《呼啸山庄》主题实现的元功能作用研究
|
摘要
系统功能语法由韩礼德创建，并在语篇分析领域得到了广泛的应用。同时，它与文体学结合所产生的功能文体学引起了国内外学者的关注。此外，本研究以艾米丽·布朗特的作品《呼啸山庄》为分析对象。到目前为止，对《呼啸山庄》的研究主要是从文学批评的角度出发，比如从女性主义和新批评主义的角度出发，但很少运用功能文体学的理论对其进行探讨。
基于此，本研究试图根据韩礼德的三大元功能思想对《呼啸山庄》采用定量、定性、实证以及描述的方法进行分析。这样的尝试具有一定的意义，因为通过对《呼啸山庄》中概念功能、人际功能、语篇功能的研究，可以探索小说中突显的语言特点及文体特征，进而从系统和功能的角度为解读《呼啸山庄》提供新的见解。
研究发现，《呼啸山庄》的文体特点可归为以下三个方面:
就概念功能来说，不同类型的过程数量和分布与小说爱恨交织的主题紧密相联。小说中使用频率最高的过程类型当属物质过程，它的应用有助于体现故事情节的推进。此外，占主导地位的过程类型是关系过程和心理过程，关系过程的运用为读者提供了不同人物间关系的微妙演变，心理过程则体现了人物内心世界的变化，进而也对故事情节的发展起到推波助澜的作用。另外，言语过程生动地刻画了人物间的争论或讨论，而他们争论或讨论的话题的转变也体现了故事焦点的转变。
就人际功能来说，本研究以话语为基础，从微观和宏观社会两个层面对小说中叙述者之间，叙述者与主要人物之间，叙述者、主要人物以及作者与读者之间互动的人际意义功能进行了分析。通过对小说前三章中洛克伍德与希斯克厉夫对话的语气和情态分析，可以看出洛克伍德作为陌生人和读者一样对呼啸山庄冷漠的人际氛围充满好奇和探寻。另外，作为第二作者，洛克伍德实现了向读者揭开故事第一页的人际功能，同时他所发现故事中扑朔迷离的重要元素为故事本身埋下了悬念。通过对耐莉与希斯克厉夫、凯瑟琳以及埃德加的对话进行语气和情态分析，发现耐莉不仅承担了故事叙述者角色，同时也代表作者表达了她的道德价值观，起到了联系两代主要角色间实现人际意义互动以及实现小说主题的桥梁作用。本研究还就小说的功能文体特色进行了分析。本研究发现人际功能在体现小说的功能文体特色和实现小说主题方面发挥了至关重要的作用。
就语篇功能来说，首先，《呼啸山庄》中主位转化证实了作者视角的变化。此外，标记性主位使用频率较高，这是因为人物的行为是作者的关注点。而对希斯克厉夫一系列复仇事件，小说中使用了复项主位和句项主位。与主位相比，述位则更加复杂。其次，基于主述位的分析，可以看到《呼啸山庄》中的主位推进模式十分复杂,因为小说中延续型、主位同一型、主位分裂型等推进模式比比皆是。另外，信息结构通过已知信息和未知信息的交互传递，与主述位结构相互补充，共同为希斯克厉夫的复仇和凯瑟琳的悲剧结局埋下了伏笔。再者，衔接手段的分析对于构架全文起到了至关重要的作用，五种主要衔接手段照应、省略、替代、连接及词汇衔接都可以在文中得到有力的例证。衔接手段的运用，使文本更加流畅，并可使我们从中深入探讨语篇元功能的应用价值。
总而言之，本研究具有一定的理论意义和应用意义。理论上，本研究证实了功能文体分析理论框架用于分析小说的可行性；应用上，本研究探讨了《呼啸山庄》的文体特点，为元功能对小说主题的实现的研究提供了新的视角。
Since the generation and development of Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG),which is put forward by M. A. K. Halliday, it has been widely applied to analyzingdifferent types of discourse. Meanwhile, its combination with stylistics, namely,functional stylistics, has attracted great attention from scholars both at home and abroad.Moreover, Emily Bront’s Wuthering Heights has been mainly studied by applyingliterature theories such as feminism and new criticism, and with rare studies of it withinthe scope of functional stylistics.
