【摘要】：反諷(irony)表達(dá)的是與說者的真實(shí)意圖相反的內(nèi)容,常暗示貶抑態(tài)度或評價。關(guān)聯(lián)理論是關(guān)于話語理解的認(rèn)知語用學(xué)理論,西班牙學(xué)者Yus在關(guān)聯(lián)理論的基礎(chǔ)上分析了反諷理解中的七類語境假設(shè)(contextual assumptions)。隱性沖突話語是“交際雙方在交際目的沖突的情況下,以隱蔽的方式表達(dá)各自目的的話語”�，F(xiàn)有的隱性沖突話語研究只是將反諷描述為一種掩蓋交際目的的“面紗”,尚未涉及反諷的理解過程。本文在關(guān)聯(lián)理論和Yus反諷理解框架的基礎(chǔ)上,探討隱性沖突話語中反諷的理解過程,依據(jù)語料分析建立隱性沖突話語中的反諷理解模型。首先,我們從經(jīng)典的影視文學(xué)作品中收集了26個包含反諷的隱性沖突話語語料,然后,從聽者角度對反諷的理解過程進(jìn)行了分析。結(jié)果發(fā)現(xiàn):Yus的七類語境假設(shè)只有六類在隱性沖突話語中出現(xiàn);不過,在隱性沖突話語中還出現(xiàn)了一類新的語境假設(shè)——后續(xù)話語。因此,隱性沖突話語中反諷的理解也涉及七類語境假設(shè),分別是:1)百科及事實(shí)信息(encyclopedic and factual information);2)說者的非言語行為(speaker’s nonverbal behavior);3)聽者具備的關(guān)于說者的背景知識(hearer’s background knowledge of speaker’s biographical data);4)互知信息(mutual knowledge);5)前序話語(previous utterances;6)后續(xù)話語(subsequent utterances);7)語言線索(linguistic cues)。以上七類語境假設(shè)在反諷理解過程中所起作用并不完全相同,其中第三類和第四類起主導(dǎo)作用,其他五類起支撐作用。據(jù)本文統(tǒng)計,以上七類語境假設(shè)在語料中所占比重分別是15%、23%、100%、100%、8%、23%和12%�；谝陨�,本研究建立了隱性沖突話語中反諷的理解模型。
[Abstract]:Irony (irony) expresses the opposite of the speaker's true intention, often implying derogatory attitude or evaluation. Relevance theory is the cognitive pragmatic theory of discourse understanding. On the basis of relevance theory, Spanish scholar Yus analyzes seven types of contextual assumptions (contextual assumptions). In ironic understanding. Implicit conflict discourse is "both sides of communication express their own purpose discourse in a covert way in the case of communicative purpose conflict". The existing implicit conflict discourse research only describes irony as a "veil" covering up the purpose of communication, and has not yet involved the process of understanding irony. On the basis of relevance theory and Yus irony understanding framework, this paper discusses the understanding process of irony in implicit conflict discourse, and establishes an irony understanding model in implicit conflict discourse according to corpus analysis. First of all, we collect 26 hidden conflict discourse corpus containing irony from the classical film and television literature works, and then analyze the understanding process of irony from the listener's point of view. The results show that only six of the seven types of contextual hypotheses of Yus appear in implicit conflict discourse, but there is also a new kind of contextual hypothesis in implicit conflict discourse-follow-up discourse. Therefore, the understanding of irony in implicit conflict discourse also involves seven types of contextual assumptions, namely: 1) encyclopedia and factual information (encyclopedic and factual information); 2) the nonverbal act (speaker's nonverbal behavior); of the speaker. 3) background knowledge of the speaker (hearer's background knowledge of speaker's biographical data); 4) Mutual knowledge (mutual knowledge); 5) Preface discourse (previous utterances;6) follow-up discourse (subsequent utterances); 7) language clue (linguistic cues). The above seven types of contextual assumptions play different roles in the process of ironic understanding, among which the third category and the fourth category play a leading role, while the other five categories play a supporting role. According to the statistics of this paper, the proportion of the above seven contextual assumptions in the corpus is 15%, 23%, 100%, 100%, 8%, 23% and 12%, respectively. Based on the above, this study establishes an understanding model of irony in implicit conflict discourse.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中科技大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：H030

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 許艷玲;楊文秀;;論隱性沖突話語發(fā)展模式[J];求索;2013年12期

2 楊文秀;胡小琴;陳夢玉;;隱性沖突話語的策略探析[J];外語教育;2012年00期

3 許艷玲;楊文秀;;隱性沖突話語的順應(yīng)性研究[J];海外英語;2013年19期

4 楊文秀;;揭開隱性沖突話語的“面紗”[J];前沿;2013年19期

5 冉永平;;沖突性話語的語用學(xué)研究概述[J];外語教學(xué);2010年01期

6 趙虹;;論Yus對反諷的認(rèn)知語用研究[J];山東外語教學(xué);2009年01期

7 蘇暉;;弗羅斯特詩歌的反諷策略及幽默效應(yīng)[J];外國文學(xué);2008年04期

8 易秀清;趙友斌;;反諷的語用功能探析[J];電子科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(社科版);2007年03期

9 辛艷偉;;反諷話語語用功能探究[J];山西農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2005年04期

10 廖美珍;“目的原則”與目的分析(上)——語用研究新途徑探索[J];修辭學(xué)習(xí);2005年03期

，

本文編號：2488637