英汉演说语篇照应手段对比研究
|
摘要
语篇，又称为话语，指任何不完全受句子语法约束的在一定语境下表示完整语义的自然语言，包括口语和书面语。自六十年代末、七十年代初以来，语篇分析作为一种语言研究方法，日益受到国际语言学界的重视，发展迅速。语篇分析通常以大于句子的单位为研究对象，它与句子或小句的关系不在于篇幅的长短，而在于衔接。因此，衔接手段自然成为语篇研究的重要对象之一。在该领域最具代表性的Halliday & Hasan的语篇衔接理论(1976)对包括照应在内的五种衔接手段给予了详尽而充分的描述，引发了语言学界对衔接这一语言现象的广泛关注。照应作为一种重要的语篇衔接手段，是指语篇中某一语言成分与另一语言成分之间在指称意义上的相互解释关系，它在句子构建、句间连贯、语境形成、段落过渡中起着重要作用，也是使语言经济简洁的重要手段，具有研究价值。
值得注意的是，国内的语篇对比研究大多是在广义的语篇范畴内进行的，较少与特定的文体结合起来进行针对性的分析，而且多以书面语篇为语料进行研究，基于口语语料的研究很少。本文尝试以结构紧凑、逻辑关系严密、衔接手段极其丰富、具有口语和书面语双重特征的演说语篇为语料进行分析，在具体的语篇分析中检验衔接理论的有效性和可靠性，更加全面地揭示英汉语篇衔接的异同。这对我们最终分析其异同存在的社会和文化原因，并将篇章语言学的成果应用于翻译理论和实践及文体学研究中来说，将是一项有益的尝试。
本文以Halliday & Hasan的衔接理论为基础，以英汉演说语篇为语料，对两种语言照应手段的异同进行量化分析，用相关理论阐释所得到的结论，并探讨照应手段的翻译问题。
本文首先回顾了国外以Halliday & Hasan的两部著作(1976，1985)为代表的衔接理论研究成果，国内胡壮麟等对衔接理论的补充和发展，以及衔接理论在英汉语篇对比研究中的发展现状。然后在文献回顾的基础上，对国内外语篇衔接研究的特点进行归纳，指出本文的特点是针对特定文体、描述与解释并重、理论与实践相结合，并对本文拟解决的问题进行说明。
在接下来的第二部分当中，本文从基本的概念界定论起，引出并阐释了
照应作为一种主要的衔接手段在演说文体中的作用及研究价值。本文首先区
分了两组对应的概念一语篇和话语，街接和连贯，归纳分析了关于街接与连
贯关系的不同观点，并指明本文就这一问题的理解和看法，因为这将直接影
响到关于照应在语篇构建中作用的讨论。然后本文从语篇分析的角度介绍了
演说语篇，就其口语和书面语的双重特征进行探讨，并尝试对其语体进行界
定。在这一部分最后，本文总体分析了照应尤其是人称照应在演说衷体中的
特殊重要性，为以下英汉照应对比的展开做了铺垫。
第三部分是论文的主体部分，通过大量实例的对比与分析，及对抽样语
料的频率统计，详细而深入地对英汉两种语言中的照应手段进行了分类对
比。除人称照应、指示照应和比较照应之外，本文将零照应作为同等重要的
一类照应手段来进行分析，因为零照应才是汉语的常规，是英汉语差异的最
显著之处。本文研究结果表明，虽然英汉演说语篇都有类似的四种照应手段，
但在数量、用法和使用频率等方面存在差异。总体来说，英语中照应手段的
使用较之汉语要频繁得多，而汉语中照应的使用虽少但更加灵活，可以采用
省略和重复原词的方法来实现。研究还发现，演说语篇中大量使用外指照应
来实现其交际目的，本文对外指照应在语篇构建中的作用进行了探讨。最后
本文从语言系统自身、民族文化传统、思维模式等角度总结并阐释研究结果。
本文第四部分主要在上文研究的基础上讨论英汉照应手段的翻译问题。
语篇分析的迅速发展极大地丰富了翻译理论和实践，翻译的单位已经由词汇
层、语句层扩展到段落层及语篇层。在语篇层面上进行翻译时，对于作为语
篇特征之一的衔接，译者必须仔细研究，力求在译文中达到街接标准。对英
汉照应系统进行对比分析，可以帮助译者更清晰地把握原文和译文街接方式
的不同，进而在翻译过程中采取适当的方式把源语的衔接机制用相应的译入
语街接机制来替代，以获得语义街接连贯的译文。
作为对全文的回顾与前瞻，结束语部分简要总结了本文的研究结果，指
出本文的局限和不足、尚未解决的问题以及今后努力的方向。
Text, or discourse, refers to any piece of spoken or written language which forms a continuity of meaning in certain context without being wholly confined to the syntactic structures. Since the late 1960s and the early 1970s, text analysis, as an effective way of linguistic study, has received growing attention from linguists and flourished ever since. The subject of study for text analysis is the unit above sentence which differs from sentence or clause not in length but in the aspect of cohesion. Naturally, cohesion becomes one of the key notions of text analysis. Halliday & Hasan's theory of cohesion (1976), the most representative achievement in this field, gives a detailed and sufficient account of the English cohesive devices including reference, and has thus aroused a keen interest in cohesion. Reference, as an important type of cohesive devices, refers to the relationship between certain items in a language which can only be interpreted by reference to something else. Reference is of high research va
lue in that it plays a vital role in realizing text coherence and passage transition and makes expression concise and precise.
