漢語讓轉構式“X是X”的認知語用分析
發(fā)布時間：2018-10-23 10:33
【摘要】：本文選取漢語中含讓轉義的“X是X”作為研究對象。這種結構主語和補語同形,字面上不傳達任何信息,卻有著豐富的語用含義。其實,這種特殊的語言現(xiàn)象很早就引起了語言學家們的廣泛關注。他們將其納入同語反復現(xiàn)象之中,并從邏輯、修辭、句法、語義等多個角度進行研究。在他們看來,同語現(xiàn)象包括三種：像“戰(zhàn)爭就是戰(zhàn)爭”的強調類, “東方是東方,西方是西方”之類的對比類以及“漂亮是漂亮”之類的讓轉類。但本文認為第三種并非同語反復,而是一種獨立的構式。同時,在查閱相關文獻的過程中,筆者發(fā)現(xiàn)大多研究雖將讓轉義“X是X”涵蓋在內(nèi),但在具體分析中甚少涉及。因此,有必要對其進行進一步的研究。具體來說,以下三個問題尚未得到解決：讓轉構式“X是x”有哪些詞類限制?此構式具有怎樣的語用功能?它是如何產(chǎn)生以及被理解的?(具體來說,言者為何采用此結構來表達觀點?聽者為何能預測出下文含有轉折含義?)首先,基于北大語料庫,本文對進入構式的詞類進行了分析和歸類。結果發(fā)現(xiàn),名詞(短語)、動詞(短語)及形容詞均可進入。在詞匯的選擇方面,前后X表現(xiàn)出不對稱性：當前X為指稱性名詞時,后X則為形容詞或者量詞修飾的名詞短語；當前x為描述性名詞時,后x變?yōu)橥�。當X為動詞或者形容詞時,常用于口語中的單音節(jié)詞語在此構式中更為常見,同時,后x會在動詞或形容詞后跟有表示狀態(tài)的附著成分。研究還發(fā)現(xiàn)性質形容詞可以進入構式,而狀態(tài)形容詞卻不可以。其次,本文對前后x之間的關系以及整個構式的語用功能進行了研究。兩個X之間是話題一評述關系,這也能很好地解釋了為什么前后X會在詞匯選擇方面存在差異。另外,此構式具有以下三種語用效果：讓步性同意或確認、交互主觀性、否定預測性。最后,通過融合楊平的關聯(lián)-順應理論和格萊斯的數(shù)量準則,本人嘗試性地提出了一種新的理論框架來對此構式的產(chǎn)生與理解過程進行解釋。在產(chǎn)生過程中,言者首先構建與外界以及聽者相關的認知語境。接著,將潛在的多種語言結構對語境成分進行順應。其中,語境成分包括物質世界、社交世界以及心理世界。順應結果是言者決定選擇委婉的表達方式。為了自然地引出下文轉折部分,言者決定先重復對方的話題或者觀點以對其作出肯定評價。于是,“X是X”便產(chǎn)生了。在理解過程中,聽者首先意識到言者的話語刺激有言外之意(因為它本質上違背了數(shù)量原則)。同樣,聽者繼而也會構建相關語境,形成一系列關聯(lián)假設,之后將潛在的多種理解方式對語境成分進行順應。然后就會意識到言者只是在讓步性地或假裝性地表示同意,接下來會有轉折性的觀點出現(xiàn)。
[Abstract]:This paper chooses X is X as the object of study. This kind of structural subject and complement have the same form, literally convey no information, but have rich pragmatic meaning. In fact, this kind of special language phenomenon has aroused the widespread concern of linguists for a long time. They put it into the phenomenon of homonym and studied it from logic, rhetoric, syntax, semantics and so on. In their opinion, synonyms include three types: the emphasis on war, the contrast between east and west, and the transition from beauty to beauty. However, the third type is not a repetition, but an independent construction. At the same time, in the process of consulting the relevant literature, the author found that most of the research will cover the escape "X is X", but in the specific analysis very little. Therefore, it is necessary to further study it. Specifically, the following three questions have not been resolved: what are the restrictions on making the transpose "X is x"? What is the pragmatic function of this construction? How did it come into being and be understood? (specifically, why do speakers use this structure to express their views? How can the listener predict that there is a turning point in the following?) First of all, based on the Peking University corpus, this paper analyzes and classifies the parts of speech entering the construction. It was found that nouns (phrases), verbs (phrases) and adjectives can be entered. In terms of lexical choice, X shows asymmetry: when X is a referential noun, post-X is a noun phrase modified by adjectives or quantifiers, and when x is a descriptive noun, the latter x becomes homomorphic. When X is a verb or adjective, monosyllabic words, which are often used in spoken English, are more common in this construction. It is also found that the nature adjective can enter the construction, but the state adjective can not. Secondly, this paper studies the relationship between X and the pragmatic function of the whole construction. The relationship between X and X is a topic-one comment, which can explain why there are differences in lexical choice between X and X. In addition, the construction has the following three pragmatic effects: concessional consent or confirmation, mutual subjectivity and negative predictability. Finally, by combining Yang Ping's relevance and adaptation theory with Grice's quantitative criterion, I try to put forward a new theoretical framework to explain the process of the formation and understanding of the construction. In the process of production, the speaker first constructs the cognitive context related to the outside world and the listener. Then, the potential multilingual structures are adapted to contextual elements. Among them, the contextual elements include the material world, the social world and the psychological world. The result of adaptation is the choice of euphemism. In order to naturally lead to the following twist, the speaker decides to repeat the subject or point of view to make a positive assessment. Thus, "X is X" came into being. In the process of understanding, the listener first realizes that the utterance of the speaker has an implicit meaning (because it is essentially contrary to the principle of quantity). In the same way, the listener then constructs the relevant context and forms a series of relevance hypotheses, and then adapts the contextual elements in a variety of underlying ways of understanding. Then you realize that the speaker is only conceding or pretending to agree, and then there is a transformational point of view.
