【摘要】： 學(xué)術(shù)寫作的理論研究表明:學(xué)術(shù)論文是科學(xué)研究成果的重要表現(xiàn)形態(tài),是衡量研究者學(xué)術(shù)造詣及水平高低的最重要、最公正、最客觀的尺度。毋庸置疑,學(xué)術(shù)論文的寫作越來(lái)越受到廣大學(xué)者的重視,對(duì)這種特定的書面語(yǔ)篇的研究也已經(jīng)展開(kāi)。傳統(tǒng)觀點(diǎn)認(rèn)為,科研報(bào)道是客觀的、非人稱的。但近幾年的研究表明,在學(xué)術(shù)寫作中,作者本人也參與到整個(gè)創(chuàng)作過(guò)程之中。一方面他要報(bào)告自己的研究成果,闡述自己對(duì)某一問(wèn)題的觀點(diǎn)和看法以及展現(xiàn)自己對(duì)某一領(lǐng)域的創(chuàng)新貢獻(xiàn);另一方面他要建構(gòu)自己的主體地位,使其研究成果具有說(shuō)服力和可信度。作為作者自己明顯的指稱----自我指代在文章中常常與一些非人稱結(jié)構(gòu)伴隨出現(xiàn),并被看成一種修辭策略,學(xué)者可用以體現(xiàn)自己的主體地位,概述其具體的研究貢獻(xiàn)。因此,當(dāng)強(qiáng)調(diào)作者在學(xué)術(shù)語(yǔ)篇中的貢獻(xiàn)時(shí),第一人稱代詞的使用成為一種強(qiáng)有力的手段。然而迄今為止,我們對(duì)第一人稱代詞這種語(yǔ)言策略在不同文化、不同學(xué)科的學(xué)術(shù)語(yǔ)篇中如何使用及表達(dá)的功能所知甚少。 近年來(lái),越來(lái)越多的國(guó)外學(xué)者和語(yǔ)言學(xué)家對(duì)第一人稱代詞這種語(yǔ)言策略在學(xué)術(shù)寫作中的使用產(chǎn)生了濃厚的興趣,并從不同的角度進(jìn)行了研究。然而,在中國(guó)這樣的研究相對(duì)較少。筆者進(jìn)行此類研究主要基于以下幾點(diǎn)原因:首先,與國(guó)外學(xué)者廣泛而深入的研究相比,中國(guó)學(xué)者對(duì)學(xué)術(shù)語(yǔ)篇中第一人稱代詞的系統(tǒng)研究卻相當(dāng)有限。因此,在這一領(lǐng)域有廣泛的研究空間,就是這一理由激發(fā)了我對(duì)此問(wèn)題的思考。其次,國(guó)內(nèi)的研究成果顯示,第一人稱代詞的實(shí)證研究不多,尤其是基于真實(shí)語(yǔ)料的定量定性分析則更少�？紤]到這些因素,我認(rèn)為從語(yǔ)料庫(kù)語(yǔ)言學(xué)的角度出發(fā)研究這一語(yǔ)言現(xiàn)象將是一個(gè)有意義的嘗試。第三,盡管中國(guó)學(xué)者已經(jīng)開(kāi)始從不同的角度研究第一人稱代詞,但對(duì)不同學(xué)科學(xué)術(shù)論文中第一人稱代詞使用的對(duì)比分析卻寥寥無(wú)幾,更不用說(shuō)對(duì)其在學(xué)術(shù)論文引言部分使用情況的跨文化比較了。第四,到現(xiàn)在為止,還沒(méi)有人對(duì)第一人稱代詞在博士論文中的使用進(jìn)行過(guò)研究。這一空白需要研究者填補(bǔ)。此外,基于學(xué)術(shù)寫作教學(xué)的考慮。了解不同學(xué)科第一人稱代詞使用的差異,將有利于學(xué)生及研究人員寫作學(xué)術(shù)論文,特別是引言部分的寫作。最后,受到假說(shuō)的驅(qū)動(dòng)。我設(shè)想文化差異可能導(dǎo)致以英語(yǔ)為其母語(yǔ)的外國(guó)學(xué)者使用第一人稱代詞,特別是第一人稱代詞的單數(shù)形式比中國(guó)學(xué)者要多。為了證明我提出的假設(shè),此項(xiàng)研究將逐步展開(kāi)。 本文是一種定量和定性相結(jié)合的實(shí)證研究,主要探討第一人稱代詞在不同文化背景下的學(xué)術(shù)論文中使用情況以及表達(dá)的功能。眾所周知,學(xué)術(shù)論文通常都遵循一種標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的正式結(jié)構(gòu),即引言,方法,結(jié)果和結(jié)論。作為不可或缺的一部分---引言主要說(shuō)明研究工作的目的、范圍、相關(guān)領(lǐng)域的前人工作和知識(shí)空白、理論基礎(chǔ)和分析、研究設(shè)想、研究方法、預(yù)期結(jié)果以及意義和貢獻(xiàn)等等,一個(gè)好的引言引導(dǎo)讀者快速便捷的了解整個(gè)研究?jī)?nèi)容。