It is noteworthy that in China most of the contrastive discourse studies were conducted on text in its broad sense, and there were few studies applying the theory of text analysis to a specific genre of language. Besides that, studies in this field prefer employing written language as their primary data of analysis rather than spoken language. The present study attempts to use oratorical texts as the data, in the hope that its dual characteristics of both written and spoken modes may help reveal as many similarities and differences between English and Chinese as possible.
Based on Halliday & Hasan's theory of cohesion, the thesis uses oratorical text as its data to conduct a quantitative analysis of the English and Chinese reference systems, interprets the findings and explores the problem of the translation of reference.
The thesis first traces back into the history of reseaches on cohesion. Achievements of Halliday & Hasan (1976, 1985) abroad, and the development in this field made by Hu Zhuanglin, etc., at home, are briefly reviewed. On the basis of summarizing features of previous studies, characteristics and purposes of the present study are made clear.
In the second part of the thesis, several terms closely related to the study are clarified, and reference and its function in oratorical texts, are introduced. In this part, the thesis first distinguishes between two sets of concepts: text versus discourse, cohesion versus coherence, and elaborates on the relationship between cohesion and coherence. Then the thesis introduces the oratorical text and its unique features in the perspective of text analysis, and attempts to define its mode as far as the present study is concerned. The function of reference, especially personal reference, in oratorical texts is discussed in the last section, of this chapter, which paves the way for the intensive studies to come in the next part.
As the most important part of the thesis, Chapter Three conducts a detailed and profound investigation of reference in English and Chinese oratorical texts through the methods of illustration and frequency analysis. In addition to personal reference, demonstrative reference and comparative reference, which are the most frequently expounded categories of reference, zero reference is regarded in the analysis as an equally important type of reference, since it is actually a common rule of the Chinese language and demonstrates the most prominent differences between English and Chinese. The study shows that, although all the four types of reference are found in both English and Chinese oratorical texts, they differ a lot in number, usage, frequency, etc. Generally speaking, there are much more reference items in English than in Chinese, while in Chinese, the referential relationship can be more flexibly realized through omission of the reference item or lexical repetition. It is also found that a large number o
值得注意的是，国内的语篇对比研究大多是在广义的语篇范畴内进行的，较少与特定的文体结合起来进行针对性的分析，而且多以书面语篇为语料进行研究，基于口语语料的研究很少。本文尝试以结构紧凑、逻辑关系严密、衔接手段极其丰富、具有口语和书面语双重特征的演说语篇为语料进行分析，在具体的语篇分析中检验衔接理论的有效性和可靠性，更加全面地揭示英汉语篇衔接的异同。这对我们最终分析其异同存在的社会和文化原因，并将篇章语言学的成果应用于翻译理论和实践及文体学研究中来说，将是一项有益的尝试。
本文以Halliday & Hasan的衔接理论为基础，以英汉演说语篇为语料，对两种语言照应手段的异同进行量化分析，用相关理论阐释所得到的结论，并探讨照应手段的翻译问题。