Therefore, the present study attempts to analyze Emily Bront’s Wuthering Heightsbased on Halliday’s SFG by adopting a quantitative, qualitative, demonstrative as well asdescriptive approach. Such an attempt is of certain significance, for its study ofapplication of ideational metafunction, interpersonal metafunction, and textualmetafunction will provide a new view and credible insight into the prominent linguisticand stylistic features so as to understand the novel better from the systematic andfunctional angle.
Through the in-depth analysis of metafunctions, it is found that the foregroundedstylistic features of Wuthering Heights can be summarized from the following threeaspects:
In terms of ideational metafunction, the types and distributions of differentprocesses are closely related to the theme of the novel, namely, the co-existence ofviolent love and extreme hatred. The most frequently used process type is the materialprocess which represents the actions and events involved in the development of the plots.Other predominant types are relational processes, which provide the readers a picture ofthe delicate evolution of relationships among different characters, and mental processes,which present the change of characters’ inner world, further pushing forward thedevelopment of plots. The verbal processes make a vivid presentation of the dispute ordiscussion among different characters. It is the shift of the topics of their conversationthat reveals the shift of focuses. As for behavioral and existential processes, they are involved with a limited number.
In terms of interpersonal metafunction, the interpersonal meaning of interaction inthe novel between the narrators, between the narrators and the main characters, andbetween the writer and readers at the micro/macro social level is analyzed. Throughanalysis of mood and modality of the conversation between Lockwood and Heathcliff inthe first three chapters of the novel, a double role can be found in Lockwood, for as astranger of Wuthering Heights, he is full of curiosity and inquiring about the eccentricatmosphere in the Heights. In addition, as a second writer, Lockwood fulfills EmilyBront’s function of opening the first leaf of the story to the reader in the interpersonalmeaning and prepares the foreshadowing of the complicated events for the novel.Meanwhile, by analysis of mood and modality in Mrs. Nelly Dean’s conversation withHeathcliff, Catherine and Edgar Linton, it is found that she is not only the narrator of thestory, but also a participant connecting the two-generation lovers and transferring EmilyBront’s notion of moral and value to the reader. Besides, the functional stylistic featuresare analyzed. It is found that the interpersonal metafunction plays a very important partin the realization of the stylistic features and the theme of the novel.
In terms of textual metafunction, it can be seen that the themes in WutheringHeights is full of changes, which indicates the change of the author’s perspectives fromnarrator to other people. Besides, the marked themes are used with high frequency,because the action and behaviour of the protagnists are the major concern of the writer. Aseries of texts of retaliation committed by Heathcliff are pervaded with multiple themesand themes in clause complex. As for the rheme, it is complicated in most cases. Inaddition to these findings through theme and rheme analysis, the present study also findsthat the thematic progression patterns in Wuthering Heights are complicated, whichmeans that simple linear, constant thematic progression pattern, split theme pattern,coordinate theme pattern, and combined theme and rheme coexist. In addition, beingparallelled with the theme-rheme structure, the information structure forms a perfectcomplement through the interactive transmission between the given information and newinformation. They both pave the way for the Heathcliff’s revenge and Catherine’s tragedy.As for the cohesive devices, they play an important role in constructing the text. In Wuthering Heights, five commonly recognized devices, namely, reference, ellipsis,substitution, conjunction and lexical cohesion, are employed. It is these devices thatmake the whole novel organized in a fluent way and facilitate the insights into thestylistic value of language patterns. This dissertation also explains how the textualmetafunction helps to realize the theme of the novel.
