口头学术语篇的元话语研究

发布时间：2018-04-27 13:44

本文选题：学生学术报告 + 交互型元话语　；参考：《华南理工大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：近年来元话语研究备受关注。元话语作为一种特殊的话语结构，普遍被称为“话语中的话语”，用以表明作者态度，反映语篇、读者、作者三者之间的关系。然而，现有研究主要集中于探索学术语篇中书面语的元话语研究，而对口头学术语篇的元话语研究鲜有涉及。本文基于Hyland（2005a,2005b）的分析框架，通过对语料库MICASE中的子语料库STP进行定量和定性分析，探讨元话语在学生学术报告中的使用情况和人际功能。本文主要围绕三个方面进行研究：（1）元话语在学生学术报告中的使用情况；（2）元话语在学生学术报告中所体现的人际功能；（3）口头学术语篇与书面语学术语篇中元话语使用方面的异同。分析表明，元话语资源在学生报告中普遍存在，其中互动型元话语比交互型元话语使用更为频繁。所有的元话语资源中，，立场标记语排行榜首。在交互型元话语使用过程中，过渡标记语和语码注释语使用频率高一些；而互动型元话语中，立场标记语和自我提及语使用较多。研究还表明，不同的元话语语言资源在学生报告中可以实现不同的人际功能，其中主要表现为交际功能和互动功能，交际功能帮助报告人实现报告的逻辑性和条理性的传达，而互动功能帮助报告人实现与听众者的人际互动。此外，与书面语学术语篇进行相比，书面语学术语篇中，交互型元话语比互动型元话语多，而口头学术语篇中，则是互动型元话语比交互型元话语多。口头学术语篇中排行榜首的立场标记语，在书面语学术语篇却是使用频率最低的。两种学术语篇中的相同之处，在于过渡标记语和模糊语的普遍使用。T-test检验显示口头学术语篇和书面语学术语篇存在显著性差异。该研究有助于我们对口语学术体裁的理解，为学术语篇相关的教学工作提供一定的启示，也有助于报告人在做报告中利用元话语策略达到更好的表达效果。
[Abstract]:In recent years, meta-discourse research has attracted much attention. As a special discourse structure, meta-discourse is generally referred to as "discourse in discourse", which is used to express the author's attitude, reflect the relationship among the text, the reader and the author. However, the existing studies mainly focus on the meta discourse of written language in academic discourse, but rarely on the meta-discourse of oral academic discourse. Based on the framework of Hylandan 2005a2005b, this paper probes into the use of meta-discourse in students' academic reports and their interpersonal functions through quantitative and qualitative analysis of sub-corpus STP in Corpus MICASE. This paper focuses on three aspects: the use of "1" meta-discourse in students' academic reports. (2) the interpersonal function of meta-discourse in students' academic reports. (3) the meta-discourse in oral academic discourse and written academic discourse. Similarities and differences in use. The analysis shows that meta-discourse resources are widely used in student reports, and interactive meta-discourse is more frequently used than interactive meta-discourse. Among all the meta-discourse resources, position markers are the top of the list. In the process of using interactive meta utterances, transitional markers and code-annotated words are used more frequently, while in interactive meta utterances, position markers and self references are used more frequently. The study also shows that different meta-discourse language resources can achieve different interpersonal functions in student reports, including communicative and interactive functions, which help the speaker to communicate logically and coherently. The interactive function helps the speaker achieve interpersonal interaction with the listener. In addition, there are more interactive meta-discourse than interactive meta-discourse in written academic discourse, while in oral academic discourse, there are more interactive meta-discourse than interactive meta-discourse in written academic discourse. The position markers at the top of the list of oral academic discourses are the least frequently used in written academic discourse. The similarity between the two academic discourses lies in the fact that the universal use of transitive markers and vague words. T-test shows that there are significant differences between oral academic discourse and written academic discourse. This study is helpful to our understanding of oral academic genres, to the teaching of academic discourse, and to the use of meta-discourse strategies to achieve a better expression effect.
【学位授予单位】：华南理工大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：H05

【参考文献】