英汉语篇的语法衔接手段差异对比及成因研究

发布时间：2018-05-11 22:17

本文选题：照应 + 替代　；参考：《四川师范大学》2009年硕士论文

【摘要】： 本文从对外汉语语篇教学现状出发,针对教学中照应、替代、省略方面出现的问题,以韩礼德的功能主义语言学、对比语言学理论、语篇分析理论及语篇衔接理论为指导,全面、充分地对比了英汉语篇中照应、替代和省略三种衔接手段的差异。在照应方面,人称照应、指示照应和比较照应除了在形式和表达上不同以外,还存在着诸如使用频率、使用功能等方面的不同。在英汉语篇的替代现象中,由于英语有词的屈折变化形式,所以名词性替代词有单复数形式的区分,动词性替代词有时态上的形式变化,而这些都是汉语所没有的。其次,英汉两种语言中的替代现象在具体的表达上并不体现为一一对应的关系,相反,还体现出较大的差异。最后,汉语中的替代现象出现的频率要低于英语。英汉语里都有名词性省略、动词性省略和小句性省略。但是英语中的省略常伴有形式或形态的变化,而汉语没有。英语中动词性省略,特别是谓语实义动词的省略要多于汉语,而汉语中主语的省略要多于英语。并且,英汉语的省略现象不是一一对应的关系。因此,在比较的基础之上,我们从语言系统的角度出发,从语言类型学理论、主题性理论等微观层面到不同思维方式、民族心理、哲学及文化等宏观层面探讨其产生差异的原因。在对比分析英汉语篇照应、替代和省略三种衔接手段的差异及产生差异根源的基础之上,我们针对对外汉语语篇连贯与衔接教学中存在的问题,提出了相关的教学建议。笔者力求通过对英汉语篇中照应、替代和省略三种衔接手段异同的充分描写,对差异根源的透彻分析,提出了相应的教学策略,以期减少对外汉语语篇教学中这三种语法衔接手段偏误,提高母语为英语的汉语习得者的语篇连贯性。但是需要指出的是,由于提出的只是教学策略,其具体实施还需在实际教学中不断落实和完善,其教学效果还需在教学实践中不断检验。
[Abstract]:Based on the present situation of discourse teaching in TCFL, this paper aims at the problems of reference, substitution and ellipsis in teaching, guided by Halliday's functional linguistics, contrastive linguistic theory, discourse analysis theory and discourse cohesion theory. This paper makes a comprehensive and full comparison of the three cohesive devices in English and Chinese texts: anaphora, substitution and ellipsis. In the aspect of anaphora, personal anaphora, deixis anaphora and comparative anaphora are different not only in form and expression, but also in use frequency and function. In the substitution of English and Chinese texts, because of the inflectional forms of English words, there is a distinction between noun substitutes and verb substitutions in the form of single multiplicity and tense, which are not found in Chinese. Secondly, the substitution phenomenon in English and Chinese does not reflect one-to-one correspondence in concrete expression, on the contrary, it also shows great difference. Finally, the frequency of substitution in Chinese is lower than that in English. There are nominal ellipsis, verb ellipsis and clause ellipsis in English and Chinese. However, ellipsis in English is often accompanied by changes in form or form, but not in Chinese. In English, verb ellipsis, especially predicate actual verb, is more ellipsis than Chinese, and the subject ellipsis is more in Chinese than in English. Moreover, ellipsis in English and Chinese is not a one-to-one relationship. Therefore, on the basis of comparison, from the perspective of language system, from the micro level of linguistic typology theory and thematic theory to different ways of thinking, national psychology, This paper discusses the causes of the differences in philosophy and culture at the macro level. Based on the contrastive analysis of the differences among the three cohesive devices in English and Chinese, such as anaphora, substitution and omission, and the root causes of the differences, we put forward some relevant teaching suggestions in view of the problems existing in the teaching of coherence and cohesion in Chinese as a foreign language. The author tries to make a thorough analysis of the root causes of the differences and similarities of the three cohesive devices in English and Chinese texts by describing the similarities and differences of anaphora, substitution and ellipsis, and puts forward the corresponding teaching strategies. The purpose of this paper is to reduce the errors of the three grammatical cohesive devices in the teaching of Chinese as a foreign language and to improve the coherence of the Chinese learners who are native speakers of English. However, it should be pointed out that because the teaching strategy is only put forward, its concrete implementation needs to be carried out and perfected in the actual teaching, and its teaching effect should be constantly tested in the teaching practice.
【学位授予单位】：四川师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2009
【分类号】：H315.9

【参考文献】