鑒于此,本文擬以數(shù)學(xué),教育學(xué)和語(yǔ)言學(xué)三門學(xué)科中外學(xué)者的博士學(xué)位論文引言部分為語(yǔ)料進(jìn)行共時(shí)的對(duì)比分析。研究者建立了一個(gè)學(xué)術(shù)論文引言部分共時(shí)語(yǔ)料庫(kù),由兩個(gè)子語(yǔ)料庫(kù)組成,即英語(yǔ)為其母語(yǔ)的外國(guó)學(xué)者博士論文引言部分語(yǔ)料庫(kù)(NES)和中國(guó)學(xué)者博士論文引言部分語(yǔ)料庫(kù)(NCS)。論文均選自中外高校博士學(xué)位論文全文數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù),隨機(jī)選出2006年度中國(guó)和外國(guó)學(xué)者的數(shù)學(xué)、教育學(xué)和語(yǔ)言學(xué)學(xué)位論文各15篇,共90篇組成語(yǔ)料庫(kù)。為了更好的展示英語(yǔ)學(xué)術(shù)論文中第一人稱代詞的使用情況,其外國(guó)作者均選自英美國(guó)家。之所以選擇數(shù)學(xué)、教育學(xué)和語(yǔ)言學(xué)進(jìn)行分析,其一是因?yàn)樗麄儊?lái)自人類社會(huì)三大類型科學(xué)即自然科學(xué)(數(shù)學(xué))、社會(huì)科學(xué)(教育學(xué))和人文科學(xué)(語(yǔ)言學(xué))(20世紀(jì)以后,西方已把人類社會(huì)三大類型科學(xué)劃分為自然科學(xué)、社會(huì)科學(xué)、人文科學(xué));其二是因?yàn)榈浆F(xiàn)在為止,除了語(yǔ)言學(xué)這門學(xué)科外,還沒(méi)有人對(duì)另外兩門學(xué)科學(xué)術(shù)論文中第一人稱代詞的使用進(jìn)行過(guò)研究。 本文試圖以功能語(yǔ)言學(xué)人際功能系統(tǒng)的人稱代詞子系統(tǒng)為理論框架,從共時(shí)的角度出發(fā)探討第一人稱代詞在中外高級(jí)學(xué)者撰寫的不同學(xué)科學(xué)術(shù)論文中使用的異同點(diǎn)及表達(dá)的功能,并通過(guò)對(duì)語(yǔ)料庫(kù)的實(shí)證研究揭示導(dǎo)致這種異同的原因。為了進(jìn)行更有意義的比較,我把研究范圍限制在第一人稱代詞的非包括性用法的研究,即用于專門指代作者本人的第一人稱代詞的研究。同時(shí)考慮到比較的平衡性,漢語(yǔ)的第一人稱代詞“我”“我們”細(xì)化為主語(yǔ)和賓語(yǔ)兩種用法�；诒疚牡难芯磕康�,筆者提出以下兩個(gè)主要問(wèn)題: 1.所選擇的第一人稱代詞每一形式在中外數(shù)學(xué),教育學(xué)和語(yǔ)言學(xué)的博士學(xué)位論文引言部分的出現(xiàn)頻率是多少?有哪些相同點(diǎn)和不同點(diǎn)及可能的原因?其中哪些形式出現(xiàn)頻率較高或較低? 2.中國(guó)學(xué)者和英語(yǔ)為其母語(yǔ)的外國(guó)學(xué)者在引言部分使用第一人稱代詞時(shí)表達(dá)的功能是什么? 本文采取定量和定性互為補(bǔ)充的研究方法。首先研究者用專業(yè)檢索工具Concordancer對(duì)所確定的第一人稱代詞逐一在幾組語(yǔ)料庫(kù)中進(jìn)行檢索,得到每個(gè)代詞形式在語(yǔ)料庫(kù)中出現(xiàn)的頻率。為了便于比較,將結(jié)果又轉(zhuǎn)化為10,000詞的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)語(yǔ)料庫(kù)的出現(xiàn)頻率。然后,通過(guò)對(duì)比第一人稱代詞的頻率來(lái)探討中外學(xué)者在不同學(xué)科學(xué)術(shù)論文引言部分使用的異同。對(duì)于學(xué)科之間以及中外學(xué)者使用第一人稱代詞時(shí)具有的差異性,研究者借助社科統(tǒng)計(jì)軟件包SPSS(13.0)中的卡方檢驗(yàn)計(jì)算差異的顯著性,并對(duì)二者的異同進(jìn)行了深入的定性分析。其研究結(jié)果如下: 1.通過(guò)對(duì)語(yǔ)料庫(kù)數(shù)據(jù)的對(duì)比分析發(fā)現(xiàn),英語(yǔ)為其母語(yǔ)的外國(guó)學(xué)者和中國(guó)學(xué)者在使用第一人稱代詞上確實(shí)存在著相似和差異。 