On the Speech Act of Apology in Chinese.docx

On the Speech Act of Apology in Chinese.docx

《On the Speech Act of Apology in Chinese.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《On the Speech Act of Apology in Chinese.docx（47页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

OntheSpeechActofApologyinChinese

OntheSpeechActofApologyinChinese

ChapterOneIntroduction

Theterm“discourseanalysis”wasfirstemployedbyZ.HarrisinhisDiscourseanalysisin1952whichwasconsideredthepreludetomoderndiscourseanalyses.Sincethe1980’s,manyworksondiscourseanalysishaveappearedsuchasDiscourseAnalysis:

ASocialLinguisticsAnalysisonNatureLanguagebyMichaelStubbs（1982）;DiscourseAnalysisbyGillianBrownandGeorgeYule（1983）;IntroductiontoDiscourseAnalysisbyMalcolmCoulthard（1985）;DiscourseandliteraturebyVanDijk（1985）;DiscoursebyBuyCook（1989）;DiscourseAnalysisforLanguageTeacherbyMichaelMcCarty（1991）;DiscourseandLanguageEducationbyEvelynHatch（1992）;AnIntroductiontoDiscourseAnalysis:

TheoryandmethodbyJamaesPaulGee（1999）tonameafew.InChinaEssentialsofTextAnalysis（1988）byHuangGuowenmightbetheearliestbookwhichgivesasystematicintroductiontodiscourseanalysistheory.TextCohesionandCoherence（1994）byHuZhuanglinmakesacontrastanalysisonEnglishandChinesediscourse.AnIntroductiontoTextLinguistics（1994）byWangFuxiangmakesanintroductiontotheChinesediscoursewhichpromotestothedevelopmentofdiscourseanalysisinChina.Thedifferentapproachesandperspectivesadoptedtostudyhumancommunicationmakeitdifficulttopresentanexactdefinitionofdiscourseanalysis.‘Itwouldbeniceifwecouldsqueezeallweknowaboutdiscourseintoahandydefinition.Unfortunately,asisalsothecaseforrelatedconceptsas‘language’,‘communication’,‘interaction’,‘society’and‘culture’,thenotionofdiscourseisessentiallyfuzzy.’（VanDijk,1997:

1）.Inpursuingtheseareasofresearch,discourseanalysisemploysavarietyofresearchmethods,rangingfromethnographicfieldworkandconversationanalysistocorpus-basedanalyses,elicitationtechniques,anddetailedanalysisofvideo-andaudio-recordeddata.Thereisnostandardparadigmofdescriptionindiscourseanalysis.Thispaperdescribessomeofthedifferentapproachestodiscourseanalysisandsuggeststhatamulti-dimensionalapproachshouldbeadaptedindiscourseanalysis.

Somepeoplemightclaimthatdiscourseunderstandingisasimplematteroflinguisticdecoding.Virtuallyanyutterancecanbeusedtoshowthatthishypothesisiswrong.ThereisagapbetweenknowingwhatasentenceofEnglishmeansandunderstandingallthataspeakerintendstocommunicatebyutteringitonanygivenoccasion.Sincediscourseisasocialactivityandthewayanutteranceconstitutesaparticularformofactionemergesfromitsplacementwithinalargersocialactivity,therefore,inordertounderstandthelanguageofsocialinteractionitisimportanttounderstanditssocio-culturalandpsychologicalbackgroundaswell.Thismeansthatdiscourseanalysisisnotrestrictedtoasingledisciplinebutisessentiallyinterdisciplinary.

ChapterTwoDifferentApproachestoDiscourseAnalysis

Thispaperdescribesfiveapproachestodiscourseanalysis1.HallidayanApproach2.SpeechActTheory3.ConversationAnalysis4.RelevanceTheory5.EthnographyofCommunication6.MentalApproaches.Thereisacertaindegreeofoverlapbetweentheapproaches,buttheinitialhypothesesvaryconsiderably.Theyalsodifferinthattheyregardmeaningdifferently,eitherasalinguisticorasocialphenomenon.Schiffrindifferentiatestheseapproachesaccordingtothreecriteria:

（i）Theindividualparticipantsofaninteractionandtheirintentions,socialactsandspeechacts,linguisticcompetenceandworldknowledge.

（ii）Linguisticinteractionoftheparticipantsasaproductofcooperation.

（iii）Thetypeofcommunication.

（Schiffrin,D.（1994）.Approachestodiscourse）

1.TheFunctionalAnalysisofEnglish:

AHallidayanApproach

SystematicandfunctionalgrammaristhemostimportantgrammariantheoryinlanguagestudywhichwasputforwardbyM.A.K.HallidayandhasastronginfluenceinChina.Hallidayrecognizesthreemacrofunctions:

ideational,interpersonal,andtextual.

Theideationalfunctionistoconveynewinformation,tocommunicateacontentthatisunknowntothehearer.Thisfunctionispresentinalllanguageuse.Thisisbecausewhateverspecificuseoneismakingoflanguagehehastorefertocategoriesofhisexperienceoftheworld.Theideationalfunctionisameaningpotential.Thewholeoftransitivitysystem,forexample,ispartoftheideationalcomponent.Inthisrespect,thisfunctionnotonlyspecifiestheavailableoptionsinmeaningbutalsodeterminesthenatureoftheirstructuralrealizations.

