英语言外构式的认知研究

发布时间：2018-06-08 17:11

本文选题：言外构式 + 词汇构式模型　；参考：《江南大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：言外构式是认知语言学和语用学结合的产物,更确切地说是构式语法理论与言语行为理论的联姻。言外行为通常指间接言语行为(ISA),是语用学的经典课题之一。自二十世纪90年代末,言外行为研究出现了认知转向。最突出的表现在于Panther和Thornburg(1997,1998)建立了用于分析间接言语行为的言外场境认知模型(简称“场境理论”)。在场境理论的启发下,越来越多的学者开始关注言外行为的规约化和构式化研究,言外构式研究应运而生。国外学者在研究词汇构式模型中,将第三层的构式视为言外构式并将其定义为由固定成分和可变成分组成的,用来传达特定言外之义的规约化序列(Ruiz de MendozaBaicchi,2007;MairalRuiz de Mendoza,2008,2009;BaicchiRuiz de Mendoza,2011;PerezRuiz de Mendoza,2011;Del Campo,2013)。长期以来,言外构式作为语言研究的一方面,受到了认知语言学家的广泛关注,但是这些研究侧重于词汇构式模型(LCM)下的理论研究,而很少涉及实证研究(Del Campo,2013)。而已有实证研究中,对语言实现的研究中,Perez(2001)未将言语行为的语言实现看作是构式,而Del Campo(2013)在提取言外构式时方法过于主观,因此,有必要使用更为客观的方法来提取言外构式。此外,很少有研究涉及到言外构式的内部机制,尤其是其生成动因及认知基础。为了解决以上问题,本研究将深入了解言外构式的语言实现、生成动因和认知基础,由于构式按其句子类型可以分为陈述句、疑问句和祈使句构式,那么对于言外构式内部机制的研究则需探讨三类构式的特征,据此,我们根据Del Campo(2013)的著作,依据基本的句子类型(祈使句、陈述句和疑问句),对应地选取三种出现频率较高的言语行为(命令、建议和提供)作为研究对象,通过语料库检索其实现方式,进而研究言外构式生成动因以及认知基础。本研究以词汇构式模型为理论框架,以COCA(美国当代英语语料库)为语料来源,以三种言语行为动词为检索项来提取对应的言语行为例句,并从这些例句中提取言外构式,通过对这些言外构式进行定性和定量的样本分析,尝试回答以下几个问题:1)命令、建议和提供言语行为的语言实现方式有哪些?2)言外构式实现方式的特征是什么?是否有相似或不同之处,若有相似或不同,产生的动因是什么?3)言外构式的认知基础是什么?为了回答上述问题,本文在词汇构式模型的指导下,基于解释适切性原则(Mendoza,2014),首先对三种言语行为的语义特征进而分析,进而探讨其语言实现方式,并对这些言外构式进行描写、解释和说明。研究结果显示:(1)由于祈使句的意义条件与命令言语行为的强制性特征一致,所以在执行命令性言语行为时能够示例命令言语行为的定义成分。陈述句句子类型由于能够展示一个要实现的命题,因此,建议言语行为采用陈述句构式时能够给予听话者以更多的选择性。疑问句句子类型的开放性本质赋予了提供言语行为中听话者更多的选择性,因此,疑问构式能够表述详述程度较高的提供构式。此外,对于表述程度较低的言外构式,其意义的识解还需要借助一些语言机制对其进行编码。而对语言实现的研究也验证了:构式是形意的配对体,形式激活意义,意义由形式表示;言语行为的语言实现是转喻激活相应的高层情景认知模型的相关部分而实现;根据构式示例高层情景认知模型参数的数量决定其不同程度的规约性。(2)语言实现的研究表明:1)一种语言功能对应多种语言实现,即一种言语行为可以由多个形式来表达。这一特征的生成动因是认知识解。认知主体采用不同的识解角度来观察同一情景或事件会产生不同的识解,使用不同的语言表达。2)同类言外构式中都包含有不同详述程度的构式。弱势字面假说理论下,每种句子类型都可以表达不同的言外值。句子类型和言语行为的兼容性导致默认解读。三种句子类型的默认值,在不改变言外之意的情况下,都可以通过使用不同的语言机制来表示,这就导致了不同详述程度构式的存在。3)相比陈述句构式和疑问句构式,祈使句构式的构式数量最少,这一特征的原因是弱势字面语力假说下,陈述句和疑问句句子类型的开放程度要大于祈使句句子类型,因此前两者可以使用更多的语言机制来表示言语行为,而后者可以使用的语言机制有限。4)每类构式所使用的缓和和强化机制不同。这一特征产生的原因是基于礼貌原则,为了不伤害讲话者,陈述和疑问类构式更多使用缓和机制来减轻句子的语力,尽管祈使类构式更多的使用了强化机制来时听话者执行某一行为,但是基于礼貌原则,讲话者也可以不必使用过于严厉的句子,也可使用温和的句子来执行某一行为。(3)在言外构式的识解过程中,对于需要推理的以言行事行为,转喻扩展和缩减为言外构式的理解和识解提供了详细的信息。转喻扩展过程中,言外构式激活整个情景认知模型,转喻缩减使得言外构式激活凸显的部分并产生言外之意的识解。而在规约化构式中,构式可以直接激活言外之意,不需要转喻的作用。类似地含有施为动词的构式也不需要转喻,因为没有推理的需要,而是直接激活。转喻和隐喻并不是孤立毫无关系的,隐喻中的关联能够解释场境中非事件成分与事件成分间的转喻关系。在转喻缩减过程中,参数化操作使得次域凸显并执行具体的行为。本研究以词汇构式模型为理论框架,探讨了命令、建议和提议言语行为的语言实现方式,进而总结出言外构式语言实现的特征及其生成动因,最后探讨了言外构式的认知基础。此外,对于言外构式的研究有利于挖掘构式语法理论的应用能力,促进学科生态的良性发展。而对言语行为的全面研究和解释对发展语用学的传统经典话题,大有裨益。除此之外,对于言语行为语言实现方式的研究有益于交流的多样化,进而有利于日常人际交流的顺利进行。
[Abstract]:The exterior structure is the product of the combination of cognitive linguistics and pragmatics, more specifically the marriage of the theory of constructional grammar and the theory of speech act. The outspoken behavior is usually one of the classical subjects of Pragmatics (ISA). From the end of the 90s twentieth Century, the study of the study of the outspoken behavior appeared in the cognitive turn. The most prominent manifestation was the Pant. Her and Thornburg (19971998) set up a linguistic field cognitive model for the analysis of indirect speech acts ("field theory"). Inspired by the field theory, more and more scholars began to pay attention to the study of the protocol and structure of the behavior of the speech. The third layer structure is regarded as an external structure and is defined as a regular sequence (Ruiz de MendozaBaicchi, 2007; MairalRuiz de Mendoza, 20082009; BaicchiRuiz de Mendoza, 2011; PerezRuiz de Mendoza, 2011; 2013). As one aspect of language research, style is widely concerned by cognitive linguists, but these studies focus on the theoretical research under