發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-01-28 22:20

  本文關(guān)鍵詞： 閃避言語行為 閃避策略 緩和手段 政府官員 禮貌　出處：《廣東外語外貿(mào)大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：閃避言語行為在日常人際交往中經(jīng)常出現(xiàn)，且閃避問題有可能威脅對(duì)方的面子甚至導(dǎo)致雙方發(fā)生沖突。國(guó)家政府官員在新聞?dòng)浾邥?huì)上會(huì)遇到刁鉆或敏感的提問，如何運(yùn)用閃避策略來躲避問題便顯得更為重要，因?yàn)槿绾位卮痍P(guān)系到政府立場(chǎng)和國(guó)家利益。 本論文以Bull和Mayer (2003)的閃避言語行為的語用分類以及Faerch和Kasper (1989)的實(shí)施言語行為的緩和模型為理論基礎(chǔ)，對(duì)語料中閃避言語行為進(jìn)行鑒別、分類及標(biāo)記，然后對(duì)其進(jìn)行定性及定量的對(duì)比分析。目的是探究中美政府官員在新聞?dòng)浾邥?huì)上所使用的閃避策略及其語用緩和手段的異同及背后的因由。語料是2007年至2012年中美各60場(chǎng)政府官員的新聞?dòng)浾邥?huì)。 研究表明：一、中國(guó)政府官員往往使用暗含閃避策略，美國(guó)政府官員則傾向于使用直接閃避策略，，總體說來主要的閃避策略雙方均有使用，但美國(guó)官員的運(yùn)用更為靈活多樣。二、在緩和閃避回答的手段上，美國(guó)官員往往不使用任何形式的緩和手段，中國(guó)官員則最常兼并使用內(nèi)部及外部?jī)煞N形式來緩和閃避回答。至于通過內(nèi)部語言形式來實(shí)現(xiàn)緩和，雙方在使用句法及詞語上的比例十分相近。句法形式上，雙方使用最多的是平行結(jié)構(gòu)；詞語或詞組形式上，中國(guó)官員最常是以重復(fù)之前說過的詞來掩蓋，美國(guó)官員則最多使用模糊限制語。至于通過外部語言形式來實(shí)現(xiàn)緩和，中方最常是給出將要閃避的提示及說明閃避的原因，而美國(guó)官員只給出將要閃避的提示。 最后，本文就分析結(jié)果從交際哲學(xué)及面子的角度分析了雙方在閃避策略及其語言實(shí)現(xiàn)形式使用上的異同。中國(guó)文化中“仁”和“禮”的哲學(xué)思想和對(duì)正面子的關(guān)注說明了中國(guó)官員為何傾向于使用暗含的閃避策略以及兼并使用兩種緩和手段；美國(guó)文化中自由與權(quán)利的思想和對(duì)負(fù)面子的關(guān)注解釋了美國(guó)政府官員為何往往使用相對(duì)直接的閃避策略以及不使用任何手段來緩和閃避行為。本文結(jié)論拓展了跨文化研究對(duì)中美閃避言語行為的對(duì)比研究，對(duì)外語學(xué)習(xí)和教學(xué)及跨文化對(duì)比研究有一定的啟示。
[Abstract]:Avoidance speech acts often occur in daily interpersonal communication, and avoidance problems may threaten the face of the other party and even lead to conflict between the two sides. Government officials will encounter tricky or sensitive questions at news conferences. How to use avoidance strategies to avoid questions is even more important, as it concerns the government's position and national interests. This thesis is based on the pragmatic classification of evasive speech acts by Bull and Mayer / 2003 and Faerch and Kasper / 1989). The mitigation model of speech act is the theoretical basis. The speech acts of avoidance in the corpus are identified, classified and marked. The purpose of this study is to explore the similarities and differences between the evasive strategies used by Chinese and American government officials at press conferences and their pragmatic mitigation measures and the reasons behind them. The corpus is from 2007 to. On middle of 2012, the United States 60 government officials press conference. The results show that: first, Chinese government officials tend to use implicit avoidance strategies, while American government officials tend to use direct avoidance strategies. In general, the main avoidance strategies are used by both sides. However, the use of American officials is more flexible and diverse. Second, American officials often do not use any form of detente in the means of detente to avoid answering. Chinese officials most often use internal and external forms to ease evasive responses. As for internal language forms to achieve relaxation, both sides in the use of syntax and words in the proportion of very similar. Syntactic form. Parallel structures are mostly used by both sides; In the form of words or phrases, Chinese officials are most often covered up by repeating the words they have said before, while American officials most often use hedges. As for mitigation through external language forms. The Chinese most often give hints about what they are going to dodge and explain why, while U.S. officials only give hints about what they are going to dodge. Finally. From the perspective of communicative philosophy and face, this paper analyzes the similarities and differences between the two sides in the use of evasive strategies and language realization forms. "benevolence" and "Rites" in Chinese Culture. It explains why Chinese officials tend to use implicit evasive tactics and merger and use two kinds of detente means. The idea of freedom and rights in American culture and the concern for negative children explain why American government officials often use relatively direct avoidance strategies and do not use any means to ease evasive behavior. A Comparative study of Chinese and American avoidance speech acts in Cultural Studies. It has some implications for foreign language learning and teaching and cross-cultural contrastive research.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：廣東外語外貿(mào)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：H136;H313

【共引文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 王宏睿;閃避回答的關(guān)聯(lián)視角研究[D];四川外語學(xué)院;2011年

2 陶蕊;《大飯店》中回避的語用研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2009年

3 楊璐;全身而退：競(jìng)選辯論中回避的順應(yīng)性研究[D];南京理工大學(xué);2009年

本文編號(hào)：1471705