本文首先回顾了国外以Halliday & Hasan的两部著作(1976，1985)为代表的衔接理论研究成果，国内胡壮麟等对衔接理论的补充和发展，以及衔接理论在英汉语篇对比研究中的发展现状。然后在文献回顾的基础上，对国内外语篇衔接研究的特点进行归纳，指出本文的特点是针对特定文体、描述与解释并重、理论与实践相结合，并对本文拟解决的问题进行说明。
在接下来的第二部分当中，本文从基本的概念界定论起，引出并阐释了
照应作为一种主要的衔接手段在演说文体中的作用及研究价值。本文首先区
分了两组对应的概念一语篇和话语，街接和连贯，归纳分析了关于街接与连
贯关系的不同观点，并指明本文就这一问题的理解和看法，因为这将直接影
响到关于照应在语篇构建中作用的讨论。然后本文从语篇分析的角度介绍了
演说语篇，就其口语和书面语的双重特征进行探讨，并尝试对其语体进行界
定。在这一部分最后，本文总体分析了照应尤其是人称照应在演说衷体中的
特殊重要性，为以下英汉照应对比的展开做了铺垫。
第三部分是论文的主体部分，通过大量实例的对比与分析，及对抽样语
料的频率统计，详细而深入地对英汉两种语言中的照应手段进行了分类对
比。除人称照应、指示照应和比较照应之外，本文将零照应作为同等重要的
一类照应手段来进行分析，因为零照应才是汉语的常规，是英汉语差异的最
显著之处。本文研究结果表明，虽然英汉演说语篇都有类似的四种照应手段，
但在数量、用法和使用频率等方面存在差异。总体来说，英语中照应手段的
使用较之汉语要频繁得多，而汉语中照应的使用虽少但更加灵活，可以采用
省略和重复原词的方法来实现。研究还发现，演说语篇中大量使用外指照应
来实现其交际目的，本文对外指照应在语篇构建中的作用进行了探讨。最后
本文从语言系统自身、民族文化传统、思维模式等角度总结并阐释研究结果。
本文第四部分主要在上文研究的基础上讨论英汉照应手段的翻译问题。
语篇分析的迅速发展极大地丰富了翻译理论和实践，翻译的单位已经由词汇
层、语句层扩展到段落层及语篇层。在语篇层面上进行翻译时，对于作为语
篇特征之一的衔接，译者必须仔细研究，力求在译文中达到街接标准。对英
汉照应系统进行对比分析，可以帮助译者更清晰地把握原文和译文街接方式
的不同，进而在翻译过程中采取适当的方式把源语的衔接机制用相应的译入
语街接机制来替代，以获得语义街接连贯的译文。
作为对全文的回顾与前瞻，结束语部分简要总结了本文的研究结果，指
出本文的局限和不足、尚未解决的问题以及今后努力的方向。
Text, or discourse, refers to any piece of spoken or written language which forms a continuity of meaning in certain context without being wholly confined to the syntactic structures. Since the late 1960s and the early 1970s, text analysis, as an effective way of linguistic study, has received growing attention from linguists and flourished ever since. The subject of study for text analysis is the unit above sentence which differs from sentence or clause not in length but in the aspect of cohesion. Naturally, cohesion becomes one of the key notions of text analysis. Halliday & Hasan's theory of cohesion (1976), the most representative achievement in this field, gives a detailed and sufficient account of the English cohesive devices including reference, and has thus aroused a keen interest in cohesion. Reference, as an important type of cohesive devices, refers to the relationship between certain items in a language which can only be interpreted by reference to something else. Reference is of high research va
lue in that it plays a vital role in realizing text coherence and passage transition and makes expression concise and precise.
It is noteworthy that in China most of the contrastive discourse studies were conducted on text in its broad sense, and there were few studies applying the theory of text analysis to a specific genre of language. Besides that, studies in this field prefer employing written language as their primary data of analysis rather than spoken language. The present study attempts to use oratorical texts as the data, in the hope that its dual characteristics of both written and spoken modes may help reveal as many similarities and differences between English and Chinese as possible.
Based on Halliday & Hasan's theory of cohesion, the thesis uses oratorical text as its data to conduct a quantitative analysis of the English and Chinese reference systems, interprets the findings and explores the problem of the translation of reference.
The thesis first traces back into the history of reseaches on cohesion. Achievements of Halliday & Hasan (1976, 1985) abroad, and the development in this field made by Hu Zhuanglin, etc., at home, are briefly reviewed. On the basis of summarizing features of previous studies, characteristics and purposes of the present study are made clear.