To sum up, the significance of the present study lies in that theoretically speaking, ithas proved the feasibility of the theoretical framework of functional stylistics; practicallyspeaking, it has provided a fresh insight into the effect of metafunctions on therealization of the theme of Wuthering Heights.
基于此，本研究试图根据韩礼德的三大元功能思想对《呼啸山庄》采用定量、定性、实证以及描述的方法进行分析。这样的尝试具有一定的意义，因为通过对《呼啸山庄》中概念功能、人际功能、语篇功能的研究，可以探索小说中突显的语言特点及文体特征，进而从系统和功能的角度为解读《呼啸山庄》提供新的见解。
研究发现，《呼啸山庄》的文体特点可归为以下三个方面:
就概念功能来说，不同类型的过程数量和分布与小说爱恨交织的主题紧密相联。小说中使用频率最高的过程类型当属物质过程，它的应用有助于体现故事情节的推进。此外，占主导地位的过程类型是关系过程和心理过程，关系过程的运用为读者提供了不同人物间关系的微妙演变，心理过程则体现了人物内心世界的变化，进而也对故事情节的发展起到推波助澜的作用。另外，言语过程生动地刻画了人物间的争论或讨论，而他们争论或讨论的话题的转变也体现了故事焦点的转变。
就人际功能来说，本研究以话语为基础，从微观和宏观社会两个层面对小说中叙述者之间，叙述者与主要人物之间，叙述者、主要人物以及作者与读者之间互动的人际意义功能进行了分析。通过对小说前三章中洛克伍德与希斯克厉夫对话的语气和情态分析，可以看出洛克伍德作为陌生人和读者一样对呼啸山庄冷漠的人际氛围充满好奇和探寻。另外，作为第二作者，洛克伍德实现了向读者揭开故事第一页的人际功能，同时他所发现故事中扑朔迷离的重要元素为故事本身埋下了悬念。通过对耐莉与希斯克厉夫、凯瑟琳以及埃德加的对话进行语气和情态分析，发现耐莉不仅承担了故事叙述者角色，同时也代表作者表达了她的道德价值观，起到了联系两代主要角色间实现人际意义互动以及实现小说主题的桥梁作用。本研究还就小说的功能文体特色进行了分析。本研究发现人际功能在体现小说的功能文体特色和实现小说主题方面发挥了至关重要的作用。
就语篇功能来说，首先，《呼啸山庄》中主位转化证实了作者视角的变化。此外，标记性主位使用频率较高，这是因为人物的行为是作者的关注点。而对希斯克厉夫一系列复仇事件，小说中使用了复项主位和句项主位。与主位相比，述位则更加复杂。其次，基于主述位的分析，可以看到《呼啸山庄》中的主位推进模式十分复杂,因为小说中延续型、主位同一型、主位分裂型等推进模式比比皆是。另外，信息结构通过已知信息和未知信息的交互传递，与主述位结构相互补充，共同为希斯克厉夫的复仇和凯瑟琳的悲剧结局埋下了伏笔。再者，衔接手段的分析对于构架全文起到了至关重要的作用，五种主要衔接手段照应、省略、替代、连接及词汇衔接都可以在文中得到有力的例证。衔接手段的运用，使文本更加流畅，并可使我们从中深入探讨语篇元功能的应用价值。
总而言之，本研究具有一定的理论意义和应用意义。理论上，本研究证实了功能文体分析理论框架用于分析小说的可行性；应用上，本研究探讨了《呼啸山庄》的文体特点，为元功能对小说主题的实现的研究提供了新的视角。
Since the generation and development of Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG),which is put forward by M. A. K. Halliday, it has been widely applied to analyzingdifferent types of discourse. Meanwhile, its combination with stylistics, namely,functional stylistics, has attracted great attention from scholars both at home and abroad.Moreover, Emily Bront’s Wuthering Heights has been mainly studied by applyingliterature theories such as feminism and new criticism, and with rare studies of it withinthe scope of functional stylistics.
