评价理论下中西方英语灾难性新闻语言对比

发布时间：2018-03-06 14:30

本文选题：评价理论　切入点：对比分析　出处：《安徽大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：自Martin的Beyond Exchange:Appraisal Systems in English发表以来,评价理论在国内外受到众多关注,也得到了不断的发展和完善。该理论是系统功能语言学对人际意义研究的一个新发展方向,包括三大主系统：态度、介入和级差。该理论关注的是运用语言表达态度的资源。随着世界经济全球化的发展,各国之间的联系越来越紧密,灾难对人类生活的影响也越来越大,因此人们对灾难性新闻报道的关注度也越来越高。灾难性新闻报道的传播不仅可以使读者了解灾难本身,同时也能够引导大众对灾难的认识,鼓励或挫败人们对待灾难的心态。因此,灾难性新闻报道是值得研究者关注和研究的。本文分别选取China Daily和UAS Today报纸中的各15篇灾难性新闻报道在评价理论框架下分析灾难性新闻语言特点,并利用语言学软件UAM CorpusTool对比中美报纸在评价资源运用的异同,探讨表达人际意义的方法。本文在评价理论的框架下对中国和美国的灾难性新闻进行对比分析,得出以下结论：首先,在整个评价系统中,中国和美国的灾难性新闻报道都使用最多的是态度资源,其次是级差资源,最少的是介入资源。在这两组新闻中,三项评价性资源在运用比例中没有显著差异。在态度系统之内,情感性资源较多地出现在中国新闻报道,而鉴赏性资源被跟多地运用在美国新闻中。其次,在介入资源的整体使用上,两组语篇差异不大。但中国新闻在报道灾难事件时对介入系统下的扩展资源的使用要高于美国新闻,而且在扩展资源下,归属类资源也更多地出现在中国的新闻报道中。最后,在级差系统之内,判断性资源在中美灾难性新闻报道中大都属于语势而非聚焦。通过对比分析中美灾难性新闻报道中评价资源的使用,文章在评价理论呢框架下研究新闻报道,希望能为以后有关评价系统的应用和新闻语言的探索研究提供一些参考。由于该理论本身存在复杂性和一些主观因素,加之本文作者个人能力的局限,这方面的研究还需要不断发展和完善。
[Abstract]:Since the publication of Martin's Beyond Exchange:Appraisal Systems in English, the theory of evaluation has attracted much attention both at home and abroad, and has also been continuously developed and perfected. It is a new direction in the study of interpersonal meaning in systemic functional linguistics. It consists of three main systems: attitude, intervention and differential. This theory focuses on the resources of using language to express attitude. With the development of the globalization of the world economy, the relationship between countries is getting closer and closer, and the impact of disasters on human life is becoming more and more serious. As a result, people pay more and more attention to catastrophic news reports. The spread of catastrophic news reports not only enables readers to understand the disaster itself, but also leads the public to understand the disaster. Encourage or thwart people's attitude toward disaster. Catastrophic news reports are worthy of researchers' attention and research. In this paper, 15 China Daily and 15 UAS Today news reports are selected to analyze the linguistic characteristics of catastrophic news under the framework of evaluation theory. Using the linguistic software UAM CorpusTool to compare the similarities and differences between Chinese and American newspapers in evaluating the use of resources, this paper probes into the methods of expressing interpersonal meaning. This paper makes a comparative analysis of the disastrous news in China and the United States under the framework of evaluation theory, and draws the following conclusions: first of all, in the whole evaluation system, attitude resources are the most frequently used in the disastrous news reports in China and the United States. In the two groups of news, there is no significant difference in the proportion of the use of the three evaluative resources. Within the attitude system, affective resources appear more frequently in Chinese news reports. And appreciation resources are used more and more in American news. Secondly, in terms of the overall use of interventional resources, There is no significant difference between the two groups of discourses. However, the use of the expanded resources under the intervention system in China news reports is higher than that in the US news system, and under the extended resources, the category resources also appear more frequently in the news reports in China. Within the differential system, the critical resources in the catastrophic news reports in China and the United States mostly belong to the language rather than focus. By comparing and analyzing the use of evaluation resources in catastrophic news reports between China and the United States, the article studies news reports under the framework of evaluation theory. The author hopes to provide some reference for the application of evaluation system and the research of news language in the future. Due to the complexity and subjective factors of the theory itself and the limitations of the author's personal ability, The research in this area still needs to be developed and perfected continuously.
【学位授予单位】：安徽大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：H05

【参考文献】