2.總的看來(lái),第一人稱代詞的主格形式在兩個(gè)子語(yǔ)料庫(kù)中出現(xiàn)比例最高,分別占整個(gè)使用的第一人稱代詞的70.9 %和70 %。這可能歸因于它們代表的語(yǔ)義所指和語(yǔ)篇功能。第一人稱代詞的主格形式通常指代作者或讀者,是較強(qiáng)的作者自我指代形式。就其表達(dá)的功能而言,較之其它形式,它們是作者權(quán)威性和主體性最明顯的標(biāo)識(shí)。 3.在兩個(gè)子語(yǔ)料庫(kù)的數(shù)學(xué)學(xué)科中第一人稱代詞復(fù)數(shù)主格形式出現(xiàn)的頻率均最高,而單數(shù)主格形式出現(xiàn)頻率最低甚至為零。這也許是由于該學(xué)科屬于自然科學(xué)領(lǐng)域,在科研活動(dòng)中作者為了建立實(shí)證研究的一致性,會(huì)使用第一人稱復(fù)數(shù)而不是單數(shù)形式來(lái)淡化其個(gè)人在研究中的作用,以增強(qiáng)研究的客觀性和可信度。 4.第一人稱代詞賓格形式在兩個(gè)子語(yǔ)料庫(kù)中的使用相當(dāng)稀少,每一萬(wàn)詞中才出現(xiàn)一到兩個(gè),可以看出學(xué)術(shù)論文的作者在指代自己時(shí)這些形式是不受青睞的。 5.所選擇的第一人稱代詞每一形式均出現(xiàn)在兩個(gè)子語(yǔ)料庫(kù)的教育學(xué)學(xué)科中。這可能意味著第一人稱代詞在主觀性很強(qiáng)的社會(huì)科學(xué)---教育學(xué)中充當(dāng)較好的修辭策略,實(shí)現(xiàn)作者表達(dá)自己觀點(diǎn)、突出對(duì)本學(xué)科貢獻(xiàn)、達(dá)到與讀者進(jìn)行學(xué)術(shù)交流的目的。 6.通過(guò)對(duì)學(xué)科間顯著性差異的定性分析,我發(fā)現(xiàn)兩個(gè)子語(yǔ)料庫(kù)中數(shù)學(xué)和教育學(xué)在第一人稱代詞使用頻率上存在著顯著差別,這是由自然科學(xué)和社會(huì)科學(xué)對(duì)學(xué)術(shù)論文的寫作不同的要求造成的。 7.卡方檢驗(yàn)的結(jié)果證明在使用第一人稱代詞上兩個(gè)子語(yǔ)料庫(kù)間確實(shí)存在明顯差異。這表明,以英語(yǔ)為其母語(yǔ)的學(xué)者較之他們的中國(guó)同行在學(xué)術(shù)寫作中更愿意突顯自己的主體性。 8.經(jīng)比較,第一人稱代詞的主格形式在兩子語(yǔ)料庫(kù)中的使用是不同的。以英語(yǔ)為其母語(yǔ)的學(xué)者使用第一人稱代詞單數(shù)遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)多于復(fù)數(shù),而中國(guó)學(xué)者卻恰恰相反。原因在于英語(yǔ)所屬文化體系提倡個(gè)人主義,而中國(guó)文化的典型特征是集體主義。這反映在作者的自我指代上就表現(xiàn)為第一人稱代詞的單復(fù)數(shù)的使用差異。 9.對(duì)比語(yǔ)料庫(kù)可顯見(jiàn),第一人稱代詞的單數(shù)形式在英語(yǔ)為母語(yǔ)的學(xué)者論文中出現(xiàn)的頻率比中國(guó)學(xué)者的論文要高出許多,足以說(shuō)明前者在指代自我時(shí)比后者更喜歡用第一人稱代詞的單數(shù)形式。 10.此外還發(fā)現(xiàn),在中國(guó)學(xué)者的語(yǔ)料庫(kù)中“我的”“我們的”幾乎很少出現(xiàn),而英語(yǔ)為其母語(yǔ)的外國(guó)學(xué)者卻使用了一定數(shù)量的第一人稱代詞的所有格形式,這反映了兩種語(yǔ)言在語(yǔ)法上的一些差異。 11.對(duì)本研究中第一人稱代詞的主要形式在學(xué)術(shù)語(yǔ)篇引言部分表達(dá)的功能總結(jié)如下: 1)作者用以陳述寫作目的,表明寫作意圖,并為讀者提供一目了然的文本框架。 2)幫助作者描述研究步驟,闡明其使用的研究方法,展示對(duì)文本的整合能力。 3)幫助作者表達(dá)觀點(diǎn),力求在研究性文章中明確地提出自己的想法或觀點(diǎn),以此加強(qiáng)其陳述的說(shuō)服力。 4)用來(lái)提出假設(shè)或展示作者對(duì)本研究的期望,使讀者清晰了解研究者的構(gòu)想。