英语主位选择与篇章类型的关系
|
摘要
本文探讨了主位选择与篇章类型之间的关系。主位选择与篇章类型之间对应关系的分析由来已久,主位推进理论是捷克的Danes(1974)提出的有关语篇连贯的理论。他的基本看法是语篇的发展呈现为主位推进形式,并明确指出这种主位推进程序体现出篇章结构的框架,通常的情况是不同的文体采用不同的主位推进模式,Nwogu(1990)曾以大量的篇幅研究了医学类语篇使用主位推进模式的一般规律,赵建成和余毓国研究过英语汽车广告的语言特点。虽然前人对此做了大量的研究,但是我们认为中外学者在英语的分析中用于确定篇章类型的依据存在差异,而且语料规模存在不足。因此,本论文拟采用与不同认知过程相联系的篇章分类方法,并以此对收集到的30篇语料进行分类分析,对主位选择与篇章类型之间的对应关系重新加以分析探讨。
论文共分四部分:第一部分为引言,介绍本文讨论的主题,选题的背景及选题的目的。第二部分是正文的第一章,文献回顾。首先论述了本文所引用的理论—主位推进理论,以及该理论的提出、概念、它的几种模式和其他语言学家对它的评价运用及发展。并概述了篇章语言学中两组容易混淆的概念。第三部分简要介绍了本论文的语料收集过程和采用的研究方法。第四部分为文章的主体部分,从主位成分的选择和主位推进模式两个角度分析了五类篇章,对前者的研究可以帮助我们了解不同类型篇章信息组织的特点,对后者的研究则有利于我们建构对应的图式。鉴于主位在功能语法中是一个泛语言层级的概念,本文的分析重点首先放在小句层面。五类30篇的语料分析结果表明,只有将两方面的分析结合起来才能较有力地证明不同类型的篇章在主位选择上是有所倾向的。
在分析论辩类篇章时我们发现篇章的连贯不一定完全依靠主位推进模式这一衔接机制,单依靠主位推进模式我们并不一定能确定篇章的类型。于是在本文的第五部分我们将主位结构扩展到语篇层级进行考察,论辩类篇章的抽象结构就显现出来,所以我们可以说分析主位选择也是确定篇章类型的方法之一,然后在这一部分我们讨论了主位的研究对英语教学尤其是阅读和写作的启示。
最后是总结,作者指出语言研究者可以就主位本身能够作更细致的切分这一特点深入探讨。语篇是可以从多种角度,以多种方式来分析的,主位推进模式只是其中比较重要的一种。不同类型篇章在主位选择上只是一种倾向而非绝对,而且语篇类型可以按照不同的“精密度”来划分,也就是说语篇的类型可以划得粗一些,也可以划得细一些。通过本研究,我们希望英语教师和英语学习者在阅读和写作时对主位选择予以足够重视,以便更准确地解读篇章、更有效地构建篇章。同时也希望语言研究者在主位系统以及语篇元功能的其他方面作更深入更有益的探索。
This paper mainly discusses the relation between text types and thematic progressions. They have been discussed for a long time. Concurrently and consistently, the topics of theme and text type have been discussed and debated. As for the relation between the two, many believe that a focus on thematic choices can be a useful aid to the establishment of text types. This paper attempts to make an exhaustive and convincing analysis of the relation between thematic choices and text types, to establish the relation between them. The method of thesis adopted is from two perspectives: thematic choice and patterns of thematic progression. Through the latter study we found that it is not enough to prove the relation between thematic choice and text types. So we extend the notion of theme to the level of text. In the end we found that only the combination of thematic choice and patterns of thematic choice can the text type be established.
The thesis is divided into four chapters. The topic for discussion is introduced at the beginning part of paper, and the then the author goes on reviewing the two related aspects of analysis and notions which are often used interchangeably. The first chapter is literature review. It mainly includes former linguists study on thematic choice, text type and patterns of thematic progression. It also gives detailed explanation of two groups of confused concepts. Chapter Two offers the criteria of how the 30 samples are collected and categorized, and the methodology adopted. Chapter Three is the main body of the whole paper. It approaches the analysis of data from the two perspectives of each thematic element and the patterns of thematic progression. The Fourth chapter starts an attack on the problems discovered by extending the notion of theme to the level of discourse and it also includes the implications for English Teaching and Learning. Then we get the result is that only the integration of the analyses of both thematic element and thematic progression patterns can text types be established. Finally the author proposes the limitation of this paper and its influence on English teacher and English learner’s reading and writing.