Therefore, the present study attempts to analyze Emily Bront’s Wuthering Heightsbased on Halliday’s SFG by adopting a quantitative, qualitative, demonstrative as well asdescriptive approach. Such an attempt is of certain significance, for its study ofapplication of ideational metafunction, interpersonal metafunction, and textualmetafunction will provide a new view and credible insight into the prominent linguisticand stylistic features so as to understand the novel better from the systematic andfunctional angle.
Through the in-depth analysis of metafunctions, it is found that the foregroundedstylistic features of Wuthering Heights can be summarized from the following threeaspects:
In terms of ideational metafunction, the types and distributions of differentprocesses are closely related to the theme of the novel, namely, the co-existence ofviolent love and extreme hatred. The most frequently used process type is the materialprocess which represents the actions and events involved in the development of the plots.Other predominant types are relational processes, which provide the readers a picture ofthe delicate evolution of relationships among different characters, and mental processes,which present the change of characters’ inner world, further pushing forward thedevelopment of plots. The verbal processes make a vivid presentation of the dispute ordiscussion among different characters. It is the shift of the topics of their conversationthat reveals the shift of focuses. As for behavioral and existential processes, they are involved with a limited number.
In terms of interpersonal metafunction, the interpersonal meaning of interaction inthe novel between the narrators, between the narrators and the main characters, andbetween the writer and readers at the micro/macro social level is analyzed. Throughanalysis of mood and modality of the conversation between Lockwood and Heathcliff inthe first three chapters of the novel, a double role can be found in Lockwood, for as astranger of Wuthering Heights, he is full of curiosity and inquiring about the eccentricatmosphere in the Heights. In addition, as a second writer, Lockwood fulfills EmilyBront’s function of opening the first leaf of the story to the reader in the interpersonalmeaning and prepares the foreshadowing of the complicated events for the novel.Meanwhile, by analysis of mood and modality in Mrs. Nelly Dean’s conversation withHeathcliff, Catherine and Edgar Linton, it is found that she is not only the narrator of thestory, but also a participant connecting the two-generation lovers and transferring EmilyBront’s notion of moral and value to the reader. Besides, the functional stylistic featuresare analyzed. It is found that the interpersonal metafunction plays a very important partin the realization of the stylistic features and the theme of the novel.
In terms of textual metafunction, it can be seen that the themes in WutheringHeights is full of changes, which indicates the change of the author’s perspectives fromnarrator to other people. Besides, the marked themes are used with high frequency,because the action and behaviour of the protagnists are the major concern of the writer. Aseries of texts of retaliation committed by Heathcliff are pervaded with multiple themesand themes in clause complex. As for the rheme, it is complicated in most cases. Inaddition to these findings through theme and rheme analysis, the present study also findsthat the thematic progression patterns in Wuthering Heights are complicated, whichmeans that simple linear, constant thematic progression pattern, split theme pattern,coordinate theme pattern, and combined theme and rheme coexist. In addition, beingparallelled with the theme-rheme structure, the information structure forms a perfectcomplement through the interactive transmission between the given information and newinformation. They both pave the way for the Heathcliff’s revenge and Catherine’s tragedy.As for the cohesive devices, they play an important role in constructing the text. In Wuthering Heights, five commonly recognized devices, namely, reference, ellipsis,substitution, conjunction and lexical cohesion, are employed. It is these devices thatmake the whole novel organized in a fluent way and facilitate the insights into thestylistic value of language patterns. This dissertation also explains how the textualmetafunction helps to realize the theme of the novel.
To sum up, the significance of the present study lies in that theoretically speaking, ithas proved the feasibility of the theoretical framework of functional stylistics; practicallyspeaking, it has provided a fresh insight into the effect of metafunctions on therealization of the theme of Wuthering Heights.
引文
Bakhtin, M. M. The Dialogic Imagination [C]. C. Emerson&M. Holquist (eds. Andtrans.). Texas: University of Texas Press,1981.