In the second part of the thesis, several terms closely related to the study are clarified, and reference and its function in oratorical texts, are introduced. In this part, the thesis first distinguishes between two sets of concepts: text versus discourse, cohesion versus coherence, and elaborates on the relationship between cohesion and coherence. Then the thesis introduces the oratorical text and its unique features in the perspective of text analysis, and attempts to define its mode as far as the present study is concerned. The function of reference, especially personal reference, in oratorical texts is discussed in the last section, of this chapter, which paves the way for the intensive studies to come in the next part.
As the most important part of the thesis, Chapter Three conducts a detailed and profound investigation of reference in English and Chinese oratorical texts through the methods of illustration and frequency analysis. In addition to personal reference, demonstrative reference and comparative reference, which are the most frequently expounded categories of reference, zero reference is regarded in the analysis as an equally important type of reference, since it is actually a common rule of the Chinese language and demonstrates the most prominent differences between English and Chinese. The study shows that, although all the four types of reference are found in both English and Chinese oratorical texts, they differ a lot in number, usage, frequency, etc. Generally speaking, there are much more reference items in English than in Chinese, while in Chinese, the referential relationship can be more flexibly realized through omission of the reference item or lexical repetition. It is also found that a large number o
引文
1. Bill Clinton, 1993.1.20, First Inaugural Address.
2. Bill Clinton, 1997.1.20, Second Inaugural Address.
3. Bill Clinton, 1998. 6. 29, Remarks to Students and Community of Beijing University.
4. George Bush, 2001.1.20, Inaugural address.
5. George Bush, 2002.2.22, Remarks delivered at Tsinghua University.
6. Lawrence H. Summers, 2002.5.14, Address to Peking University.
7．薄熙来，2001．2．24，当选为辽宁省人民政府省长时的讲话。
8．董建华，2001．12．13，宣布参选连任第二任香港特首演说。
9．胡锦涛，2003．3．18，在第十届全国人民代表大会第一次会议上的讲话。
10．江泽民，1995．10．24，“让我们共同缔造一个更加美好的世界”，在联合国成立50周年特别纪念会议上的讲话。
11．江泽民，1997．11．1，“增进相互了解，加强友好合作”，在美国哈佛大学的演讲。
12．江泽民，1999．10．22，在英国剑桥大学的演讲。
13．江泽民，1999．12．31，2000年新年贺词。
14．江泽民，2001．4．29，为庆祝清华建校九十年讲话。
15．钱其琛，1995．9．27，“联合国维和行动的五项原则”，在第50届联大上的讲话。
16．温家宝，2003．12．10“把目光投向中国”，在美国哈佛大学的演讲。
17．顾静娴译，“再见”(理查德·尼克松离职演讲)。载裴妮，2000，《二十世纪著名演讲文录》。北京：中国对外翻译出版公司。
18．王建华译，克林顿总统第一次就职演说。载冯庆华，2002，《实用翻译教程》。上海：上海外语教育出版社。
19．千龙新闻网肆侄僮芡?998年在北京大学的演讲。
1. Brown, G & Yule, G. 1983. Discourse Analysis [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. Chao, Yuanren. 1968. A Grammar of Spoken Chinese [M]. Berkeley: University of California Press.
3. Coulthard, M. 1977. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis [M]. London: Longman.
4. de Beaugrande, R. & Dressier, W. 1981. Introduction to Text Linguistics [M]. London: Longman.
5. Enkvist, N. E. 1978. Coherence, Pseudo-coherence, and Non-coherence [A]. In J. O. Ostman, Cohesion and Semantics[C]. Abo, Finlang: Abo Akademi Foundation.
6. Gernbacher, M. A. & Givon, T. 1995. Coherence in Spontaneous Text [M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
7. Goody, J. 1977. The Domestication of the Savage Mind [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8. Gutwinski, W. 1976. Cohesion in Literary Texts [M]. The Hague: Mouton.
9. Halliday, M. A. K. & Hasan, R. 1976. Cohesion in English [M]. London: Longman.
10. Halliday, M. A. K. & Hasan, R. 1985. Language, Context and Text [M]. Victoria: Deakin University Press.
11. Halliday, M. A. K. 1985. An Introduction to Functional Grammar [M]. London: Edward Arnold.
12. Hasan, R. 1968. Grammatical Cohesion in Spoken and Written English. Part Ⅰ [M]. London: University College London Department of General Linguistics and Longman.