the lexical model (LCM), and rarely involve empirical research (Del Campo, 2013). In empirical research, Perez (2001) does not consider the language realization of speech act as a structure in the study of language realization. Del Campo (2013) is too subjective to extract the outer structure, so it is necessary to use a more objective method to extract the external structure. In addition, few studies involve the internal mechanism of the outer structure, especially its generating motivation and cognitive basis. In order to solve the above problems, this study will be deeply aware of the language of the language. Realizing, generating motivation and cognitive basis, because the structure can be divided into declarative sentences, interrogative sentences and imperative sentence structures according to their sentence types, the study of the internal mechanism of the outer structure of the three types of structures should be discussed. According to this, we are based on the works of Del Campo (2013), according to the basic sentence types (imperative, declarative and interrogative sentences), It selects three higher frequency speech acts (orders, suggestions and offers) as the research object, retrieves its realization through corpus, and then studies the motivation and cognitive basis of the formation of the utterance. This study takes the lexical model as the theoretical framework, and uses the COCA (American Contemporary English Corpus) as the source of the corpus, and three kinds of words. The verbal behavior verbs are the retrieval items to extract the corresponding examples of speech acts, and extract the external constructions from these examples. Through the qualitative and quantitative analysis of these expressions, we try to answer the following questions: 1) what are the commands, suggestions and speech implementations of speech acts? 2) the special expression of the utterance. What are the signs? Whether there are similarities or differences, what are the causes of the similarity or difference? 3) what is the cognitive basis for the external structure? In order to answer the above questions, this paper, under the guidance of the lexical structure model, based on the interpretation of the principle of appropriateness (Mendoza, 2014), first analyzes the semantic features of the three speech acts, and then, then, the semantic features of the three speech acts are then analyzed. The results show that: (1) because the meaning condition of the imperative sentence is consistent with the mandatory characteristics of the command speech act, the definition of the example command speech act can be given when the imperative speech act is executed. To show a proposition to be realized, it is suggested that speech act can be given to the listener more selectively when using a statement structure. The open nature of the interrogative sentence type gives more selectivity to the listener in the speech act. Therefore, the interrogative expression can express the detailed description of the provision. In addition, The meaning understanding also needs to be encoded with some language mechanisms. The study of language realization also proves that the structure is the pairing body of the form and meaning, the form is activated and the meaning is expressed by the form; the language realization of the speech act is the correlation of the corresponding high-level situational cognitive model of the metonymy activation. Part of it is realized; according to the number of parameters of the cognitive model of high level Situational Cognition Model of the structure example, the