【摘要】：1965年，美國(guó)學(xué)者L. A.扎德(Zadeh)提出了模糊理論，并把它引入到了語(yǔ)言學(xué)研究領(lǐng)域。模糊限制語(yǔ)是語(yǔ)言學(xué)習(xí)和使用過(guò)程中的普遍現(xiàn)象，它作為模糊語(yǔ)的一部分，被認(rèn)為是最普遍，最典型，最具有研究?jī)r(jià)值的模糊語(yǔ)言。眾多學(xué)者對(duì)模糊限制語(yǔ)的分類、特征、語(yǔ)用特點(diǎn)，在書(shū)面語(yǔ)、口語(yǔ)中的應(yīng)用等進(jìn)行了研究，目前對(duì)它的研究大多集中在新聞?wù)Z篇、廣告語(yǔ)、政治訪談里，涉及英語(yǔ)求職信的研究很少，涉及兩種語(yǔ)言的對(duì)比研究則更少。 本研究收集了中國(guó)英語(yǔ)學(xué)習(xí)者和英語(yǔ)本族語(yǔ)者的英文求職信各三十篇，在E.F.普林斯(E.F.Prince)(1982)提出的分類基礎(chǔ)上，通過(guò)分析對(duì)比，旨在總結(jié)出模糊限制語(yǔ)在中國(guó)英語(yǔ)學(xué)習(xí)者和英語(yǔ)本族語(yǔ)者的英文求職信中的出現(xiàn)頻率、比例特征等，此外，本文還基于合作原則和禮貌原則，對(duì)模糊限制語(yǔ)言的語(yǔ)用功能進(jìn)行了分析。本研究設(shè)計(jì)了三個(gè)主要研究問(wèn)題：第一，在中國(guó)學(xué)習(xí)者和英語(yǔ)本族語(yǔ)者的英文求職信中模糊限制語(yǔ)有哪些類型、表現(xiàn)形式及其異同之處？第二，模糊限制語(yǔ)的語(yǔ)用策略在中國(guó)學(xué)習(xí)者和英語(yǔ)本族語(yǔ)者的英文求職信中有何異同及引起異同的原因主要有哪些？第三，在兩類英文求職信中模糊限制語(yǔ)有何語(yǔ)用功能？ 研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，在中國(guó)學(xué)習(xí)者和英語(yǔ)本族語(yǔ)者的英文求職信中都使用了模糊限制語(yǔ)，在兩類求職信中，程度變動(dòng)語(yǔ)出現(xiàn)的頻率最高，其次是范圍變動(dòng)語(yǔ)，直接緩和語(yǔ)在中國(guó)學(xué)習(xí)者的求職信中出現(xiàn)的頻率較高，而間接緩和語(yǔ)在英語(yǔ)本族語(yǔ)者的求職信中出現(xiàn)的頻率較高。模糊限制語(yǔ)也大量應(yīng)用在合作原則和禮貌原則中，但是中國(guó)英語(yǔ)學(xué)習(xí)者在運(yùn)用語(yǔ)用策略方面還有待進(jìn)步。存在差異的原因有：中國(guó)英語(yǔ)學(xué)習(xí)者的語(yǔ)言能力較差，對(duì)模糊限制語(yǔ)、合作原則和禮貌原則的語(yǔ)用意識(shí)不強(qiáng)，中西思維差異等。此外，本研究還總結(jié)了模糊限制語(yǔ)在英文求職信中的語(yǔ)用功能。 本研究由五部分構(gòu)成。 第一章是綜述，介紹了本研究的研究背景、研究目的、研究意義和論文框架。 第二章是文獻(xiàn)綜述部分，，包括求職信和模糊語(yǔ)的定義及特征、模糊語(yǔ)的分類、國(guó)內(nèi)外學(xué)者對(duì)模糊限制語(yǔ)的研究以及與本研究相關(guān)的語(yǔ)用策略的介紹。 第三章是研究設(shè)計(jì)，主要介紹了研究問(wèn)題、語(yǔ)料來(lái)源、數(shù)據(jù)收集、研究方法和研究步驟。 第四章是該論文的主要章節(jié)，首先基于普林斯對(duì)模糊限制語(yǔ)的分類標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，找出兩個(gè)語(yǔ)料中符合分類的模糊限制語(yǔ)，對(duì)其列表分類，旨在比較模糊限制語(yǔ)在兩個(gè)語(yǔ)料中出現(xiàn)頻率和分布的異同。其次，通過(guò)呈現(xiàn)例子，比較了模糊限制語(yǔ)在兩個(gè)語(yǔ)料中語(yǔ)用策略的異同，并試探性地歸納出存在異同的原因。最后總結(jié)了模糊限制語(yǔ)在英文求職信中的語(yǔ)用功能。 第五章是結(jié)論，首先總結(jié)了本論文的主要發(fā)現(xiàn)，其次指出該論文的不足之處，最后為以后類似的研究提出了建議。
[Abstract]:In 1965, American scholar L. A. Zadeh (Zadeh) put forward the fuzzy theory and introduced it into the field of linguistics. Hedges are a common phenomenon in the process of language learning and use. As a part of vague language, they are regarded as the most common, typical and valuable fuzzy language. Many scholars have studied the classification, characteristics, pragmatic characteristics of hedges, their application in written language and spoken language, etc. At present, most of the researches have focused on news discourse, advertising language and political interviews. There are few researches on English cover letters and even less on two languages. This study collected 30 English cover letters from Chinese English learners and 30 native English speakers. On the basis of the classification proposed by E.F.Prince (1982), the purpose of this paper is to summarize the frequency and proportion of hedges in the English cover letters of Chinese English learners and native speakers. Based on the principle of cooperation and politeness, this paper analyzes the pragmatic functions of vague restricted language. This study has designed three main research questions: first, what types