13. Hasan, R. 1971. Rime and Reason in Literature [J], Literary Style: A Symposium, ed. by Seymour Chatman. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14. Huddleston, R. D. et al. 1968. Sentence and Clause in Scientific English [M]. London: University College London Department of General Linguistics.
15. Hoey, M. 2000. Patterns of Lexis in Text [M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
16. James, C. 1980. Contrastive Analysis [M]. Harlow: Longman.
17. Li, Charles N. & Thompson, S. 1979. Third-person pronouns and zero-anaphora in Chinese discourse [J]. Syntax and Semantics, vol. 12: Discourse and Syntax. ed. by T. Givon. New-York: Academic Press.
18. McCarthy, M. 2002. Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers [M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
19. Quirk, R. et al. 1972. A Grammar of Contemporary English [M]. London: Longman.
20. Richards, J. C. et al. 2002, Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching & Research Press.
21. Stubbs, M. 1983. Discourse Analysis. The Sociolinguistic Analysis of Natural Language[M]. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
22. Thompson, G. 2000. Introducing Functional Grammar [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching & Research Press.
23. Widdowson, H. G. 1978. Teaching Language as Communication [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24. Widdowson, H. G. 1979. Explorations in Applied Linguistics[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
25. Xu, Yulong. 1987. A study of referential functions of demonstratives in Chinese discourse [J]. Journal of Chinese Linguistics, (1).
26．丁言仁(Ding Yanren)，2000，语篇分析[M]，南京：南京师范大学出版社。
27．高原(Gao Yuan)、刘润清(Liu Runqing)，2002，具有衔接作用的标点[J]，解放军外国语学院学报，第4期。
28．候维瑞(Hou Weirui)，1988，英语语体[M]，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
29．胡壮麟(Hu Zhuanglin)，1994，语篇的衔接与连贯[M]，上海：上海外语教
育出版社。
30．黄国文(Huang Guowen)，2001，语篇分析的理论与实践：广告语篇研究[M]，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
31．柯平(Ke Ping)，1999，对比语言学[M]，南京：南京师范大学出版社。
32．李运兴(Li Yunxing)，2001，语篇翻译引论[M]，北京：中国对外翻译出版公司。
33．刘礼进(Liu Lijin)，1997，英汉人称代词回指和预指比较研究[J]，外国语，第六期。
34．刘宓庆(Liu Miqing)，1998，文体与翻译[M]，北京：中国对外翻译出版公司。
35．罗选民(Luo Xuanmin)，2002，话语的认知模式与翻译的文本建构[J]，外语与外语教学，第7期。
36．马博森(Ma Bosen)，2002，国内对比语篇研究：现状与借鉴[J]，外语与外语教学，第10期。
37．马壮寰(MaZhuanghuan)，1998，演讲英语[M]，北京：外语教学与研究出版社。
38．苗兴伟(Miao Xingwei)，1998，论衔接与连贯的关系[J]，外国语，第四期。
39．潘文国(Pan Wenguo)，1997，汉英语对比纲要[M]，北京：北京语言文化大学出版社。
40．钱瑗(Qian Yuan)，1983，英汉语篇中某些衔接手段的比较[J]，外国语，第1期。
41．王东风(Wang Dongfeng)，1998，语篇连贯与翻译初探[J]，外语与外语教学，第6期。
42．萧立明(Xiao Liming)，2002，英汉比较研究与翻译[M]，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
43．熊文华(Xiong Wenhua)，1997，汉英应用对比概况[M]，北京：北京语言文化大学出版社。
44．熊学亮(Xiong Xueliang)，1999，认知语用学概论[M]，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
45．徐赳赳(Xu Jiujiu)，1997，话语分析在中国[J]，外语教学与研究，第4期。
46．徐有志(Xu Youzhi)，1992，现代英语文体学[M]，郑州：河南大学出版社。
47．许余龙(XuYulong)，2002，对比语言学[M]，上海；上海外语教育出版社。
48．张德禄(Zhang Delu)，2002，语篇跨类衔接研究[J]，解放军外国语学院学报，第6期。
49．张德禄(Zhang Delu)、刘汝山(Liu Rushan)，2003，语篇连贯与衔接理论的发展及应用[M]，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
50．赵世开(Zhao Shikai)，1999，汉英对比语法论集[M]，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
51．郑贵友(Zheng Guiyou)，2002，汉语篇章语言学[M]，北京：外文出版社。
52．朱永生(Zhu Yongsheng)，1997，韩礼德的语篇连贯标准[J]，外语教学与研究，第1期。
53．朱永生(Zhu Yongsheng)、严世清(Yan Shiqing)，2001a，系统功能语言学多维思考[M]，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
54．朱永生(Zhu Yongsheng)、郑立信(Zheng Lixin)、苗兴伟(Miao Xingwei)，2001b，英汉语篇衔接手段对比研究[M]，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