specification of different degrees is determined. (2) the study of language realization shows that 1) a language function corresponds to multi language realization, that is, a speech act can be expressed in many forms. The same construal angle to observe the same situation or event will produce different construal and use different language to express.2) the same kind of outer structure contains different constructional expressions. Under the theory of disadvantaged literal hypothesis, each sentence type can express different external values. The compatibility of sentence types and speech behavior leads to the default solution. The default value of the three sentence types can be expressed by using different language mechanisms without changing the meaning of the words. This leads to the existence of the existence of.3 in different detailed constructions. Compared with the declarative sentence structure and the interrogative sentence structure, the structure number of the imperative sentence is the least. The reason is the weak literal language force false reason. As a result, the openness of the declarative and interrogative sentence types is greater than the imperative sentence type. Therefore, the former two can use more language mechanisms to represent speech behavior, and the latter can use the language mechanism limited.4). The relaxation and reinforcement mechanism used in each category is different. The reason is based on the politeness original. In order not to harm the speaker, the statement and the interrogative structure are more used to mitigate the force of the sentence. Although the imperative category uses more strengthening mechanisms to perform a certain act, the speaker can not use a strict sentence or use a mild sentence based on the politeness principle. (3) in the process of the interpretation of the external structure, a detailed information is provided for the understanding and construal of the speech act, the metonymy extension and the reduction to the outer structure. In the metonymy extension, the outer structure activates the whole situational cognitive model, and the metonymy reduction makes the part of the prominence of the expression of the expression of the speech. In the formative form, the structure can directly activate the meaning, not the function of metonymy. Similarly, the constructions containing the applied verbs do not need metonymy, because there is no need for reasoning, but direct activation. Metonymy and metaphor are not isolated and unrelated, and the relevance in metaphor can explain the middle of the field. The metonymy relationship between event components and event components. In the process of metonymy reduction, the parameterized operation makes the sub domain highlight and perform specific behavior. This study uses the lexical model as the theoretical framework to explore the language realization of the command, suggestion and proposed speech act, and then summarizes the characteristics of the realization of the utterance language and its birth. In addition, the study of utterance is beneficial to mining the application ability of the constructional grammar theory and promoting the benign development of the subject ecology. The comprehensive study and interpretation of speech act will be of great benefit to the development of the traditional classical questions of pragmatics. The study of ways of realization is beneficial to the diversification of communication and is conducive to the smooth progress of daily interpersonal communication.
【学位授予单位】：江南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：H314.3

【参考文献】