Bates, E. Language and Context: The Acquisition of Pragmatics [M]. New York:Academic Press,1976.
Beaugrande, R. D.&W. U. Dressler. Introduction to Text Linguistics [M]. London/NewYork: Longman,1981.
Berry, M. Review of Halliday1978[J]. Nottingham Linguistic Circular,1982,(11):64-94.
Bloor, M.&T. Bloor. The Functional Analysis of English: A Hallidayan Approach [M].London: Arnold,1995.
Booth, C. W. The Rhetoric of Fiction [M]. London: The University of Chicago Press,Ltd.,1961.
Bront, E. Wuthering Heights [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Press,2010.
Brown, G.&G. Yule. Discourse Analysis [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching andResearch Press,2000.
Carter, R. Language as Discourse: Perspectives for Language Teaching [M]. Beijing:Peking University Press,2004.
Cecil, D.“Emily Bront and Wuthering Heights” Early Victorian Novelists [M]. London:Constable,1934.
Crump, R. W. Writings about Charlotte and Emily Bront,1846-1915[M]. Boston: G. K.Hall and Co.,1982.
Danes, F. Functional Sentence Perspective and the Organization of the Text [A]. In F.Danes (ed.). Papers on Functional Sentence Perspective [C]. Prague: Academia,1974.
Eggins, S. An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics [M]. New York andLondon: Continuum,2004.
Eggins, S.&D. Slade. Analyzing Casual Conversation [M]. London: Cassell,1997.
Eggins, S.&D. Slade. Discourse Analysis [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching andResearch Press,2000.
Firbas, J. Functional Sentence Perspective in Written and Spoken Communication [M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1992.
Firth, A.&J. Wagner. On Discourse, Communication, and Some Fundamental Conceptsin SFL Research [J]. The Modern Language Journal,1997.81(3):285-300.
Fries, P. On the Status of Theme in English: Arguments from Discourse [J]. ForumLinguisticum,1981,(6. I):1-38.
Fries, P.&G. Francis. Exploring Theme: Problems for Research [J]. Occasional Papersin Systemic Linguistics,1992,(6):45-60.
Forster, E. M. Aspects of the Novel [M]. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World,1927.
Fowler, R., Hodge, R., Kress, G.&T. Trew. Language and Control [M]. London:Routledge and Kegan Paul,1979.
Garner, W. R. The Processing of Information and Structure [M]. New York: Wiley,1974.
Givon, T. Functionalism and Grammar [M]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins,1995.
Halliday, M. A. K. An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2rdedition)[M]. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2000.
Halliday, M. A. K. An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rdedition)[M]. Beijing:Foreign language Teaching and Research Press,2008.
Halliday, M. A. K. Explorations in the Foundation of Language [M]. London: Arnold,1973.
Halliday, M. A. K. Foreword [Z]. In M. Cummings&R. Simmons. The Language ofLiterature [M], Oxford: Pergamon Press,1983.
Halliday, M. A. K. Language, Context and Text: Aspects of Language in a SocialSemiotics Perspective [M]. Geelong Victoria: Deakin University Press,1985.
Halliday, M. A. K. Language as System and Language as Instance: the Corpus as aTheoretical Construct [A]. In J. Svartvik (ed.). Directions in Corpus Linguistics:Proceedings of Nobel Symposium82[C]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter,1992.
Halliday, M. A. K. Linguistic Function and Literary Style: An Inquiry into the Languageof William Golding’s The Inheritors [A]. In S. Chatman (ed.). Literary Style: ASymposium [C]. Oxford: Oxford University Press,1971; reprinted in Freeman, D.C.(ed.). Essays in Modern Stylistics [C]. London: Methuen,1981.
Halliday, M. A. K. Linguistic Studies of Text and Discourse [A]. In W. Jonathan (ed.).Volumes in the Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday [C]. London&New York:Continuum,2002.
Halliday, M. A. K. Notes on Transitivity and Theme in English (part3)[J]. Journal ofLinguistics,1968,4(2),179-215.
