus collectivism
    3.4 Summary
Chapter Four RESEARCH DESIGN
    4.1 Research Questions
    4.2 Research Method and Instrument
    4.3 Research Procedures
        4.3.1 Corpus collection
        4.3.2 Corpus processing and analysis
Chapter Five RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
    5.1 Distribution of Reporting Verbs and Intertextual Forms in Two Corpora
        5.1.1 Similarities of reporting verbs and intertextual forms
        5.1.2 Differences of reporting verbs and intertextual forms
    5.2 Pragmatic Interpretation of the Distribution in Two Corpora
        5.2.1 Pragmatic interpretation of the similarities in two corpora
        5.2.2 Pragmatic interpretation of the differences in two corpora
    5.3 Cross-cultural Explanation of Pragmatic Functions
        5.3.1 Masculinity versus femininity
        5.3.2 Power distance
        5.3.3 Uncertainty avoidance
        5.3.4 Individualism versus collectivism
    5.4 Summary
Chapter Six CONCLUSION
    6.1 Major Findings of the Study
    6.2 Limitations of this Thesis
    6.3 Suggestions for Future Research
References
Publications



本文編號(hào)：3984440