2. Bill Clinton, 1997.1.20, Second Inaugural Address.
3. Bill Clinton, 1998. 6. 29, Remarks to Students and Community of Beijing University.
4. George Bush, 2001.1.20, Inaugural address.
5. George Bush, 2002.2.22, Remarks delivered at Tsinghua University.
6. Lawrence H. Summers, 2002.5.14, Address to Peking University.
7．薄熙来，2001．2．24，当选为辽宁省人民政府省长时的讲话。
8．董建华，2001．12．13，宣布参选连任第二任香港特首演说。
9．胡锦涛，2003．3．18，在第十届全国人民代表大会第一次会议上的讲话。
10．江泽民，1995．10．24，“让我们共同缔造一个更加美好的世界”，在联合国成立50周年特别纪念会议上的讲话。
11．江泽民，1997．11．1，“增进相互了解，加强友好合作”，在美国哈佛大学的演讲。
12．江泽民，1999．10．22，在英国剑桥大学的演讲。
13．江泽民，1999．12．31，2000年新年贺词。
14．江泽民，2001．4．29，为庆祝清华建校九十年讲话。
15．钱其琛，1995．9．27，“联合国维和行动的五项原则”，在第50届联大上的讲话。
16．温家宝，2003．12．10“把目光投向中国”，在美国哈佛大学的演讲。
17．顾静娴译，“再见”(理查德·尼克松离职演讲)。载裴妮，2000，《二十世纪著名演讲文录》。北京：中国对外翻译出版公司。
18．王建华译，克林顿总统第一次就职演说。载冯庆华，2002，《实用翻译教程》。上海：上海外语教育出版社。
19．千龙新闻网
1. Brown, G & Yule, G. 1983. Discourse Analysis [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. Chao, Yuanren. 1968. A Grammar of Spoken Chinese [M]. Berkeley: University of California Press.
3. Coulthard, M. 1977. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis [M]. London: Longman.
4. de Beaugrande, R. & Dressier, W. 1981. Introduction to Text Linguistics [M]. London: Longman.
5. Enkvist, N. E. 1978. Coherence, Pseudo-coherence, and Non-coherence [A]. In J. O. Ostman, Cohesion and Semantics[C]. Abo, Finlang: Abo Akademi Foundation.
6. Gernbacher, M. A. & Givon, T. 1995. Coherence in Spontaneous Text [M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
7. Goody, J. 1977. The Domestication of the Savage Mind [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8. Gutwinski, W. 1976. Cohesion in Literary Texts [M]. The Hague: Mouton.
9. Halliday, M. A. K. & Hasan, R. 1976. Cohesion in English [M]. London: Longman.
10. Halliday, M. A. K. & Hasan, R. 1985. Language, Context and Text [M]. Victoria: Deakin University Press.
11. Halliday, M. A. K. 1985. An Introduction to Functional Grammar [M]. London: Edward Arnold.
12. Hasan, R. 1968. Grammatical Cohesion in Spoken and Written English. Part Ⅰ [M]. London: University College London Department of General Linguistics and Longman.
13. Hasan, R. 1971. Rime and Reason in Literature [J], Literary Style: A Symposium, ed. by Seymour Chatman. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14. Huddleston, R. D. et al. 1968. Sentence and Clause in Scientific English [M]. London: University College London Department of General Linguistics.
15. Hoey, M. 2000. Patterns of Lexis in Text [M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
16. James, C. 1980. Contrastive Analysis [M]. Harlow: Longman.
17. Li, Charles N. & Thompson, S. 1979. Third-person pronouns and zero-anaphora in Chinese discourse [J]. Syntax and Semantics, vol. 12: Discourse and Syntax. ed. by T. Givon. New-York: Academic Press.