Halliday, M. A. K. Quantitative Studies and Probabilities in Grammar [A]. In M. Hoey(ed.). Data, Description, Discourse: Papers on English Language in Honour ofJohn McH. Sinclair [C]. London: Harper Collins,1993.
Halliday, M. A. K.&C. M. I. M. Matthiessen. An Introduction to Functional Grammar(3rdedition)[M]. London: Arnold,2004.
Halliday, M. A. K.&J. R. Martin. Readings in Systemic Linguistics [M]. Chicago:Trafalgar Square Publishing,1981.
Halliday, M. A. K.&R. Hasan. Cohesion in English [M]. London: Longman,1976;reprinted, Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2001.
Henderson, P. Wuthering Heights and Selected Poems [M]. London: J. M. Dent and Sons,1955.
Hoey, M. Language as Choice: What is Chosen?[A]. In G. Thompson&S. Hunston(eds.). System and Corpus: Exploring Connections [C]. London: Equinox,2006.
Hoye, L. E. Adverbs and Modality in English [M]. New York: Addison Wesley LongmanInc,1997.
Iser, W. The Act of Reading: A Theory o f Aesthetic Response [M]. London&Henley:Routledge&Kegan Paul,1978(3):63.
Jaworski, A.&N. Coupland. The Discourse Reader [M]. London: Routledge,1999.
Kettle, A. An Introduction to the English Novel [M]. London: Hutchinson House,1951.
Kilpert, D. Getting the Full Picture: A Reflection on the Work of M. A. K. Halliday [J].Language Sciences,2003(25):159-209.
Leech, G. N.&M. H. Short. Style in Fiction: A Linguistic Introduction to EnglishFictional Prose [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2001.
Lodge, D. Language of Fiction [M]. London: Routledge&Kegan Paul,1966.
Lovejoy, K. B.&D. M. Lance. Information Management and Cohesion in the Study ofWritten Discourse [J]. Linguistics and Education,1991,(3),251-273.
Malinowski, B. The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages [A]. In C.K. Ogden&I.A. Richards (eds.). The Meaning of Meaning [C]. London: Kegan Paul,1923.
Malinowski, B. Coral Gardens and Their Magic [M]. London: Allen&Unwin,1935.
Maugham, W. S. Ten Novels and Their Authors [M]. London: Heinemann,1954.
Martin, J. R. English Text: System and Structure [M]. Philadelphia-Amsterdam: JohnBenjamins,1992.
Martin, J. R. Theme, Method of Development and Existentiality: The Price of Reply [J].Occasional Papers in Systemic Linguistics,1992(6):174-83.
Martin, J. R.&P. R. R. White. The Language of Evaluation [M]. Palgrave: Macmillian,2005.
Martin, J. R.&R. David. Working with Discourse: Meaning Beyond the Clause [M].Beijing: Beijing University Press,2004.
Ravelli, L. Getting Started with Functional Analysis of Texts [A]. In L. Unsworth (ed.).Researching Language in Schools and Communities: Functional LinguisticPerspectives [C]. London: Continuum International Publishing Group,2006.
Renkema, J. Introduction to Discourse Studies [M]. Amsterdam: Benjamins,2004.
Shklovsky, V. Art as Technique [M]. Lincol: University of Nebraska Press,1965.
Short, M. Exploring the Language of Poems, Plays and Pose [M]. London and New York:Longman,1996.
Short, M. Who Is Stylistics [J]. Journal of Foreign Languages,1984,33(5),14-21.
Simpson, P. Language, Ideology and Point of View [M]. London: Routledge,1993.
Simpson, P. Language through Literature [M]. New York: Routledge,1997.
Simpson, P. Stylistics: A Resource Book for Students [M]. London&New York:Routledge,2004.
Spitzer, L. Linguistics and Literary History [M]. Princeton: Princeton University Press,1948.