Theinterpersonalfunctionembodiesallusesoflanguagetoexpresssocialandpersonalrelations.Thisincludesthevariouswaysthespeakerentersspeechsituationandperformsaspeechact.Thisfunctionisrealizedbymoodandmodality.Moodshowswhatrolethespeakerselectsinthespeechsituationandwhatroleheassignstotheaddressee.Ifthespeakerselectstheimperativemood,heassurestheroleofonegivingcommandsandputtingtheaddresseeintheroleofoneexpectedtoobeyorders.Modalityspecifiesifthespeakerisexpressinghisjudgmentormakingaprediction（i.e.“Itwillraintomorrow.”）

Thetextualfunctionsreferstothefactthatlanguagehasmechanismstomakeanystretchofspokenorwrittendiscourseintoacoherentandunifiedtextandmakealivingmessagedifferentfromarandomlistofsentences.Thiscanbeseenfromthefollowingtwosetsofsentences:

1.Johnsawahandbaginafield.Johnwalkedacrossafieldandpickedupahandbag.JohntookahandbagtothePoliceStationandJohnhandedinahandbagaslostproperty.WhenJohnhadhandedinahandbagaslostproperty,Johnwenthome.

2.Johnsawahandbaginafield.Hewalkedacrossthefieldandpickedupthehandbag.HetookthehandbagtothePoliceStationandhandeditinaslostproperty.WhenJohnhaddonethis,hewenthome.

Wefindthatthesecondsetofsentencesreadsmuchmorelikeacoherenttextthanthefirst,thoughtheirideationalandinterpersonalfunctionareexactlythesame.Thetextualfunctioncanalsohighlightcertainpartsofthetext.Forexample,in“suchbooksIneverread,butgoodpoetryIdoenjoyreading”,“suchbooks”and“goodpoetry”arehighlighted.Attentionisdrawntothembecausetheyhavebeenmovedbeforetheirsubjectandpredicator.

InhisTowardsaCloserRelationshipBetweentheStudyofGrammarandtheStudyofDiscourse（1997）,hegivesadescriptionfromthefollowingthreeaspects:

1）Textandcohesion

2）Theme-ryhemeanalysis

3）Informationstructure

1.1Textandcohesion

Systematicandfunctionalgrammartheoristshavebeenconcernedtoprovideatighter,moreformalaccountofhowspeakersofEnglishcometoidentifyatextasformingatext.FunctionalgrammartheoristslikeHillday&Hasanareconcernedwiththeprincipleofconnectivitywhichbindatexttogetherandformaco-interpretation.

Holliday&Hasantaketheviewthattheprimarydeterminantofwhetherasetofsentencesdoordonotconstituteatextdependsoncohesiverelationshipswithinandbetweensentences,whichcreatetexture:

‘Atexthastextureandthisiswhatisprovidedbythecohesiverelation（1976:

2）.Cohesiverelationshipswithinatextaresetup‘wheretheinterpretationofsomeelementinthediscourseisdependentonthatofanother.Theonepresupposestheotherinthesensethatitcannotbeeffectivelydecodedexceptbyrecoursetoit’（1976:

4）.Aparadigmexampleofsuchacohesiverelationshipisgiven（1976:

2）:

Washandcoresixcookingapples.Putthemintoafireproofdish.

Ofthistexttheysay:

“Itisclearthattheminsecondsentencerefersbackto（isanaphoricto）thesixcookingapplesinthefirstsentences.Thisanaphoricfunctionofthemgivescohesiontosentences,sothatweinterpretthemasawhole;thetwosentencestogetherconstituteatext’（1976:

2）.

Halliday&Hasanoutlineataxonomyoftypesofcohesiverelationshipswhichcanbeformallyestablishedwithinatext,providingcohesive‘ties’whichbindatexttogether.

1.2Theme-rhemeanalysis

Thereisalongtraditionofdiscussingtopic（theme）andcomment（rheme）inthecontextofanalyzingtheinformationalstructureofdiscoursebuttheseattemptsneverreallymovedbeyondthesentence-pairboundary.Inotherwords,theywerenotproperlycontextualized.ItstartedinthePragueSchooltraditionofanalyzingthemesandrhemesinsentences,anapproachbasedontheassessmentoftheassumedinformationflow（‘communicativedynamism’）withinthem.Themainproblemindescribingthetheme-rheme-structureofsentencesliesinthefactthatvarioussemantic（ideational）andpragmatic（interpersonal）criteriaandthecriterionofthelinguisticformmaybeapplied.

AsimpleexplanationofthemeinEnglishistothinkofitastheidearepresentedbytheconstituentatthestartingpointoftheclause.ThishasbeenexpressedbyHallidayas“thepointofdepartureofthemessage’.Aclausebeginswitharealizationofthetheme.Thisisfollowedbytherealizationoftherheme,whichcanbeexplainedasbeingtherestofthemessage:

THEME-------RHEME

Oneoftheheuristicstartingpointsofthetheme-rhymediscussionisthefactthatsentencesindiscoursecontainsomeinformationwhichthespeakerpresupposestobeknownbythehearerandsomeinformationwhichthespeakerasserts.Theformerisoftenreferredtoas‘old’or‘given’informationandthelatteras‘new’.Thusthetheme-rhemecontrasthingesonthepresenceorabsenceofanaphorictiestotheprevioustext.Withregardtonouns,thismeansthatthedifferencebetweendefinitenessandindefinitenesscanserveasanindicatorofanaphoricity.Anotherpointofdeparturei