中国英语专业硕士生毕业论文中的衔接分析

发布时间：2018-06-17 08:00

本文选题：衔接 + 衔接手段　；参考：《南京师范大学》2011年硕士论文

【摘要】：韩礼德和哈桑于1976年首次提出了较为完整和系统的衔接理论体系。以往国内外的研究结果表明,衔接是影响写作质量好坏的一个重要的因素,衔接与作文质量高低存在着相关性,但是,以往的国外研究大多数是分析较低水平的学习者的习作,极少数则是分析硕士生的英语文章,他们缺少将中国英语高水平的硕士毕业论文与高水平英语写作者的文章进行比较,前者反映的是作为二语使用者的中国学生的水平。在本研究中,笔者将以韩礼德和哈桑的这一理论为依托,试图探讨中国英语二语使用者和高水平英语写作者在衔接手段使用上的异同。本文研究对象为120名中国英语高水平的硕士毕业生和120名高水平的英语写作者,数据为120篇硕士毕业论文和120名篇高水平英语期刊的文章,国内大学的选择依照大学排名来进行,覆盖了高、中、低层面；在高水平期刊的选择,所选择的期刊都是英语语言文学方向权威的外文期刊,体现了英语高水平研究者的水平。在研究的变量方面,研究者确立了指称和连接范畴下的141个变量,分析工具为Range和Wordsmith软件,统计工具为SPSS11.0分析软件包。研究结果表明,中国英语二语使用者和高水平英语写作者在文章中都使用了大量的衔接手段。在指称的范畴下,中国英语二语使用者与高水平英语写作者相比更多地使用人称指称,使用的比较指称少于高水平英语写作者；在连接手段使用方面,他们的文章都呈现同一种态势,即增补型连接使用的最多,其次是转折型连接,然后是时间型连接,使用最少的是因果连接。另外,相比较于高水平英语写作者而言,中国英语二语使用者较多地使用因果连接手段,其他三种连接均少于高水平英语写作者。但是,从整体来看,他们在衔接手段的使用上不存在显著性的差异。比较结果还发现,他们在人称指称使用和时间连接手段使用上存在着显著性的差异。在两类文章中,他们使用的指称和连接在衔接项目选择的分布上大致相同,即各个衔接手段中出现频率最高的衔接项目基本相同。但是,与高水平英语写作者相比,中国英语二语使用者在特定的指称词和连接词的使用上表现出了过多和过少的使用趋势。在指称中,他们过多地使用了大部分的第三人称代词以及表达一般比较的词项different;而他们则过少地使用了its、such和as many。在连接方面,中国英语使用者过多地使用了一些简单的衔接项目,女Wand、or、therefore、next,对于一些诸如“程式语”的连接词,如in consequence、at last、to sum up,他们也表现出了过多使用的趋势,这反映中国学生擅于总结的倾向；相比之下,中国英语使用者又偏少地使用了其他一些常见、看似简单的词项,如(?)for example、nor;but、at least、in fact、rather、yet;earlier,他们在论文中较少地使用例证来辅助论述,他们在表达正反观点方面和本族语者有很大的不同,使用词汇的频率较低且不如本族语者的丰富。分析结果表明,在衔接手段的使用方面,中国英语高水平的硕士研究生已达到了较高的英语水平,但在某些类具体的衔接项目使用上,他们和本族语者还有一定的差别,仍需继续学习。
[Abstract]:Hallidy and Hassan first put forward a more complete and systematic theoretical system of cohesion in 1976. The results of previous studies in and outside the country show that cohesion is an important factor affecting the quality of writing. There is a correlation between cohesion and the quality of composition. However, most of the previous studies of foreign countries are the lower level of the learners. Most of the workings are the analysis of the English articles of the master's students. They lack the comparison between the high level Chinese English master's thesis and the high level English writer's article. The former reflects the level of Chinese students as the two language users.
In this study, the author, based on the theory of Hallidy and Hassan, tries to explore the similarities and differences between the two language users of Chinese English and the high level English writer in the use of cohesive devices. The object of this study is 120 master graduates of Chinese English and 120 high level English writers, and the data are 120 master's masters. In the paper and 120 high level English journals, the choice of the domestic universities is carried out according to the university rankings, covering high, middle and low levels. In the choice of high level periodicals, the selected periodicals are the foreign language journals in the direction of English language and literature, reflecting the level of English high-level researchers. The researchers established 141 variables under the category of reference and connection. The analysis tools are Range and Wordsmith software, and the statistical tool is SPSS11.0 analysis software package.
The results show that both Chinese English two language users and high level English writers use a large number of cohesive devices in the article. In the category of reference, Chinese English two speakers use personal references more than the high level English writers, and the comparison refers to less than the high level English writer; in connection with the means of connection. In terms of use, their articles all present the same situation, that is, the most used in the supplementary connection, followed by a turning connection, then the time type connection, and the least use of the causal connection. In addition, compared to the high level English writer, the two language of Chinese English makes the use of causality connection more used, the other three kinds of connections. They are all less than high level English writers. However, as a whole, there is no significant difference in the use of cohesive devices.
The results also found that they have significant differences in the use of personal referential use and the use of time connections. In the two category, their use of reference and connection is roughly the same in the distribution of connection items, that is, the highest frequency of cohesion in the various cohesive devices is basically the same. Compared to the writer, Chinese English two speakers have shown too much and too little use in the use of specific reference words and connectives. In the reference, they use most of the third person pronouns and the words different that express general comparison; and they use its, such and as many. in the connection too little. On the other hand, Chinese English users have used too many simple cohesive projects, women Wand, or, therefore, next. For some connectors such as in consequence, at last, to sum up, they also show a tendency to use too much, which reflects the tendency of Chinese students to be good at summing up; in contrast, Chinese English makes The use of some other common and seemingly simple words, such as (?) for example, nor; but, at least, in fact, rather, yet; earlier, are less used in the paper to assist in the discussion; they are very different from the native speakers in expressing the positive and negative views and are less frequently used in the native language than the native language. The results of the analysis show that the high level Chinese graduate students of Chinese English have reached a higher level of English in the use of cohesive devices, but there are some differences between them and their native speakers in the use of certain specific cohesive projects, and still need to continue to learn.
【学位授予单位】：南京师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：H319

【参考文献】