法律语篇信息结构及语言实现研究—汉英语篇对比分析

发布时间：2018-05-01 00:36

本文选题：英汉对比分析 + 法律语篇　；参考：《广东外语外贸大学》2009年博士论文

【摘要】： 英汉两种语言已逐步成为同等重要的国际语言。迄今国内的对比研究主要集中探讨两种语言的普遍性异同，鲜有专门针对法律语言的对比，更少有学者依据丰富的语料库对法律语篇信息结构及其语言实现进行研究。日益加速的中外法律交流更加凸显了深入探索法律语篇本质的重要性。英汉法律语篇的言语交际从本质上讲在于语际信息的传递，传递的过程将受制于某些一般的和特殊的影响因素。从语言的功能视角出发，法律语篇呈现出鲜明的机构性特征。法律交际过程中信息的处理和语言的实现均取决于法律语境下的规则与目的。本研究旨在通过英汉语篇对比的方法探讨法律语篇信息结构及其语言实现的规律。通过理论演绎和语料分析，本研究拟回答以下三个研究问题：问题之一：在既定的语类和语域系统内，决定功能基本一致的法律语篇信息结构及其语言实现的因素有哪些? 问题之二：为了实现最佳的信息传递，法律语篇在微观层面如何进行语言实现? 问题之三：英汉法律语篇在信息结构和语言实现上有何异同? 本研究既有自上而下的纵观性分析，也有自下而上的微观考量。对比研究的功能视角建立在前人相关成果之上，包括交际学理论、系统功能语言学(SFL)和批评话语分析(CDA)。在此基础上构建了一个“四桥”分析框架来观察和分析法律语篇，并进行英汉对比研究。此外，，“法律信息处理系统语料库”(CUPS)为本研究提供了丰富翔实的语料，奠定了对法律语篇进行定性分析和定量分析的基础。分析框架下更为细微的考量参数使得本研究更为全面和细致，克服了前人研究的某些局限。法律语篇的机构性和功能性特征是本研究的出发点和归宿，这也是法律交际的本质所在。法律语篇的机构性本质使得对比研究能在相对确定的观察视阈下展开。法律语篇，无论其子类体裁如何，均受制于法律规范和法律目的，并且会涉及交际者为确立自身机构性身份而进行的语言选择。所有的语篇使用者，包括立法者、法官、律师以及其他当事人，均采取既有区别又有类似的言语策略去适用、解释和利用法律文本，从而达到各自的目的。本研究得出的结论如下：首先，在既定的语类和语域系统内，决定功能基本一致的法律语篇信息结构及其语言实现的因素包括社会文化体系、语言规约、法律体制以及语篇使用者的立场和态度。这些因素及其相关的参数决定着法律语篇信息的结构和语言实现，犹如四座充满许多桥墩的桥梁架设在有着不同语言习惯的交际者之间，促成法律交际的完成。其次，为了实现信息的最佳传递，法律语篇的交际者和使用者，尤其是法律翻译工作者必须从宏观上充分关注到社会文化以及法律体制的制约因素，在微观层面认真考量不同语言规约的作用以及语篇使用者的态度。信息的处理和语言的表征取决于人们对这些制约因素的认识和敏感性。此外，从语言的功能视角出发，通过对大量语篇宏观研究和微观考量，本研究总结出英汉两种语言在法律语篇信息结构和语言实现上的异同。对这些异同的认识将有助于提高法律语篇作者和翻译工作者对决定法律交际制约因素的意识，采取更有效的语言策略来达到法律信息最佳传递之目标，从而为法律实践和法律交流做出贡献。本研究的结果和结论将对立法文书的起草和修订，司法领域内诉讼当事人的庭审辩论和语言运用提供借鉴。鉴于英汉法律语篇宏微观对比性质，尤其是在不同语言、文化和法律体制下更加细微的信息单位和信息元素的对比分析，本研究对法律翻译实践有一定的参考价值，尤其是法律翻译质量评估。虽然本研究较为全面细致地考察了英汉法律语篇信息结构及其语言实现的异同，但也有一定的局限性。理论框架的建立尽管有较充分的理据，但概括性较强，难免会遗漏其它因素。此外，语料分析多为定性研究，定量分析稍显不足，而且大量的语篇对比分析也难免有一定的主观性。总之，本研究是针对英汉法律语篇信息及其语言实现进行研究的尝试性工作。希望初步的研究成果能对中外法律交流和法律翻译提供一定的参考价值。
[Abstract]:English and Chinese language has gradually become the same important international language . So far , the comparative study mainly focuses on the universal similarities and differences between the two languages , and there are few scholars to study the structure of legal discourse information and their language .