This paper mainly discusses the relation between thematic choice and patterns of thematic progression. The results found in this paper are consistent with previous studies showing that coherence of texts may not be realized solely by cohesive devices. We hope this research can do some help for English teachers and learner especially in their writing and learning. On the other hand, language researchers delve further into the system of theme and the other aspects of the textual metafunction in functional grammar.
论文共分四部分:第一部分为引言,介绍本文讨论的主题,选题的背景及选题的目的。第二部分是正文的第一章,文献回顾。首先论述了本文所引用的理论—主位推进理论,以及该理论的提出、概念、它的几种模式和其他语言学家对它的评价运用及发展。并概述了篇章语言学中两组容易混淆的概念。第三部分简要介绍了本论文的语料收集过程和采用的研究方法。第四部分为文章的主体部分,从主位成分的选择和主位推进模式两个角度分析了五类篇章,对前者的研究可以帮助我们了解不同类型篇章信息组织的特点,对后者的研究则有利于我们建构对应的图式。鉴于主位在功能语法中是一个泛语言层级的概念,本文的分析重点首先放在小句层面。五类30篇的语料分析结果表明,只有将两方面的分析结合起来才能较有力地证明不同类型的篇章在主位选择上是有所倾向的。
在分析论辩类篇章时我们发现篇章的连贯不一定完全依靠主位推进模式这一衔接机制,单依靠主位推进模式我们并不一定能确定篇章的类型。于是在本文的第五部分我们将主位结构扩展到语篇层级进行考察,论辩类篇章的抽象结构就显现出来,所以我们可以说分析主位选择也是确定篇章类型的方法之一,然后在这一部分我们讨论了主位的研究对英语教学尤其是阅读和写作的启示。
最后是总结,作者指出语言研究者可以就主位本身能够作更细致的切分这一特点深入探讨。语篇是可以从多种角度,以多种方式来分析的,主位推进模式只是其中比较重要的一种。不同类型篇章在主位选择上只是一种倾向而非绝对,而且语篇类型可以按照不同的“精密度”来划分,也就是说语篇的类型可以划得粗一些,也可以划得细一些。通过本研究,我们希望英语教师和英语学习者在阅读和写作时对主位选择予以足够重视,以便更准确地解读篇章、更有效地构建篇章。同时也希望语言研究者在主位系统以及语篇元功能的其他方面作更深入更有益的探索。
This paper mainly discusses the relation between text types and thematic progressions. They have been discussed for a long time. Concurrently and consistently, the topics of theme and text type have been discussed and debated. As for the relation between the two, many believe that a focus on thematic choices can be a useful aid to the establishment of text types. This paper attempts to make an exhaustive and convincing analysis of the relation between thematic choices and text types, to establish the relation between them. The method of thesis adopted is from two perspectives: thematic choice and patterns of thematic progression. Through the latter study we found that it is not enough to prove the relation between thematic choice and text types. So we extend the notion of theme to the level of text. In the end we found that only the combination of thematic choice and patterns of thematic choice can the text type be established.
The thesis is divided into four chapters. The topic for discussion is introduced at the beginning part of paper, and the then the author goes on reviewing the two related aspects of analysis and notions which are often used interchangeably. The first chapter is literature review. It mainly includes former linguists study on thematic choice, text type and patterns of thematic progression. It also gives detailed explanation of two groups of confused concepts. Chapter Two offers the criteria of how the 30 samples are collected and categorized, and the methodology adopted. Chapter Three is the main body of the whole paper. It approaches the analysis of data from the two perspectives of each thematic element and the patterns of thematic progression. The Fourth chapter starts an attack on the problems discovered by extending the notion of theme to the level of discourse and it also includes the implications for English Teaching and Learning. Then we get the result is that only the integration of the analyses of both thematic element and thematic progression patterns can text types be established. Finally the author proposes the limitation of this paper and its influence on English teacher and English learner’s reading and writing.
This paper mainly discusses the relation between thematic choice and patterns of thematic progression. The results found in this paper are consistent with previous studies showing that coherence of texts may not be realized solely by cohesive devices. We hope this research can do some help for English teachers and learner especially in their writing and learning. On the other hand, language researchers delve further into the system of theme and the other aspects of the textual metafunction in functional grammar.
引文
[1] Bates, E. 1976. Language and Context. New York City: Academic Press.