綜上所述,學(xué)術(shù)論文中第一人稱代詞的使用確實(shí)存在著跨文化和學(xué)科之間的差異,值得研究者的關(guān)注。兩個(gè)子語(yǔ)料庫(kù)的研究結(jié)果表明第一人稱代詞在博士論文中的使用不僅受到作者所屬學(xué)科的限制,同時(shí)也受特定文化語(yǔ)境的影響。此外,分析表明第一人稱代詞在引言部分的使用能幫助作者表達(dá)觀點(diǎn),闡述研究方法,陳述寫作目的,突顯自己的創(chuàng)新貢獻(xiàn),以此達(dá)到提升其在語(yǔ)篇中的主體地位的目的。 理論和方法上,從語(yǔ)料庫(kù)語(yǔ)言學(xué)角度出發(fā)對(duì)第一人稱代詞在兩種文化、不同學(xué)科學(xué)術(shù)論文引言部分的使用進(jìn)行共時(shí)的實(shí)證研究,為這一領(lǐng)域的研究提供了一些有價(jià)值的數(shù)據(jù)參考,并作為國(guó)內(nèi)相關(guān)研究的一種補(bǔ)充。 教學(xué)上,通過(guò)真實(shí)語(yǔ)料的對(duì)比分析,使國(guó)內(nèi)科研人員和研究生對(duì)第一人稱代詞在學(xué)術(shù)語(yǔ)篇中的使用情況有了較清晰的了解,特別是對(duì)數(shù)學(xué)、教育學(xué)和語(yǔ)言學(xué)等學(xué)科的學(xué)術(shù)寫作提供一些有益的幫助。更重要的是,通過(guò)展示英語(yǔ)為其母語(yǔ)的外國(guó)學(xué)者在學(xué)術(shù)論文中使用第一人稱代詞的情況,中國(guó)高級(jí)英語(yǔ)學(xué)習(xí)者可以更好地理解并有效地撰寫相關(guān)英語(yǔ)文章,以期被國(guó)際上的主流學(xué)術(shù)刊物所接受,達(dá)到國(guó)與國(guó)之間學(xué)術(shù)交流的目的。 然而需要指出的是,由于時(shí)間和水平的限制,該論文不可避免存在一些缺點(diǎn)和不足,懇請(qǐng)專家學(xué)者進(jìn)行批評(píng)指正。
[Abstract]:Theoretical research on academic writing shows that academic papers are an important manifestation of scientific research achievements and the most important, fair and objective yardstick to measure the academic attainment and level of researchers. Kai. Traditionally, scientific research reports are objective and impersonal. However, recent studies have shown that in academic writing, the author himself participates in the whole creative process. On the one hand, he should construct his own subjectivity to make his research results convincing and credible. As the author's own obvious reference, self-reference often appears with some non-personal structures in his articles, and is regarded as a rhetorical strategy. Scholars can use it to embody their subjectivity and summarize their specific research contributions. Therefore, the use of first-person pronouns has become a powerful tool when emphasizing the author's contribution to academic discourse. However, up to now, little has been known about how the first-person pronouns are used and expressed in academic discourse of different cultures and disciplines.
