《格列佛游记》原著与简写本的功能文体研究

发布时间：2018-04-09 10:43

本文选题：功能文体　切入点：《格列佛游记》　出处：《江苏大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：本研究以功能文体学为基础,从及物性系统和语法隐喻两个角度对比分析《格列佛游记》及其简写本。借助语料处理软件UAM Corpus Tool 3.3对目标语料的及物性过程、概念语法隐喻和人际语法隐喻进行标注并统计。研究发现:1)原著中,按使用频率,及物性过程依次是:物质过程(66.39%)、关系过程(15.90%)、心理过程(11.82%)、言语过程(4.47%)、存在过程(0.94%)、行为过程(0.49%),而简写本中,依次是:物质过程(55.52%)、心理过程(15.95%)、关系过程(15.34%)、言语过程(10.28%)、存在过程(1.99%)、行为过程(0.92%)。这表明,关系过程在原著中更突出,而心理过程在简写本中更突出。原著中80%左右的物质过程、心理过程、关系过程和存在过程在简写本中被删减,仅有20%左右在简写本中被保留,简写本中新增加的物质过程、心理过程、关系过程和存在过程分别占7.73%、26.92%、19%和76.92%。原著中60%左右的言语过程和行为过程在简写本中被删减,40%左右在简写本中被保留,简写本中新增加的言语过程和行为过程分别占29.85%和16.67%。2)原著中的概念语法隐喻的使用频率(2.18%)高于简写本(0.92%);原著中大部分概念语法隐喻在简写本中被删减或转化为相应的一致式,其中57.14%在简写本中被删减,39.68%在简写本中转化为一致式,仅有3.17%被保留;简写本中出现了部分新的概念语法隐喻,占简写本概念语法隐喻总数的66.67%。3)原著和简写本中均有少量情态隐喻出现,但简写本中情态隐喻的使用频率(1.53%)多于原著(1.00%)。原著中大部分情态隐喻在简写本中被删减或转化为相应的一致式,其中65.52%在简写本中被删减,31.03%在简写本中转化为一致式,仅有3.45%被保留;简写本中出现了部分新的情态隐喻,占简写本情态隐喻总数的90%。原著和简写本中未出现语气隐喻。以上发现表明,改编者采用多种策略简化原著,以满足英语学习者的需要。这些策略包括:删减及物性过程;删减概念语法隐喻和情态隐喻,使用一致式表达。本研究启示:我国英语教学应根据教学目标及英语学习者现有水平采用原著或不同级别的简写本作为教学辅助材料。
[Abstract]:On the basis of functional stylistics, this study makes a comparative analysis of Gulliver's travels and their abbreviations from the perspectives of transitivity system and grammatical metaphor.With the help of UAM Corpus Tool 3.3, the process of target corpus, conceptual grammatical metaphor and interpersonal grammatical metaphor are annotated and counted.The order is: material process 55.52, mental process 15.9595, relationship process 15.34, verbal process 10.28, process of existence 1.99, behavioral process 0.92.This shows that the relational process is more prominent in the original book, and the psychological process is more prominent in the shorthand.The relationship process and the existence process accounted for 7.73% and 76.92%, respectively.About 60% of the speech and behavior processes in the original book were deleted from the shorthand and about 40% were retained in the shorthand.The frequency of use of conceptual grammatical metaphors in the original works is 29.85% and 16.67.2% respectively, which is higher than that in the shorthand book 0.92%. Most of the conceptual grammatical metaphors in the original book are deleted or converted into the corresponding consistent form in the shorthand.Among them, 57.14% were deleted from the shorthand, 39.68% were converted into consistent form in the shorthand, only 3.17% were retained, and some new conceptual grammatical metaphors appeared in the shorthand.There are a few modal metaphors in both the original and the abbreviations, but the frequency of using modal metaphors in the abbreviations is 1.53) more than 1.00 in the original works.It accounts for 90% of the total number of modal metaphors in abbreviations.There are no mood metaphors in the original and abbreviated books.These findings suggest that the editors adopt a variety of strategies to simplify the original to meet the needs of English learners.These strategies include the process of deletion and transitivity, the deletion of conceptual grammatical metaphors and modal metaphors, and the use of consistent expressions.The implications of this study are as follows: English teaching in China should be based on the teaching objectives and the current level of English learners to use the original or different levels of abbreviations as teaching aids.
【学位授予单位】：江苏大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：H315;H314

【参考文献】