[2] Berry, M. 1995. Thematic options and success in writing. In M. Ghadessey (ed.) Thematic Development in English Texts. London: Pinter.
[3]Brown, G. and Yule,G. 1983. Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridg University Press.
[4] Cook, G. 1994. Discourse and Literature. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
[5] Danes, F. 1970. On linguistic analysis of text structure. In Folia Linguistics VI. 72-78
[6] de Beaugrande, R. and W. Dressler. 1981. Introduction to Text Linguistics. London: Longman
[7] Ellis, R. 1994. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
[8] Enkvist, N. 1973. Linguistic Stylistics. The Hague: Mouton.
[9] Fowler, R. 1991. Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the Press. London: Routledge
[10] Francis, G. 1990. Theme in the daily press. In Occasional Papers in Systemic Linguistics (Vol. 4).
[11] Fries, P.H. 1983. On the status of theme in English: arguments from discourse. In Petofi J S, Sozer E (eds), Micro and Macro Connexity of Texts. Hamburg: Helmut Baske.
[12] Gee, J.P. 1999. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method. Beijing: FLTRP.
[13] Ghadessey, M. 1995. Thematic development and its relationship to registers and genres. In M. Ghadessey (ed.) Thematic Development in English Texts. London: Printer.
[14] Giora, R. 1983. Segmentation and segment cohesion. On the thematic organization of the text. Text 3 (2): 155-182.
[15] Givon, T. 1995. Coherence in text vs. coherence in mind. In M.A. Gernsbacher and T. Givon (ed.). Coherence in Spontaneous Text. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
[16] Halliday, M.A.K. and Hasan, R. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
[17] Halliday, M.A.K. 1994. Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
[18] Hoey, M.P. 1991. Patterns of Lexis in Text. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
[19] Martin, J. 1992. English Text: System and Structure. Beijing: Peking University Press.
[20] Matthews, P.H. 2000. Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[21] McCarthy, M. 1994. Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[22] McCarthy, M. and R. Carter. 1994. Language as Discourse: Perspectives for Language Teaching. London: Longman.
[23] Joseph, G. 1999. MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
[24] Joseph, G. 2001. MLA Style Manual and Guide to Scholarly Publishing. New York: The Modern Language Association of America.
[25] Nwogu, K.N. 1990. Discourse variation in medical texts. In Monographs in Systemic Linguistics (Vol. 2).
[26] Ouhalla, J. 1991. Functional Categories and Parametric Variation. London: Routledge.
[27] Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., and Svartvik, J. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
[26] Siewierska, A. 1991. Functional Grammar. London: Routledge.
[28] Thompson, G. 1996. Introducing Functional Grammar. Beijing: FLTRP.
[29] van Dijk, Teun A. 1981. Studies in the Pragmatics of Discourse. The Hague: Mouton.
[30] Verschueren, J. 1999. Understanding Pragmatics. Beijing: FLTRP. [31 Virtanen, T. 1993. Discourse Functions of Adverbial Placement in English. Abo Akademi University Press.
[32] Widdowson, H. 1979. Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[33] 程雨民,1989,《英语语体学》,上海:上海外语教育出版社。
[34] 大学英语阅读 100 篇,2000,北京:科学技术文献出版社。
[35] 顾明华,1996,“论英语主位的语篇功能”,上海:《外国语》第 1 期。
[36] 胡壮麟、朱永生、张德禄,1989,《系统功能语法概论》,长沙:湖南教育出版社。
[37] 胡壮麟,1994,《语篇的衔接与连贯》,上海:上海外语教育出版社。
[38] 胡壮麟,1998,“系统功能语言学近况”,上海:《外国语》第 1 期。
[39] 黄国文,1988,《语篇分析概要》,长沙:湖南教育出版社。
[40] 黄衍,1985,“试论英语主位和述位”,上海:《外国语》第 5 期。
[41] 刘辰诞,1999,《教学篇章语言学》, 上海:上海外语教育出版社。
[42] 彭宣维,2000,《英汉语篇综合对比》,上海:上海外语教育出版社。
[43] 彭宣维,2002,《语言过程与维度》,北京:清华大学出版社。
[44] 戚雨村,1993,“布拉格学派和马泰休斯的语言理论”,上海:《外国语》第 5 期。
[45] 项兰,2002,“主位推进模式在阅读教学中的应用”,大连:《外语与外语教学》For example: (How did you get here so early?)
[46] 应惠兰,1999, 《新编大学英语》, 北京: 外语教学与研究出版社.
