英汉学术论文引言中的言据性及其作者身份构建研究

发布时间：2018-05-14 18:59

本文选题：作者身份 + 言据性　；参考：《曲阜师范大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：传统观点认为学术写作是客观的、中立的,避免个人情感的渗入。然而,越来越多的研究表明学术写作是一种作者与读者之间的学术互动和交际。作者通过各种各样的语言资源与读者进行交流并在语篇中构建自己的身份。学术语篇中的身份构建研究受到越来越多的关注。然而,对比分析英汉学术写作中的身份构建研究很少,目前尚未有从言据性视角对比分析英汉期刊论文引言中的作者身份构建。参照杨林秀(2009)对言据性的分类与定义,本研究选取了80篇发表于2012至2015年间的应用语言学领域的英汉学术论文引言(中英引言各40篇),建立小型语料库,旨在回答以下三个研究问题:1.英汉学术论文引言中言据性的分布特点是什么?2.在引言部分作者如何通过言据性构建身份?英汉作者的身份构建是否存在差异,如果存在,差异何在?3.影响作者身份构建的可能因素是什么?基于以上问题,本文首先对每个据素词进行人工标注,并利用AntConc 3.3和BFSU卡方计算器统计语料中言据性的使用次数和频率。通过对比分析言据性据素类别及据素词的使用特点,揭示英汉学术论文作者在引言中身份构建的特点并探讨造成差异的潜在因素。研究结果显示:英汉论文作者都使用不同种类的据素及各种实现方式在语篇中构建自己的身份,期刊引言中三类据素有着相同的分布方式。然而,英汉论文作者在不同据素的选择上存在明显差异。1.总体而言,汉语学术论文引言中据素的使用频率明显低于英语学术论文引言。2.英语作者倾向于使用报道据素和推测据素,汉语作者则更多的使用报道据素。3.在每类据素的实现方式方面,二者也存在着差异。汉语作者多使用客观的实现形式及较高承诺的据素词表达个人观点,英语作者则倾向于使用各种各样的实现形式及带有对话空间的词汇表达自己的主张。这些分布特点体现了作者构建身份的不同方式。首先,英语作者善于使用各种据素词汇引导读者对语篇进行解读,将语篇看做是与读者之间的沟通渠道,期待读者的参与。通过不同的据素实现方式,英语作者灵活地转移自己对命题的责任,建立与读者间的亲和力,试图呈现话语建构者的身份。汉语作者则倾向于列举前人研究,将语篇视为对知识的客观陈述,更加关注信息的可靠性,避免个人态度的显现。通过不同的据素实现方式,汉语作者增强信息的可靠性,建立个人权威,呈现学术研究者的身份。造成以上身份构建方式差异的可能原因在于作者文化背景及对言据性人际意义的掌握程度存在差异。本文为学术论文引言中作者身份构建研究提供了新的视角。在学术语篇中,作者可以采用言据性表达信息来源及自己的观点从而构建不同的学术身份。此外,本研究有助于加深学者对言据性人际意义的理解,帮助作者更好的掌握言据性的使用,提高语言写作水平。
[Abstract]:The traditional view is that academic writing is objective and neutral, avoiding the infiltration of personal emotion. However, more and more studies show that academic writing is a kind of academic interaction and communication between the author and the reader. The author communicates with readers through various language resources and constructs his identity in the text. More and more attention has been paid to the research of identity construction in academic discourse. However, there are few researches on identity construction in English and Chinese academic writing, so far, there has not been a contrastive analysis of the author's identity construction in the preface of English and Chinese periodical papers from the perspective of textual evidence. Referring to the classification and definition of textual evidence in Yang Lin 2009, the present study selects 80 English and Chinese academic papers published from 2012 to 2015 in the field of applied linguistics (40 English and Chinese prefaces) to establish a small corpus of English and Chinese academic papers. Aim to answer the following three research questions: 1. What is the distributional characteristic of the evidential nature in the preface of English and Chinese academic papers? In the introduction, how does the author construct his identity through textual? Whether there is a difference in identity construction between English and Chinese authors, and if so, where is the difference? What are the possible factors that influence the author's identity construction? Based on the above problems, this paper firstly uses AntConc 3.3 and BFSU chi-square calculators to calculate the number and frequency of verbality in the corpus by manually tagging each primordial word. By contrastive analysis of the categories of evidential primes and the characteristics of their use, this paper reveals the characteristics of identity construction in the preface of the authors of English and Chinese academic papers, and probes into the potential factors that cause differences. The results show that the authors of English and Chinese papers use different kinds of evidential elements and various ways of realizing to construct their identity in the discourse, and the three kinds of primes in the preface of the journal have the same distribution pattern. However, there are obvious differences between English and Chinese writers in the choice of different evidential elements. In general, the frequency of the use of evidential elements in the preface of Chinese academic papers is significantly lower than that in the preface of English academic papers. English writers tend to use reported and speculated elements, while Chinese writers use them more often. There are also differences in the implementation of each type of primes. Chinese writers often use objective realization forms and high-commitment primes to express their views, while English writers tend to use various forms of realization and words with dialogue space to express their opinions. These distribution characteristics reflect the author's different ways of building identity. First of all, the author is good at guiding the reader to interpret the text with all kinds of primordial words, and regards the text as a channel of communication with the reader, and looks forward to the participation of the reader. Through different materialistic approaches, English authors flexibly transfer their responsibilities to the proposition, establish affinity with the reader, and attempt to present the identity of the discourse constructor. Chinese authors tend to enumerate previous studies, regard discourse as an objective statement of knowledge, pay more attention to the reliability of information and avoid the appearance of personal attitude. Through different implementation methods, Chinese authors enhance the reliability of information, establish personal authority and present the identity of academic researchers. The possible reasons for the differences are the author's cultural background and his mastery of verbal interpersonal meaning. This paper provides a new perspective for the study of author identity construction in the introduction of academic papers. In academic discourse, the author can express the information source and his own views by using verbal information to construct different academic identities. In addition, this study is helpful to deepen the scholars' understanding of verbal interpersonal meaning, to help the author better grasp the use of verbal meaning, and to improve the level of language writing.
【学位授予单位】：曲阜师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：H15;H315

【相似文献】