【摘要】：模糊性是語言的顯著性特征之一。對語言模糊性的研究有助于揭示語言的本質(zhì)。模糊限制語指那些能把事情變得更加模糊或不那么模糊的詞語。對模糊限制語的研究已經(jīng)從語義學(xué)拓展到語用學(xué)，語篇分析，語體分析，跨文化交際以及模糊集合等多個領(lǐng)域。特別是對模糊限制語在法律文本，研究論文以及案例報告等語體中體現(xiàn)的人際意義的研究也已經(jīng)展開。然而對學(xué)術(shù)論壇這一語體中模糊限制語所體現(xiàn)的人際意義的研究目前還鮮有涉及。隨著互聯(lián)網(wǎng)技術(shù)的廣泛推廣和應(yīng)用，對網(wǎng)絡(luò)學(xué)術(shù)論壇語體的研究有助于促進人們之間在網(wǎng)絡(luò)上的交流和互動。 本文基于系統(tǒng)功能語言學(xué)人際元功能的理論和Hyland對模糊限制語的分類，，借助語料庫的研究手段和Wconcord這一統(tǒng)計軟件對BISC這一學(xué)術(shù)論壇中模糊限制語體現(xiàn)的人際意義進行了定量和定性分析。本文作者以BISC這一學(xué)術(shù)論壇中240篇有關(guān)學(xué)術(shù)問題的電子郵件（字數(shù)為80844）為語料，把郵件主體內(nèi)容部分劃分了三個語步：（1）表達作者對論壇中其他成員觀點的看法，并表明自己發(fā)送此郵件要發(fā)表的觀點；（2）對自己的觀點進行理論上的論證和解釋；（3）重申自己的觀點并期待其他學(xué)者對此作出回應(yīng)。 分析結(jié)果表明：無論在整個論壇語篇中還是在各個獨立的語步中，四種類型的模糊限制語按出現(xiàn)頻率的高低的排列次序為：可靠型模糊限制語（54.0‰），讀者導(dǎo)向型模糊限制語(31.0‰)，作者導(dǎo)向型模糊限制語(21.2‰)以及特性型模糊限制語(16.3‰)。這表明郵件的作者在寫作過程中首先考慮的是如何使用可靠型模糊限制語表達自己對命題內(nèi)容的不確定性，以此避免自己的武斷。郵件的作者運用模糊限制語的手段考慮最少的是如何對所述現(xiàn)象的特性作出準確得描述。橫向來看，不同類型的模糊限制語在三個不同語步中也具有不同的分布規(guī)律，體現(xiàn)了不同的人際意義。 對學(xué)術(shù)論壇語篇中模糊限制語人際意義的研究擴展了模糊限制語的研究領(lǐng)域并且將有助于增強人們對網(wǎng)絡(luò)論壇的語體特征的了解。另外，本研究可能給寫作教學(xué)帶來一定的啟示。
[Abstract]:Fuzziness is one of the salient features of language. The study of language fuzziness helps to reveal the nature of language. Hedges refer to words that make things more or less vague. The study of hedges has been extended from semantics to pragmatics, discourse analysis, stylistic analysis, cross-cultural communication and fuzzy sets. In particular, the research on the interpersonal meaning of hedges in legal texts, research papers and case reports has also been carried out. However, there is little research on the interpersonal meaning of hedges in academic forum. With the wide spread and application of Internet technology, the research on the language style of online academic forum is helpful to promote the communication and interaction between people on the network. Based on the theory of interpersonal metafunctions in systemic functional linguistics and Hyland's classification of hedges, With the help of corpus-based research and statistical software Wconcord, this paper makes a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the interpersonal meaning of vague hedges in BISC, an academic forum. The author uses BISC, an academic forum, as the corpus of 240 emails (80844 words) to divide the main content of the mail into three steps: (1) to express the author's views on the views of other members of the forum. And to express their views to send this email to express; (2) theoretical argumentation and explanation of one's own point of view; (3) reiterating one's point of view and expecting other scholars to respond to it. The results show that the four types of hedges are in the order of frequency of occurrence: reliable hedges (54.0 鈥

本文編號：2306719