18. McCarthy, M. 2002. Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers [M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
19. Quirk, R. et al. 1972. A Grammar of Contemporary English [M]. London: Longman.
20. Richards, J. C. et al. 2002, Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching & Research Press.
21. Stubbs, M. 1983. Discourse Analysis. The Sociolinguistic Analysis of Natural Language[M]. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
22. Thompson, G. 2000. Introducing Functional Grammar [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching & Research Press.
23. Widdowson, H. G. 1978. Teaching Language as Communication [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24. Widdowson, H. G. 1979. Explorations in Applied Linguistics[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
25. Xu, Yulong. 1987. A study of referential functions of demonstratives in Chinese discourse [J]. Journal of Chinese Linguistics, (1).
26．丁言仁(Ding Yanren)，2000，语篇分析[M]，南京：南京师范大学出版社。
27．高原(Gao Yuan)、刘润清(Liu Runqing)，2002，具有衔接作用的标点[J]，解放军外国语学院学报，第4期。
28．候维瑞(Hou Weirui)，1988，英语语体[M]，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
29．胡壮麟(Hu Zhuanglin)，1994，语篇的衔接与连贯[M]，上海：上海外语教
育出版社。
30．黄国文(Huang Guowen)，2001，语篇分析的理论与实践：广告语篇研究[M]，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
31．柯平(Ke Ping)，1999，对比语言学[M]，南京：南京师范大学出版社。
32．李运兴(Li Yunxing)，2001，语篇翻译引论[M]，北京：中国对外翻译出版公司。
33．刘礼进(Liu Lijin)，1997，英汉人称代词回指和预指比较研究[J]，外国语，第六期。
34．刘宓庆(Liu Miqing)，1998，文体与翻译[M]，北京：中国对外翻译出版公司。
35．罗选民(Luo Xuanmin)，2002，话语的认知模式与翻译的文本建构[J]，外语与外语教学，第7期。
36．马博森(Ma Bosen)，2002，国内对比语篇研究：现状与借鉴[J]，外语与外语教学，第10期。
37．马壮寰(MaZhuanghuan)，1998，演讲英语[M]，北京：外语教学与研究出版社。
38．苗兴伟(Miao Xingwei)，1998，论衔接与连贯的关系[J]，外国语，第四期。
39．潘文国(Pan Wenguo)，1997，汉英语对比纲要[M]，北京：北京语言文化大学出版社。
40．钱瑗(Qian Yuan)，1983，英汉语篇中某些衔接手段的比较[J]，外国语，第1期。
41．王东风(Wang Dongfeng)，1998，语篇连贯与翻译初探[J]，外语与外语教学，第6期。
42．萧立明(Xiao Liming)，2002，英汉比较研究与翻译[M]，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
43．熊文华(Xiong Wenhua)，1997，汉英应用对比概况[M]，北京：北京语言文化大学出版社。
44．熊学亮(Xiong Xueliang)，1999，认知语用学概论[M]，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
45．徐赳赳(Xu Jiujiu)，1997，话语分析在中国[J]，外语教学与研究，第4期。
46．徐有志(Xu Youzhi)，1992，现代英语文体学[M]，郑州：河南大学出版社。
47．许余龙(XuYulong)，2002，对比语言学[M]，上海；上海外语教育出版社。
48．张德禄(Zhang Delu)，2002，语篇跨类衔接研究[J]，解放军外国语学院学报，第6期。
49．张德禄(Zhang Delu)、刘汝山(Liu Rushan)，2003，语篇连贯与衔接理论的发展及应用[M]，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
50．赵世开(Zhao Shikai)，1999，汉英对比语法论集[M]，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
51．郑贵友(Zheng Guiyou)，2002，汉语篇章语言学[M]，北京：外文出版社。
52．朱永生(Zhu Yongsheng)，1997，韩礼德的语篇连贯标准[J]，外语教学与研究，第1期。
53．朱永生(Zhu Yongsheng)、严世清(Yan Shiqing)，2001a，系统功能语言学多维思考[M]，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
54．朱永生(Zhu Yongsheng)、郑立信(Zheng Lixin)、苗兴伟(Miao Xingwei)，2001b，英汉语篇衔接手段对比研究[M]，上海：上海外语教育出版社。