In recent years, more and more foreign scholars and linguists have shown great interest in the use of first-person pronouns as a linguistic strategy in academic writing and have studied it from different perspectives. Compared with the extensive and in-depth study, the systematic study of the first-person pronouns in academic discourse by Chinese scholars is rather limited. Therefore, there is a wide range of research space in this field, which stimulates my thinking on this issue. Secondly, the domestic research results show that there are not many empirical studies on the first-person pronouns, especially the basic pronouns. Considering these factors, I think it would be a meaningful attempt to study this linguistic phenomenon from the perspective of corpus linguistics. Thirdly, although Chinese scholars have begun to study first-person pronouns from different perspectives, first-person pronouns in academic papers of different disciplines have been studied. Fourth, up to now, no one has studied the use of first-person pronouns in doctoral dissertations. This gap needs to be filled by researchers. Moreover, based on the consideration of teaching academic writing, no one knows. Finally, driven by the hypothesis, I envisage that cultural differences may lead to the use of first-person pronouns by English-speaking foreign scholars, especially in the singular form ratio of first-person pronouns. There are many scholars in China. In order to prove my hypothesis, this study will be carried out step by step.
As we all know, academic papers usually follow a standard formal structure, i.e. introduction, method, result and conclusion. As an indispensable part, introduction The introduction mainly explains the purpose, scope, previous work and knowledge gaps in related fields, theoretical basis and analysis, research assumptions, research methods, expected results, significance and contributions, etc. A good introduction guides readers to understand the whole research content quickly and conveniently. The introduction part of doctoral dissertations of Chinese and foreign scholars in different disciplines is a synchronic corpus, which consists of two sub-corpuses, namely, the introduction corpus of foreign scholars whose mother tongue is English (NES) and the introduction part of doctoral dissertations of Chinese scholars. Corpus (NCS). The dissertations were selected from the full-text database of doctoral dissertations in Chinese and foreign universities. Fifteen dissertations of Chinese and foreign scholars in 2006 were selected randomly, and 90 of them constituted a corpus. In order to better display the use of first-person pronouns in English academic papers, the foreign authors were selected from Britain and the United States. Country. One of the reasons for choosing mathematics, pedagogy and Linguistics for analysis is that they come from three major types of Science in human society: Natural Science (mathematics), social science (pedagogy) and Humanities (linguistics). Second, no one has studied the use of first-person pronouns in academic papers of two other disciplines except linguistics.
Based on the interpersonal pronoun subsystem of functional linguistics, this paper attempts to explore the similarities and differences in the use of first-person pronouns in academic papers of different disciplines written by senior Chinese and foreign scholars from a synchronic perspective, and to reveal the reasons for these differences through an empirical study of the corpus. In order to make a more meaningful comparison, I limit my study to the non-inclusive use of first-person pronouns, i.e. the study of first-person pronouns that refer specifically to the author himself. For the purpose of this study, the author raises the following two main questions:
1. What are the frequencies of each form of the first-person pronoun used in the introduction of doctoral dissertations in mathematics, pedagogy and Linguistics at home and abroad? What are the similarities and differences and possible reasons? Which of these forms appear more frequently or less frequently?
2. What are the functions of the first-person pronouns used by Chinese scholars and foreign scholars whose mother tongue is English?
