基于语料库的2016美国总统辩论中模糊限制语的语用研究

发布时间：2018-04-11 19:53

本文选题：模糊限制语 + 美国总统竞选辩论　；参考：《中北大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：1972年,G.Lakoff首次提出“模糊限制语”这一术语,他指出模糊限制语就是那些“把事物弄得模模糊糊的词语”。而后,许多研究者从修辞学、语义学、语用学等多角度探讨了模糊语现象。模糊限制语的研究覆盖各类语篇,包括新闻报道、商务信函、法律文件和节目访谈。而对于政治语篇,尤其是总统辩论方面的研究还为数不多。本文选取2016年Trump和Hillary的三场总统竞选辩论作为研究语料,采用Prince对模糊限制语的分类,以合作原则和礼貌原则为理论基础,通过自建一个小型语料库并借助Antconc 3.2.1解决以下三个研究问题:1)根据Sinclair的理论,2016美国总统竞选辩论中典型模糊限制语的语义韵特点是什么?2)基于语用原则,这些模糊限制语是如何帮助Trump和Hillary实现说话意图的?3)2016美国总统竞选辩论中所使用的模糊限制语有何语用功能?研究结果表明:1)在2016美国总统竞选辩论中,模糊限制语共出现4124次,覆盖了183种。其中直接缓和语最多,出现1514次,分布达37种;间接缓和语最少,出现474次,涉及24种;程度变动语多于范围变动语,前者出现1434次,多达85种,后者出现了702次,涵盖37种。典型的模糊限制语“about”出现252次,“will”出现230次,并都呈现中性语义韵。另外,“will”中的积极语义韵成分占到46%。“Very”出现219次,并呈现出积极语义韵。2)采用语用理论分析,两位总统竞选人在使用模糊限制语的同时都意识到了语用原则,并有意违反了合作原则的部分准则,遵守了礼貌原则中的策略准则、赞扬准则和赞同准则,从而达到顺利交际并赢得竞选的目的。3)2016美国总统竞选辩论中所使用的模糊限制语主要表现为以下语用功能:提供适量的信息,刻意地保留信息,表示礼貌和自我保护。本文丰富了模糊限制语的研究范围,提供了新的研究视角,并将语义学与语用学相结合,对相关研究有一定借鉴作用。其次,通过大量实例,本文深刻剖析了总统候选人在面对敏感和有争议问题时如何巧妙地避免承担不必要的责任,从而进行恰当的自我保护,实现说话意图。最后,通过研究结果,本文在一定程度上帮助我们更加深入了解总统选举。
[Abstract]:In 1972, G. Lakoff first put forward the term "hedges". He pointed out that hedges are words that "obscure things".Then, many researchers discuss the phenomenon of vagueness from the perspectives of rhetoric, semantics and pragmatics.The study of hedges covers a wide range of texts, including news reports, business letters, legal documents and program interviews.However, there are few studies on political discourse, especially on presidential debate.This paper selects three presidential debates of Trump and Hillary in 2016 as the research corpus, uses Prince to classify hedges, based on the principles of cooperation and politeness.By building a small corpus and solving the following three research questions: 1: 1 with the help of Antconc 3.2.1) according to Sinclair's theory, what are the semantic prosody characteristics of typical hedges in the US presidential debate in 2016?) based on pragmatic principles.How do these hedges help Trump and Hillary achieve their intention? what are the pragmatic functions of the hedges used in the US presidential debate in 2016?The results showed that in the 2016 presidential debate, the hedges appeared 4124 times, covering 183 kinds of hedges.Among them, direct detente appeared the most, 1514 times, distributed 37 kinds; indirect detente appeared the least, 474 times, involving 24 kinds; degree variable was more than range variable, the former appeared 1434 times, as many as 85 kinds, the latter appeared 702 times, covering 37 kinds.The typical hedges "about" and "will" appear 252times and 230times respectively, and all of them show neutral semantic rhyme.In addition, the positive semantic prosody in "will" accounts for 46 times. "Very" appears 219 times and presents positive semantic rhyme. 2) the two presidential candidates are aware of the pragmatic principle while using vague hedges.And deliberately violating some of the guidelines of the principle of cooperation, following the policy guidelines of the principle of politeness, commending the guidelines and endorsing them,In order to achieve the goal of successful communication and win the election, the hedges used in the American presidential debate in 2016 mainly show the following pragmatic functions: providing the right amount of information, deliberately retaining information, expressing politeness and self-protection.This paper enriches the scope of the study of hedges, provides a new perspective, and combines semantics with pragmatics, which can be used for reference in relevant studies.Secondly, through a large number of examples, this paper analyzes how presidential candidates skillfully avoid taking unnecessary responsibility in the face of sensitive and controversial issues, so as to carry out proper self-protection and realize speech intention.Finally, through the research results, this paper helps us to understand the presidential election to a certain extent.
【学位授予单位】：中北大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：H313

【参考文献】