批评转喻分析视角下的庭审话语分析
发布时间：2020-12-02 18:26
转喻作为人类的一种基本思维方式,普遍存在于人类的话语与行为之中,庭审话语也不例外。作为一门新兴的交叉学科,近年来庭审话语相关研究方兴未艾。随着认知语言学的兴起与发展,已有学者从认知视角对其进行了研究,但鲜少有人涉及庭审话语中的转喻现象。本研究试图将批评话语分析与认知转喻结合,构建批评转喻分析的理论框架,进而探析庭审话语中的转喻现象。基于批评转喻分析的理论框架,本文分别从三个步骤对庭审话语中的转喻进行分析:(1)转喻识别,即识别出庭审话语中的转喻;(2)转喻解释,即结合语境对庭审话语中的转喻进行详尽的解释,探析转喻的使用动机以及意识形态:(3)转喻评价,即对庭审话语中的转喻进行综合评价,分析其是否符合转喻的评价标准。本研究从“中国庭审公开网”中选取五场来自全国各地中级人民法院的刑事审判视频,将其转写为文字语料(约148,000字),结合定性和定量分析,试图回答以下三个问题:(1)庭审话语中存在哪些类型的转喻?(2)庭审话语中转喻的运作机制是什么?(3)如何评价庭审话语中的转喻?研究发现:(1)根据庭审话语的特征以及转喻识别的要素,庭审话语中的转喻可分为立法性话语中的转喻、程序性话语中的转...
【文章来源】：山东大学山东省 211工程院校 985工程院校 教育部直属院校
【文章页数】：101 页
【学位级别】：硕士
【文章目录】：
Abstract
摘要
Chapter One Introduction
1.1 Research Background
1.2 Research Questions and Significance
1.3 Research Methodology
1.4 Data Collection and Transcription
1.5 Thesis Layout
Chapter Two Literature Review
2.1 Previous Studies on Linguistic Features of Courtroom Discourse
2.2 Previous Studies on Interactions of Courtroom Discourse
2.3 Previous Studies on Power Relations of Courtroom Discourse
2.4 Previous Studies on Cognitive Perspective of Courtroom Discourse
2.5 Summary
Chapter Three Theoretical Framework
3.1 Critical Discourse Analysis
3.1.1 The Definition of Critical Discourse Analysis
3.1.2 Power and Ideology in CDA
3.2 Conceptual Metonym
3.2.1 The Definition of Conceptual Metonymy
3.2.2. The Classification of Conceptual Metonymy
3.3 Critical Metonymy Analysis
3.3.1 The Feasibility of Integrating CDA with Metonymy
3.3.2 The Procedure of Critical Metonymy Analysis
3.3.2.1 Metonymy Identification
3.3.2.2 Metonymy Explanation
3.3.2.3 Metonymy Evaluation
Chapter Four Analysis of Metonymy in Courtroom Discourse from thePerspective of CMA
4.1 Conceptual Metonymy in Courtroom Discourse
4.1.1 The Classification of Metonymy in Courtroom Discourse
4.1.1.1 Metonymy in Legislative Discourse
4.1.1.2 Metonymy in Procedural Discourse
4.1.1.3 Metonymy in Substantive Discourse
4.1.2 The Contrastive Study of the Three Types of Metonymies in CourtroomDiscourse
4.1.2.1 Similarities of the Three Types of Metonymies
4.1.2.2 Differences of the Three Types of Metonymies
4.2 Critical Metonymy Analysis of Metonymy in Courtroom Discourse
4.2.1 Critical Metonymy Analysis of Metonymy in Legislative Discourse
4.2.1.1. Referential Metonymy
4.2.1.2 Predictional Metonymy
4.2.2 Critical Metonymy Analysis of Metonymy in Procedural Discourse
4.2.2.1 Referential Metonymy
4.2.2.2 Illocutionary Metonymy
4.2.3 Critical Metonymy Analysis of Metonymy in Substantive Discourse
4.2.3.1 Referential Metonymy
4.2.3.2 Illocutionary Metonymy
4.2.4 Summary
Chapter Five Implications for Critical Metonymy Analysis of Metonymy inCourtroom Discourse
5.1 Theoretical Implications
5.1.1 Implications for Critical Metonymy Analysis
5.1.2 Implications for Courtroom Discourse Studies
5.2 Practical Implications
5.2.1 Implications for the Normative Expressions of Legal Professionals
5.2.2 Implications for Defense of Defenders and Self-defense of Litigants
Chapter Six Conclusion
6.1 Major Findings
