西方语言学论文adiachronicanalysisofthemerhemetheory.docx

西方语言学论文adiachronicanalysisofthemerhemetheory.docx

《西方语言学论文adiachronicanalysisofthemerhemetheory.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《西方语言学论文adiachronicanalysisofthemerhemetheory.docx（6页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

西方语言学论文adiachronicanalysisofthemerhemetheory

西方语言学论文adiachronicanalysisofthemerhemetheory

西方语言学论文adiachronicanalysisofthemerhemetheoryADiachronicAnalysisofTheme/RhemeTheory1.Introduction2.LiteratureRiview3.AnalysisofTheme/RhemeideasbyWeil,Mathesius,FirbasandHalliday3.1HenriWeil3.2Mathesius3.3Firbas3.4Halliday（每部分包括个人的理论基础、定义、贡献、不足四小部分）4.Conclusion1.IntroductionTheme/Rhemetheoryisanimportantfunctionallinguistictheoryandappliedinmanyareas,suchasEnglishteaching,translationstudiesetc.whilemoreandmoreattentionisdrawnintoitsapplication,theresearchtoitshistoryanddevelopmentseemstobekindofneglected,.However,theknowledgeofthehistorywilldefinitelyforitsuseasawhole.Outofthisreason,thispaperwillmakeadiachronicstudyofThemeandRhemetheory.Uptonow,theresearchesaboutThemeandRhemefocusonitsapplication,especiallytheapplicationofHalliday’stheory.Besides,someliteratureisaboutthehistory,buttheyareonlyconcernedwithpartofthehistoryofdevelopment.Afullresearchisstillblank.Inthiscase,thispaperisnecessary.Thefollowingpartcanbedividedintoparts:

2.Literaturereview3.AnalysisofTheme/RhemeideasbyWeil,Mathesius,FirbasandHallidayThetermsofThemeandRhemaretheproductoffunctionallinguistics.Tobeexact,itoriginatesfromthefounderofPragueSchool,Mathesius.RelevantresearchesalsotakeMathesiusastheinitioatorofTheme/RhemeandtheirresearchesbeginwithMathesius.However,Mathesius’ideasaboutThemeandRhemearemainlyinspiredbyanotherFrenchscholar,HenriWeil.Therefore,afullstudyofthedevelopmentofTheme/RhemecannotneglectWeil.Inthiscase,theprominentscholarswhomakeremarkablecontributiontoTheme/RhemetheoryisWeil,Mathesius,FirbasandHalliday.Inthispart,IwillillustrateTheme/Rhemeofthefourresearchersfromfourpointsofview:

thetheoteticalbase,thedefinitionofTheme/Rheme,thecontributions,andtheproblems.Ofthefour,thefirsttwoarejustobjectivedescriptionsofthetheorywhilethelasttwoaremainlypersonalideastobeshared.3.1HenriWeilHenriWeilisthepioneerinthefieldofFunctionalSentencePerspective（FSP）andhisideasarethechiefinspirationtoMathesiusideas.FunctionalSentencePerspective（FSP）isatheoryoflinguisticanalysiswhichreferstoananalysisofutterances（ortexts）intermsoftheinformationtheycontain.ThistheoryisthebasisofWeil’sideasandfromthenon,thefollowingthreepeoplealltakeFSPastheirtheoreticalfoundation.AccordingtoWeil,themovementofideasisexpressedbythewordorder,whilethesyntacticalmovementbyterminations（endings）.Inhisopinion,asentencecontainsapointofdeparture（aninitialnotion）andagoalofdiscourse.Thepointofdepartureisequallypresenttothespeakerandtothehearer—itistheirrallyingpoint,thegroundonwhichtheymeet.ThisiscalledtheTheme.Thegoalofdiscoursepresentstheveryinformationthatistobeimpartedtothehearer.ThisiscalledtheRheme.Weilclaimedthatthemovementfromtheinitialnotion（Theme）tothegoalofdiscourse（Rheme）revealsthemovementoftheminditself.Languagemayusedifferentsyntacticconstructions,buttheorderofideasremainsbasicallythesame.WeilalsofoundthatusuallytheThemestandsbeforeRheme,butsometimesthegoalofdiscoursegoesbeforetheinitialnotion.Weilcalledthelatteronethepathetic（emotional）orderandlookeduponitasavehicleofemotion.PersonalanalysisFromthetheoryWeilbasesonandhisdefinitionofTheme/Rheme,wecanseethatTheme/Rhemeisoriginallydefinedfromtheviewpointofgiven（known）andnewinformation.Moreover,hisTheme/Rhemeistotallydependentontheinformationstatusandfreefromthelinearrestrictions.Therefore,hisTheme/Rhemecanoccurinanyplaceofthesentence.ThecriteariatojudgeTheme/Rhemeisonlywhetheritisknownornotbybothspeakerandreader.However,accordingtoWeil,nomatterhowthesentenceisorganized,theprocessinmindsisalwaysintheprocessoffromThemetoRheme.TheyputRhemeinfrontofThemeisjustbecauseoftherequirementsofspecialsituationwhichlayafoundationforHalliday’stheorytodistinguishbetweenunmarkedandmarkedthemes.Inaword,accordingtoWeil,thegiveninformationisThemewhilethenewinformationisRheme.Itisthedefinitioninthelevelofmindbutnotthesyntacticalrestrictions.3.2MathesiusMathesius,thefounderofPragueSchool,alsotakesFSPashistheoreticalfoundation.Thedifferenceisthathecalleditasthetheoryofactualdivision.Heconceivedofthesentencefromthepointofviewoftheinformationitconveyed.Inthe1930s,Mathesiusrevisedtraditionalgrammaticaltermssuchassubjectandpredicate,andreplacedthemwithafunctionallinguisticapproach:

ThemeandRheme.Hearguedthatitconsistsoftwobasicparts.ThefirstpartistheTheme,whichissomethingalreadyknownfromtheprecedingcontextorasinformationtakenforgranted,andwhichdoesnotcontributeanythingnewtotheinformationtobetransmitted.ThesecondpartistheRheme,whichcontainsallthenewinformationtobetransmittedandsubstantiallyenrichesthehearer’sknowledge.WordorderprinciplePersonalanalysisComparedwithWeil’sideas,Mathesiustheoryhasthefollowingfeatures:

first,likeWeil,heisalsoseenitfromtheperspectiveofinformationconveyed.Second,hisdefinitioniskindofdifferentfromthatofWeil’sinthatitisdefinedbasedonthreecriteiria.:

（a）.Theme/Rhemepositioninthesentenceisrestrictedbythelineararrangement,thatis,thefirstpartofthesentenceisThemeandthesecondpartisRheme.刘润清封宗信alsoexplainedthispointbytheexampleof“John”killedMary.（b）.hisThemeshouldbetheknowninformationwhiletheRhemeisthenewinformation,thispointisthesameasthedefinitionofWeil.（c）.itisalsoconsideredfromtheperspectiveofthecontributionThemeandRhemehaveforthedevelopmentofcommunication.ThispointarousestheinterestofFirbastoexplorethelawsdeterminingthedistributionofinformation,andthenthecommunicativedynamismisinitiated.IfWeil’sdefinitionofThemeandRhemeiscompletelydeterminedbythemind,Mathesius’definitioncombinesthemovementofmindandthesyntacticalrepresentation.ThereforehisTheme/Rhemearedefinedbyitspositioninthesentenceanditisknownornot.ItseemsthatMathesius’definitionismorecomprehensive,butactuallytheserestrictionsincurmanyquestions.ProblemsAccordingtoMathesius,theThemeshouldbethefirstpartofthesentenceandalsotheknowninformation.However,inreality,thisisnotalwaysthecase.Itsometimesoccursthatthefirstpartofthesentenceisalsonewtospeakerandhearer.Wecanalsotake“JohnkilledMary”forexample.Ifitisapieceofnews,boththespeakerandtheaudiencedonotknowwhoJohnandMaryare.Inthiscase,theessentialinformationisnotMaryorKilledMary,buttheeventthatsomeonekilledsomeone.Inthisway,Mathesius’definitioncontradictstoeachother,buthedidnotprovideanyrankfortheimportanceofthethreecritearia.ThisproblemseemstobesolvedbyFirbastosomedegree.3.3FirbasAlsotakingFSPasthegeneraltheoreticalbackground,Firbas’researchmainlyfocusesonthelawsdeterminingthedistributionofdegreeofCDoverlinguisticelementscapableofcarryingthem.Thatistosay,hisresearchconcentratesonthedistributionofCD.ByCD,Firbasreferstoapropertyofcommunicationdisplayedinthecourseofthedevelopmentoftheinformation.ThedegreeofCDistheeffectcontributedbyalinguisticelement,ortheextenttowhichtheelementcontributestothedevelopmentofthecommunication,forit“pushesthecommunicationforward”.FirbassaidthatalllinguisticelementsarecapableofcarryingdegreesofCDaslongastheyconveysomemeaning.FirbasdefinedFSPas“thedistributionofvariousdegreesofCD”whichcanbeexplainedas:

theinitialelementsofasequencecarrythelowestdegreeofCD,andwitheachstepforward,thedegreeofCDbecomesincrementaltilltheelementthatcarriesthehighest.Thus,therulemaybe:

theThemeatthebeginning,theTransitioninthemiddle,andtheRhemeattheendofthesentence.PersonalanalysisComparedwiththeabovetwopeople,Firbas,likethem,adheretoFSP,anddevelopFSPtoadeeperlevel,thatis,hehasagoodresearchonthedistributionofinformation,whichisvaluedbyCD.Inhisopinion,Anyelement---sentence,phrase,word,morpheme–maybesingledoutinordertoestablishasharpopposition（contrast）.Take“JohnWASreadingthenewspaper”forexample.Thestressed“WAS”indicatesitistheinformationthatistobeimparted,inoppositiontothepresenttense,andthatallotherelementsaregiveninformation.Inthisway,accordingtoWeil’sdefinitionofTheme/Rheme,“WAS”theThemepartandallotherpartsareRheme.However,intheviewpointofMathesius,thecaseisdifferentbecauseMathesius’Themeshouldbegiveninformationbutalsothefirstpartofthesentence.Forthissentence,Firbas’explanationisthattheonlyelementconveyingnewinformationiscontextuallyindependent,whereasalltheotherelementsconveyingknowninformationarecontextuallydependent.ElementsbecomecontextuallydependentandinconsequencecarrythelowestdegreeofCD.Theyassumethisfunctionirrespectiveofthepositiontheyoccupywithinthelineararrangement.ThisindicatesthattheThemenotnecessarilyoccurattheinitialplace.Therefore,strictlyspeaking,Firbas’sdefinitionismuchmoresimilartoWeil’sideasforTheme/Rheme.FirbasexplainedTheme/Rhemefromthecontex