順應論視角下的語用失誤研究
發(fā)布時間：2018-07-25 18:58
【摘要】：語用失誤現(xiàn)象一直是語用學研究的熱點之一。學者們在過去幾十年里從不同角度對這一現(xiàn)象進行了研究，如跨文化交際，二語習得，外語教學和認知學等領域。在先前學者們的不懈努力下，對語用失誤的研究取得了豐碩的成果。 但是這些研究也存在一些局限性和不足。首先，大部分的研究都局限于跨文化交際中的語用失誤，忽視語內語用失誤。再次，先前的研究強調口語和詞匯層面上的語用失誤，忽略其他層面上的語用失誤。最后，不同角度研究得來的結果不可避免地存在交叉現(xiàn)象。 鑒于這些局限性和不足，需要一種更具理論性，包含跨學科性質，更全面綜合的理論來系統(tǒng)解釋語用失誤現(xiàn)象。 維索爾倫的順應論正是能滿足這些條件的理論。維索爾倫不贊同傳統(tǒng)的語用學觀，他認為不可能給語用學指派自己的分析單元，也不可能鑒別出一個具體的相關對象，因為語用學涉及到的是語言行為的全部復雜現(xiàn)象。語用學被他定義為“一種從認知的，社會的和文化的整體角度對語言現(xiàn)象的綜觀”。語用學不再是語言學的一個分支，它所涉及的領域可以拓展到語言學結構的各個層次。在語言結構的各個層次，語用視角對語言現(xiàn)象的解釋都是有價值和必須的，包括語音層次，單詞，語義和句法。在維索爾倫的著作中提到的順應論理論框架為我們分析語用現(xiàn)象提供了一種全新的視角。 維索爾倫的語用綜觀論的核心內容是順應論，即使用語言的過程就是一個不斷做出選擇的過程。順應論從認知、社會和文化的功能的視角對語言使用作出描述和解釋。語言的變異性，協(xié)商性和順應性使人們在交際中能夠作出動態(tài)選擇。順應性又允許我們從四個角度來分析語言現(xiàn)象，分別是順應性的語境相關成分，，順應性結構對象，順應性動態(tài)過程，和順應性的意識突顯性。作為語言現(xiàn)象的語用失誤，自然也可以從這四方面來分析。鑒于后兩種角度認知性過強，本文從順應性的語境相關成分和順應性結構對象兩方面來分析。 第一，順應性的語境相關成分。任何交際因素，從物理環(huán)境,社交關系到語言使用者的心理狀態(tài)都可成為交際語境的元素。語言使用者們在他們的視野范圍內選擇并且激活這些元素，使其成為相關的關聯(lián)成分，并且在展開的言語中變異與協(xié)商。語言選擇的結果就是根據(jù)交際語境做出順應以達到交際目的。本文通過大量實例與論證，并且與構成交際語境要素的心智世界，社交世界和物理世界的主要成分相結合，來系統(tǒng)地探求語用失誤的原因。通過分析研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，語用失誤現(xiàn)象出現(xiàn)在交際語境的各個層面，而根源在于語言使用者未能對交際語境作出順應，如忽視交際方的性格特征、情緒、信仰、價值觀、目的、社會地位、宗教、以及所處的時空等，都會造成語用失誤。 第二，順應性結構對象。由于交際選擇總是在所有涉及到各種變異的語言結構層面上展開的，因而，語用現(xiàn)象也可以和任何一個結構層面發(fā)生聯(lián)系：從語音特征和音位，到語篇內外，或者到層面間的任何一種關系。所涉及的不只是“結構”，還包括“結構過程”中的原則。本文通過結構對象的三個主要層面，即語音，詞素與詞，句子來分析語用失誤現(xiàn)象，進一步得出忽視結構對象也會造成語用誤用。 在系統(tǒng)探求出語用失誤根源后，一個很自然的問題是如何減少和消除語用失誤現(xiàn)象，即如何提高語言使用者的語用能力。在結合時代背景分析中國英語學習者普遍語用能力不強的原因后，本文繼而提出了針對中國英語學習者提高語用能力的三條建議：倡導語用知識的顯性教學，使用地道的英語教學材料以及增加和改革以測試學生語用能力的口語考試。
[Abstract]:Pragmatic failure has always been one of the hot topics in pragmatics. Scholars have studied this phenomenon from different angles in the past several decades, such as intercultural communication, two language acquisition, foreign language teaching and cognitive science. The research of pragmatic failure has been fruitful in the previous scholars' unremitting efforts.