[2] Berry, M. 1995. Thematic options and success in writing. In M. Ghadessey (ed.) Thematic Development in English Texts. London: Pinter.
[3]Brown, G. and Yule,G. 1983. Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridg University Press.
[4] Cook, G. 1994. Discourse and Literature. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
[5] Danes, F. 1970. On linguistic analysis of text structure. In Folia Linguistics VI. 72-78
[6] de Beaugrande, R. and W. Dressler. 1981. Introduction to Text Linguistics. London: Longman
[7] Ellis, R. 1994. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
[8] Enkvist, N. 1973. Linguistic Stylistics. The Hague: Mouton.
[9] Fowler, R. 1991. Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the Press. London: Routledge
[10] Francis, G. 1990. Theme in the daily press. In Occasional Papers in Systemic Linguistics (Vol. 4).
[11] Fries, P.H. 1983. On the status of theme in English: arguments from discourse. In Petofi J S, Sozer E (eds), Micro and Macro Connexity of Texts. Hamburg: Helmut Baske.
[12] Gee, J.P. 1999. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method. Beijing: FLTRP.
[13] Ghadessey, M. 1995. Thematic development and its relationship to registers and genres. In M. Ghadessey (ed.) Thematic Development in English Texts. London: Printer.
[14] Giora, R. 1983. Segmentation and segment cohesion. On the thematic organization of the text. Text 3 (2): 155-182.
[15] Givon, T. 1995. Coherence in text vs. coherence in mind. In M.A. Gernsbacher and T. Givon (ed.). Coherence in Spontaneous Text. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
[16] Halliday, M.A.K. and Hasan, R. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
[17] Halliday, M.A.K. 1994. Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
[18] Hoey, M.P. 1991. Patterns of Lexis in Text. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
[19] Martin, J. 1992. English Text: System and Structure. Beijing: Peking University Press.
[20] Matthews, P.H. 2000. Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[21] McCarthy, M. 1994. Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[22] McCarthy, M. and R. Carter. 1994. Language as Discourse: Perspectives for Language Teaching. London: Longman.
[23] Joseph, G. 1999. MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
[24] Joseph, G. 2001. MLA Style Manual and Guide to Scholarly Publishing. New York: The Modern Language Association of America.
[25] Nwogu, K.N. 1990. Discourse variation in medical texts. In Monographs in Systemic Linguistics (Vol. 2).
[26] Ouhalla, J. 1991. Functional Categories and Parametric Variation. London: Routledge.
[27] Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., and Svartvik, J. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
[26] Siewierska, A. 1991. Functional Grammar. London: Routledge.
[28] Thompson, G. 1996. Introducing Functional Grammar. Beijing: FLTRP.
[29] van Dijk, Teun A. 1981. Studies in the Pragmatics of Discourse. The Hague: Mouton.
[30] Verschueren, J. 1999. Understanding Pragmatics. Beijing: FLTRP. [31 Virtanen, T. 1993. Discourse Functions of Adverbial Placement in English. Abo Akademi University Press.
[32] Widdowson, H. 1979. Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[33] 程雨民,1989,《英语语体学》,上海:上海外语教育出版社。
[34] 大学英语阅读 100 篇,2000,北京:科学技术文献出版社。
[35] 顾明华,1996,“论英语主位的语篇功能”,上海:《外国语》第 1 期。
[36] 胡壮麟、朱永生、张德禄,1989,《系统功能语法概论》,长沙:湖南教育出版社。
[37] 胡壮麟,1994,《语篇的衔接与连贯》,上海:上海外语教育出版社。
[38] 胡壮麟,1998,“系统功能语言学近况”,上海:《外国语》第 1 期。
[39] 黄国文,1988,《语篇分析概要》,长沙:湖南教育出版社。
[40] 黄衍,1985,“试论英语主位和述位”,上海:《外国语》第 5 期。
[41] 刘辰诞,1999,《教学篇章语言学》, 上海:上海外语教育出版社。
[42] 彭宣维,2000,《英汉语篇综合对比》,上海:上海外语教育出版社。
[43] 彭宣维,2002,《语言过程与维度》,北京:清华大学出版社。
[44] 戚雨村,1993,“布拉格学派和马泰休斯的语言理论”,上海:《外国语》第 5 期。
[45] 项兰,2002,“主位推进模式在阅读教学中的应用”,大连:《外语与外语教学》For example: (How did you get here so early?)
[46] 应惠兰,1999, 《新编大学英语》, 北京: 外语教学与研究出版社.