【學位授予單位】：西南大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：H136
本文編號：2288976
[Abstract]:This paper chooses X is X as the object of study. This kind of structural subject and complement have the same form, literally convey no information, but have rich pragmatic meaning. In fact, this kind of special language phenomenon has aroused the widespread concern of linguists for a long time. They put it into the phenomenon of homonym and studied it from logic, rhetoric, syntax, semantics and so on. In their opinion, synonyms include three types: the emphasis on war, the contrast between east and west, and the transition from beauty to beauty. However, the third type is not a repetition, but an independent construction. At the same time, in the process of consulting the relevant literature, the author found that most of the research will cover the escape "X is X", but in the specific analysis very little. Therefore, it is necessary to further study it. Specifically, the following three questions have not been resolved: what are the restrictions on making the transpose "X is x"? What is the pragmatic function of this construction? How did it come into being and be understood? (specifically, why do speakers use this structure to express their views? How can the listener predict that there is a turning point in the following?) First of all, based on the Peking University corpus, this paper analyzes and classifies the parts of speech entering the construction. It was found that nouns (phrases), verbs (phrases) and adjectives can be entered. In terms of lexical choice, X shows asymmetry: when X is a referential noun, post-X is a noun phrase modified by adjectives or quantifiers, and when x is a descriptive noun, the latter x becomes homomorphic. When X is a verb or adjective, monosyllabic words, which are often used in spoken English, are more common in this construction. It is also found that the nature adjective can enter the construction, but the state adjective can not. Secondly, this paper studies the relationship between X and the pragmatic function of the whole construction. The relationship between X and X is a topic-one comment, which can explain why there are differences in lexical choice between X and X. In addition, the construction has the following three pragmatic effects: concessional consent or confirmation, mutual subjectivity and negative predictability. Finally, by combining Yang Ping's relevance and adaptation theory with Grice's quantitative criterion, I try to put forward a new theoretical framework to explain the process of the formation and understanding of the construction. In the process of production, the speaker first constructs the cognitive context related to the outside world and the listener. Then, the potential multilingual structures are adapted to contextual elements. Among them, the contextual elements include the material world, the social world and the psychological world. The result of adaptation is the choice of euphemism. In order to naturally lead to the following twist, the speaker decides to repeat the subject or point of view to make a positive assessment. Thus, "X is X" came into being. In the process of understanding, the listener first realizes that the utterance of the speaker has an implicit meaning (because it is essentially contrary to the principle of quantity). In the same way, the listener then constructs the relevant context and forms a series of relevance hypotheses, and then adapts the contextual elements in a variety of underlying ways of understanding. Then you realize that the speaker is only conceding or pretending to agree, and then there is a transformational point of view.
【學位授予單位】：西南大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：H136
【參考文獻】
相關期刊論文 前10條
1 梅思斌;;“X是X”在讓步復句中的句法和語義考察[J];大理學院學報;2010年11期
2 文旭;同義反復話語的特征及其認知語用解釋[J];外國語言文學;2003年03期
3 冉永平;言語交際的順應—關聯(lián)性分析[J];外語學刊;2004年02期
4 施春宏;;試析名詞的語義結構[J];世界漢語教學;2002年04期
5 齊滬揚;胡建鋒;;試論負預期量信息標記格式“X是X”[J];世界漢語教學;2006年02期
6 沈家煊;語言的“主觀性”和“主觀化”[J];外語教學與研究;2001年04期
7 劉正光,劉潤清;語言非范疇化理論的意義[J];外語教學與研究;2005年01期
8 成軍;文旭;;詞項的概念指向性——陳述與指稱的語義理據(jù)[J];外語教學與研究;2009年06期
9 鄧紅葉;;“A是A與但是(就是、倒是等)……”是不是同語句[J];文學教育(中);2010年01期
10 潘國英;;論漢語典型同語格的成因與理解[J];修辭學習;2006年02期
，本文編號：2288976
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/wenyilunwen/yuyanxuelw/2288976.html