However, there are some limitations and shortcomings in these studies. First, most of the studies are limited to pragmatic failure in intercultural communication and neglect of pragmatic failure in language. Thirdly, previous studies emphasize pragmatic failures on the level of spoken and vocabulary and ignore the pragmatic failures on other levels. Finally, the results from different angles can not be found. There is an avoidance of cross phenomena.
In view of these limitations and deficiencies, a more theoretical, interdisciplinary and comprehensive theory is needed to systematically explain pragmatic failure.
Weisl Len's theory of adaptation is the theory that satisfies these conditions. Versolen does not agree with the traditional pragmatics view. He thinks it is impossible to assign his own analysis unit to pragmatics, nor can he identify a specific object, because pragmatics involves all the complex phenomena of language behavior. Pragmatics is defined as a pragmatics. "A comprehensive view of linguistic phenomena from a cognitive, social and cultural perspective." pragmatics is no longer a branch of linguistics. The fields involved can be extended to all levels of linguistic structure. At all levels of the language structure, pragmatic perspectives are valuable and necessary for the interpretation of language images, including language. The framework of adaptation theory mentioned in Weisl Len's works provides a new perspective for us to analyze pragmatic phenomena.
The core content of Weisl Len's pragmatic view is the theory of adaptation, that is, the process of using language is a continuous process of choice. The theory of adaptation describes and explains language use from the perspective of cognitive, social and cultural functions. Language variability, negotiability and adaptability make people make dynamic choices in communication. Compliance allows us to analyze language phenomena from four perspectives, namely, contextual related components of compliance, adaptation to structural objects, adaptation to dynamic processes, and awareness prominence of compliance. As a pragmatic failure of linguistic phenomena, nature can also be analyzed from these four aspects. In view of the latter two angles, this article is from the CIS Two aspects of contextual and contextual components of adaptability are analyzed.
First, the contextual components of compliance. Any communicative element, from the physical environment, the social relationship to the psychological state of the language user, can be the elements of the communicative context. Language users choose and activate these elements within their field of vision to make them related components, and variation and change in the unfolding language. Negotiation. The result of language selection is to make compliance with the communicative context in order to achieve communicative purpose. Through a large number of examples and arguments, and combining the mental world with the elements of communicative context and the main components of the social world and the physical world, this paper systematically explores the reasons for pragmatic miserrors. The phenomenon occurs at all levels of the communicative context, and the root lies in the failure of the language users to adapt to the communicative context, such as ignoring the character characteristics of the communicative side, emotions, beliefs, values, purposes, social status, religion, and the time and space in which they are in the context of pragmatic failure.
Second, compliant structural objects. Because communication choices are always carried out in all the linguistic structure levels that involve various variations, pragmatic phenomena can also be associated with any structural level: from phonetic features and phonemes to any relationship between the text and the layer, or to the level, not only "structure". It also includes the principle of "structural process". This paper analyzes pragmatic failure through three main aspects of structural objects, namely, phonetics, morphemes and words, and sentences, and further draws the neglect of structural objects as well as misuse of idioms.
After the systematic exploration of the root of pragmatic failure, a very natural question is how to reduce and eliminate pragmatic failure, that is, how to improve the pragmatic competence of the language users. After analyzing the reasons for the poor pragmatic competence of Chinese English learners in the context of the background of the times, this paper proposes to improve the pragmatics of Chinese English learners. Three suggestions of competence: explicit teaching of pragmatic knowledge, the use of authentic English teaching materials, and the oral test of increasing and reforming the students' pragmatic competence.
【學位授予單位】：中南民族大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：H030
本文編號：2144769
[Abstract]:Pragmatic failure has always been one of the hot topics in pragmatics. Scholars have studied this phenomenon from different angles in the past several decades, such as intercultural communication, two language acquisition, foreign language teaching and cognitive science. The research of pragmatic failure has been fruitful in the previous scholars' unremitting efforts.
However, there are some limitations and shortcomings in these studies. First, most of the studies are limited to pragmatic failure in intercultural communication and neglect of pragmatic failure in language. Thirdly, previous studies emphasize pragmatic failures on the level of spoken and vocabulary and ignore the pragmatic failures on other levels. Finally, the results from different angles can not be found. There is an avoidance of cross phenomena.
In view of these limitations and deficiencies, a more theoretical, interdisciplinary and comprehensive theory is needed to systematically explain pragmatic failure.