of hedges exist in the English cover letters of Chinese learners and native English speakers, their forms of expression and their similarities and differences? Second, what are the similarities and differences between the pragmatic strategies of hedges in the English cover letters of Chinese learners and native English speakers and the main reasons for the differences and similarities? Thirdly, what are the pragmatic functions of hedges in the two types of English cover letters? The study found that both Chinese learners and native English speakers use hedges in their English cover letters. In the two types of cover letters, the frequency of degree variation is the highest, followed by range variation. Direct detente appears more frequently in Chinese learners' application letters, while indirect detente appears more frequently in English native speakers' cover letters. Hedges are also widely used in cooperative and politeness principles, but Chinese EFL learners still need to make progress in using pragmatic strategies. The reasons for the differences are: poor language proficiency of Chinese English learners, weak pragmatic awareness of hedges, cooperative principles and politeness principles, and differences in Chinese and western thinking. In addition, this study also summarizes the pragmatic functions of hedges in English cover letters. This study consists of five parts. The first chapter is a summary, introduces the research background, research purpose, research significance and the framework of the paper. The second chapter is the literature review, including the definition and characteristics of cover letter and vagueness, the classification of vague words, the research of hedges at home and abroad, and the introduction of pragmatic strategies related to this study. The third chapter is the research design, mainly introduces the research question, the corpus source, the data collection, the research method and the research procedure. The fourth chapter is the main chapter of this paper. Firstly, based on Prince's classification criteria for hedges, we find out the classifying hedges in the two corpus, and classify them in the list. The purpose of this paper is to compare the similarities and differences of the frequency and distribution of hedges in the two corpus. Secondly, by presenting examples, this paper compares the similarities and differences of pragmatic strategies of hedges in the two corpora, and tentatively concludes the reasons for the differences and similarities. Finally, the pragmatic functions of hedges in English cover letters are summarized. The fifth chapter is the conclusion, first summarizes the main findings of this paper, then points out the shortcomings of the paper, and finally puts forward some suggestions for similar research in the future.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河南師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：H319

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 段恩香;模糊限制語(yǔ)的語(yǔ)用功能及其對(duì)英語(yǔ)教學(xué)的啟示[J];西南民族大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社科版);2004年04期

本文編號(hào)：2169220