From the functional perspective of language , the legal discourse presents a distinct institutional feature . The processing of information and the realization of language in the process of legal communication depend on the rules and objectives in the context of law . The aim of this study is to explore the rule of legal discourse information structure and its language realization through the comparison of English and Chinese . Through theoretical deduction and corpus analysis , this study intends to answer the following three research questions :

One of the problems : What are the legal text information structures and the language implementation factors that determine the basic function of the function within the established language and language system ?

Question 2 : In order to achieve the best information transfer , how can legal texts be implemented in language at the micro level ?

Question 3 : What is the difference between English and Chinese legal texts in information structure and language implementation ?

In addition , the legal information processing system corpus ( CUPS ) provides a rich and informative corpus for the study , which lays a foundation for the qualitative analysis and quantitative analysis of legal texts .

Legal discourse , regardless of its genre , is subject to legal norms and legal purposes , and involves linguistic choices made by communicators to establish their own institutional identity . All discourse users , including legislators , judges , lawyers and other parties , have both the same differences and similar speech strategies to apply , interpret and utilize legal texts to achieve their respective purposes . The conclusions of this study are as follows :

Firstly , in the established language and language domain system , the legal discourse information structure and its language implementation factors that determine the basic function of the function include the social and cultural system , the language conventions , the legal system and the discourse user ' s position and attitude . These factors and their related parameters determine the structure and language realization of the legal discourse information , as if four bridges full of bridge piers were erected among the communicants with different language habits , and contributed to the completion of legal communication .

Secondly , in order to realize the best transfer of information , legal translators and users , especially legal translators , must pay close attention to the social culture and the restrictive factors of legal system , carefully consider the function of different language conventions and the attitude of discourse users at the micro level . The processing of information and the representation of language depend on people ' s understanding and sensitivity to these constraints .

In addition , from the functional perspective of language , this study summarizes the similarities and differences between English and Chinese languages in legal discourse information structure and language implementation . The understanding of these differences will help to improve the awareness of legal discourse writers and translators in determining the restrictive factors of legal communication , and adopt more effective language strategies to achieve the goal of best transmission of legal information , thus contributing to legal practice and legal communication .

The results and conclusions of this study will provide reference for the drafting and revision of legislative instruments , the court trial debate and the language application of the parties in the judicial field . In view of the macro - microcontrast nature of English and Chinese legal texts , especially the comparative analysis of information units and information elements in different languages , cultures and legal systems , this study has some reference value to the practice of legal translation , especially the quality evaluation of legal translation .

Although this study examines the similarities and differences between English and Chinese legal discourse information structure and its language realization , it has some limitations . The establishment of the theoretical framework , although there are more reasonable grounds , will inevitably miss other factors . In addition , the analysis of corpus is qualitative research , the quantitative analysis is slightly insufficient , and a lot of discourse analysis is inevitable .

In conclusion , this study is intended to study the English and Chinese legal discourse information and its language realization . It is hoped that the preliminary research results will provide some reference value for the legal exchange and legal translation of Chinese and foreign countries .

【学位授予单位】：广东外语外贸大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2009
【分类号】：D90-055;H030

【引证文献】