Weisl Len's theory of adaptation is the theory that satisfies these conditions. Versolen does not agree with the traditional pragmatics view. He thinks it is impossible to assign his own analysis unit to pragmatics, nor can he identify a specific object, because pragmatics involves all the complex phenomena of language behavior. Pragmatics is defined as a pragmatics. "A comprehensive view of linguistic phenomena from a cognitive, social and cultural perspective." pragmatics is no longer a branch of linguistics. The fields involved can be extended to all levels of linguistic structure. At all levels of the language structure, pragmatic perspectives are valuable and necessary for the interpretation of language images, including language. The framework of adaptation theory mentioned in Weisl Len's works provides a new perspective for us to analyze pragmatic phenomena.
The core content of Weisl Len's pragmatic view is the theory of adaptation, that is, the process of using language is a continuous process of choice. The theory of adaptation describes and explains language use from the perspective of cognitive, social and cultural functions. Language variability, negotiability and adaptability make people make dynamic choices in communication. Compliance allows us to analyze language phenomena from four perspectives, namely, contextual related components of compliance, adaptation to structural objects, adaptation to dynamic processes, and awareness prominence of compliance. As a pragmatic failure of linguistic phenomena, nature can also be analyzed from these four aspects. In view of the latter two angles, this article is from the CIS Two aspects of contextual and contextual components of adaptability are analyzed.
First, the contextual components of compliance. Any communicative element, from the physical environment, the social relationship to the psychological state of the language user, can be the elements of the communicative context. Language users choose and activate these elements within their field of vision to make them related components, and variation and change in the unfolding language. Negotiation. The result of language selection is to make compliance with the communicative context in order to achieve communicative purpose. Through a large number of examples and arguments, and combining the mental world with the elements of communicative context and the main components of the social world and the physical world, this paper systematically explores the reasons for pragmatic miserrors. The phenomenon occurs at all levels of the communicative context, and the root lies in the failure of the language users to adapt to the communicative context, such as ignoring the character characteristics of the communicative side, emotions, beliefs, values, purposes, social status, religion, and the time and space in which they are in the context of pragmatic failure.
Second, compliant structural objects. Because communication choices are always carried out in all the linguistic structure levels that involve various variations, pragmatic phenomena can also be associated with any structural level: from phonetic features and phonemes to any relationship between the text and the layer, or to the level, not only "structure". It also includes the principle of "structural process". This paper analyzes pragmatic failure through three main aspects of structural objects, namely, phonetics, morphemes and words, and sentences, and further draws the neglect of structural objects as well as misuse of idioms.
After the systematic exploration of the root of pragmatic failure, a very natural question is how to reduce and eliminate pragmatic failure, that is, how to improve the pragmatic competence of the language users. After analyzing the reasons for the poor pragmatic competence of Chinese English learners in the context of the background of the times, this paper proposes to improve the pragmatics of Chinese English learners. Three suggestions of competence: explicit teaching of pragmatic knowledge, the use of authentic English teaching materials, and the oral test of increasing and reforming the students' pragmatic competence.
【學位授予單位】：中南民族大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：H030
【參考文獻】
相關期刊論文 前10條
1 孫亞;從認知角度看語用失誤[J];四川外語學院學報;2001年06期
2 崔義平;語用負遷移視角的語用失誤[J];山東外語教學;2004年03期
3 張國;語用失誤與順應理論[J];山東外語教學;2004年04期
4 朱煉紅;;顯性教學對語用能力發(fā)展的影響[J];山東外語教學;2008年01期
5 何自然,閻莊;中國學生在英語交際中的語用失誤——漢英語用差異調查[J];外語教學與研究;1986年03期
6 王得杏;跨文化交際的語用問楲[J];外語教學與研究;1990年04期
7 洪崗;英語語用能力調查及其對外語教學的啟示[J];外語教學與研究;1991年04期
8 戴煒棟!200083,張紅玲!200083;外語交際中的文化遷移及其對外語教改的啟示[J];外語界;2000年02期
9 季佩英;江靜;;對大學英語語用能力培養(yǎng)的再思考——以2010年首屆“外教社杯”全國大學英語教學大賽上海賽區(qū)比賽為例[J];外語界;2010年06期
10 楊慶萍;現(xiàn)狀與對策:大學英語口試引發(fā)的思考[J];外語與外語教學;2001年05期
相關碩士學位論文 前1條
1 趙菲菲;語用能力與大學英語教學[D];上海外國語大學;2006年
本文編號：2144769
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/wenyilunwen/hanyulw/2144769.html