6.2 Limitations and Suggestions for Further Research
Acknowledgements
References
Appendix
Publications
学位论文评阅及答辩情况表
【参考文献】：
期刊论文
[1]试论认知语言学与批评话语分析的融合[J]. 张辉,江龙. 外语学刊. 2008(05)
[2]中国法庭互动话语formulation现象研究[J]. 廖美珍. 外语研究. 2006(02)
本文编号：2895571
【文章来源】：山东大学山东省 211工程院校 985工程院校 教育部直属院校
【文章页数】：101 页
【学位级别】：硕士
【文章目录】：
Abstract
摘要
Chapter One Introduction
1.1 Research Background
1.2 Research Questions and Significance
1.3 Research Methodology
1.4 Data Collection and Transcription
1.5 Thesis Layout
Chapter Two Literature Review
2.1 Previous Studies on Linguistic Features of Courtroom Discourse
2.2 Previous Studies on Interactions of Courtroom Discourse
2.3 Previous Studies on Power Relations of Courtroom Discourse
2.4 Previous Studies on Cognitive Perspective of Courtroom Discourse
2.5 Summary
Chapter Three Theoretical Framework
3.1 Critical Discourse Analysis
3.1.1 The Definition of Critical Discourse Analysis
3.1.2 Power and Ideology in CDA
3.2 Conceptual Metonym
3.2.1 The Definition of Conceptual Metonymy
3.2.2. The Classification of Conceptual Metonymy
3.3 Critical Metonymy Analysis
3.3.1 The Feasibility of Integrating CDA with Metonymy
3.3.2 The Procedure of Critical Metonymy Analysis
3.3.2.1 Metonymy Identification
3.3.2.2 Metonymy Explanation
3.3.2.3 Metonymy Evaluation
Chapter Four Analysis of Metonymy in Courtroom Discourse from thePerspective of CMA
4.1 Conceptual Metonymy in Courtroom Discourse
4.1.1 The Classification of Metonymy in Courtroom Discourse
4.1.1.1 Metonymy in Legislative Discourse
4.1.1.2 Metonymy in Procedural Discourse
4.1.1.3 Metonymy in Substantive Discourse
4.1.2 The Contrastive Study of the Three Types of Metonymies in CourtroomDiscourse
4.1.2.1 Similarities of the Three Types of Metonymies
4.1.2.2 Differences of the Three Types of Metonymies
4.2 Critical Metonymy Analysis of Metonymy in Courtroom Discourse
4.2.1 Critical Metonymy Analysis of Metonymy in Legislative Discourse
4.2.1.1. Referential Metonymy
4.2.1.2 Predictional Metonymy
4.2.2 Critical Metonymy Analysis of Metonymy in Procedural Discourse
4.2.2.1 Referential Metonymy
4.2.2.2 Illocutionary Metonymy
4.2.3 Critical Metonymy Analysis of Metonymy in Substantive Discourse
4.2.3.1 Referential Metonymy
4.2.3.2 Illocutionary Metonymy
4.2.4 Summary
Chapter Five Implications for Critical Metonymy Analysis of Metonymy inCourtroom Discourse
5.1 Theoretical Implications
5.1.1 Implications for Critical Metonymy Analysis
5.1.2 Implications for Courtroom Discourse Studies
5.2 Practical Implications
5.2.1 Implications for the Normative Expressions of Legal Professionals
5.2.2 Implications for Defense of Defenders and Self-defense of Litigants
Chapter Six Conclusion
6.1 Major Findings
6.2 Limitations and Suggestions for Further Research
Acknowledgements
References
Appendix
Publications
学位论文评阅及答辩情况表
【参考文献】：
期刊论文
[1]试论认知语言学与批评话语分析的融合[J]. 张辉,江龙. 外语学刊. 2008(05)
[2]中国法庭互动话语formulation现象研究[J]. 廖美珍. 外语研究. 2006(02)
本文编号：2895571
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/wenyilunwen/yuyanyishu/2895571.html