This paper adopts a quantitative and qualitative complementary approach. Firstly, the researcher uses Concordancer, a professional retrieval tool, to retrieve the first-person pronouns one by one from several corpuses, and obtains the frequency of each pronoun form appearing in the corpus. Then, by comparing the frequencies of first-person pronouns, this paper explores the similarities and differences in the use of first-person pronouns by Chinese and foreign scholars in the introduction of academic papers of different disciplines. It also makes an in-depth qualitative analysis of the similarities and differences between the two.
1. Through a comparative analysis of the corpus data, it is found that there are similarities and differences in the use of first-person pronouns between English-speaking foreign scholars and Chinese scholars.
2. Generally speaking, the nominative form of the first-person pronoun is the highest in the two sub-corpuses, accounting for 70.9% and 70% of the first-person pronouns used in the whole corpus, respectively. This may be attributed to the semantic and textual functions they represent. The nominative form of the first-person pronoun usually refers to the author or the reader, and it is a stronger author's self-referential form. As far as the function of expression is concerned, they are the most obvious marks of authoritativeness and subjectivity than other forms.
3. The frequency of the first-person pronoun plural nominative form is the highest in the two sub-corpuses, while the frequency of the singular nominative form is the lowest or even zero. It is not a singular form to weaken the role of individuals in research, so as to enhance the objectivity and credibility of research.
4. The first-person pronoun object forms are rarely used in the two sub-corpuses. Only one or two of every ten thousand words appear. It can be seen that the authors of academic papers are not favored when referring to themselves.
5. Each form of the first-person pronoun selected appears in the pedagogical disciplines of the two sub-corpuses. This may mean that the first-person pronoun acts as a better rhetorical strategy in the highly subjective social sciences-pedagogy, realizing the author's expression of his own views, highlighting his contribution to the discipline, and achieving academic communication with readers. The purpose.
6. Through a qualitative analysis of the significant differences between disciplines, I find that there are significant differences in the frequency of first-person pronouns used by mathematics and Pedagogy in the two sub-corpuses, which is caused by the different requirements of natural and Social Sciences for academic paper writing.
7. Chi-square test results show that there are significant differences between the two sub-corpuses in the use of first-person pronouns. This shows that English-speaking students are more willing to highlight their subjectivity in academic writing than their Chinese counterparts.
8. By comparison, the use of the nominative form of first-person pronouns in the two corpuses is different. English-speaking scholars use far more singular first-person pronouns than plural pronouns, whereas Chinese scholars do the opposite. The reason is that the English-speaking cultural system advocates individualism, and the typical feature of Chinese culture is collectivism. This reflects the difference in the use of the singular plural of the first person pronouns in the author's self reference.
9. Contrastive corpus shows that the singular form of the first-person pronoun appears much more frequently in English-speaking academic papers than in Chinese academic papers, suggesting that the former prefers the singular form of the first-person pronoun to the latter when referring to the ego.
10. It is also found that "mine" and "ours" are seldom found in the corpus of Chinese scholars, while foreign scholars whose native language is English use a certain number of possessive forms of first-person pronouns, reflecting some differences in grammar between the two languages.
11. The main forms of the first-person pronouns in this study are summarized as follows:
1) the author states the purpose of writing, indicates the intention of writing, and provides readers with a clear text framework.
2) help authors describe research steps, clarify their research methods and demonstrate their ability to integrate texts.
3) Help the author to express his opinions and make every effort to put forward his own ideas or opinions clearly in the research articles so as to strengthen the persuasiveness of his statements.
To sum up, there are indeed cross-cultural and interdisciplinary differences in the use of first-person pronouns in academic papers, which deserve researchers'attention. In addition, the analysis shows that the use of first-person pronouns in the preface can help the author express his views, elaborate his research methods, state his writing aims and highlight his innovative contributions so as to enhance his subjectivity in the text. Objective.
Theoretically and methodologically, from the perspective of corpus linguistics, this paper makes a synchronic empirical study of the use of first-person pronouns in the introduction of academic papers in two cultures and different disciplines, which provides some useful information for the study of this field.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2008
【分類號(hào)】：H042

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 寶柱;“本文+動(dòng)作動(dòng)詞”漢英對(duì)比研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號(hào)：2192840