Steiner, E. A Functional Perspective on Language, Action&Interpretation [M]. Berlinand New York: Mouton de Gruyter,1991.
Stotsky, S. Type of Lexical Cohesion in Expository Writing: Implications for Developingthe Vocabulary of Academic Discourse [J]. College Composition andCommunication,1983,34(4):430-446.
Thompson, G. Introducing Functional Grammar [M]. Beijing: Foreign LanguageTeaching and Research Press,2000.
Thornborrow, J.&S. Wareing. Patterns in Language: Stylistics for Students of Languageand Literature [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2000.
Toolan, M. Compromising Positions: Systemic Linguistics and the Locally ManagedSemiotics of Dialogue [A]. In Birch, D.&M. O’Toole (eds.). Functions of Style [M].London: Edward Arnold,1988.
Ventola, E.&A. Mauranen. Functional and Systemic Linguistics: Approaches and Uses[M]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter,1991.
Wales, K. A Dictionary of Stylistics [M]. London: Longman,1989.
Widdowson, H. G. Stylistics and the Teaching of Literature [M]. London: Longman Press,1975.
Witt, S.&L. Faigley. Coherence, Cohesion, and Writing Quality [J]. CollegeComposition and Communication,1981,(32):189-204.
Woolf, V.“Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights” The Common Reader: First Series [M].London: Hogarth Press,1925.
Wright, L.&J. Hope. Stylistics: A Practical Coursebook [M]. Beijing: Foreign LanguageTeaching and Research Press,2009.
邓颖玲.在希斯克利夫形象的后面——《呼啸山庄》中希斯克利夫创作模型考证[J].外语与外语教学,2003,(6):36-40.
丁素萍.概念功能中的语义级差与体现形式研究[J].外语与外语教学,2007,(9):4-8.
丁素萍.会话中的概念功能和语言体现形式研究[J].外语教学,2005,(3):10-16.
方平.爱和恨,都是生命在燃烧——试论《呼啸山庄》中的希克厉[J].外国文学研究,1989(2):3-7,20.
方平.希望在人间——论《呼啸山庄》.呼啸山庄译序[Z].上海:上海译文出版社,2010.
方琰.系统功能语法与语篇分析[J].外语教学,2005(6):1-5.
付晓丽,付天军.英语文学语篇的级差系统分析[J].河北师范大学学报（哲学社会科学版）,2009,(3):115-119.
公静,方琰.英语法庭辩论语篇的概念功能分析[J].外语研究,2005,(3):11-16.
胡壮麟.文体学[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2000.
胡壮麟.语篇的衔接与连贯[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,1994.
黄国文.杜牧《清明》英译文的逻辑功能分析[J].外语与翻译,2002,(1):1-6.
黄国文.《清明》一诗英译文的人际功能探讨[J].外语教学,2002,(3):34-38.
黄国文.语篇分析的理论与实践：广告语篇研究[M].上海:上海外国语教育出版社,2001.
黄国文.语篇分析概要[M].长沙:湖南教育出版社,1988.
黄国文.中国的语篇分析研究——写在中国英汉语篇分析研究会成立之际[J].外语教学,2007,(5):6-9.
黄国文,辛志英.语篇功能中的复杂主位[J].外语与外语教学,2009,(12):1-4.
黄雪娥.爱米丽的“人际关系”及其悲剧命运——从人际功能的角度探讨《献给爱米丽的玫瑰》[J].外语教学,2003,(5):88-92.
李运兴.“主位”概念在翻译研究中的应用[J].外语与外语教学,2002,(7):19-22.
李战子.功能语法中的人际意义框架的扩展[J].外语研究,2001,(1):52-53.
李战子,施卫华.韩礼德系统功能语法面貌刷新——第三版《功能语法引论》述评[J].外语教学,2006,(2):92-94.
刘世生.西方文体学论纲[M].济南:山东教育出版社,1998.
苗兴伟.人际意义与语篇的建构[J].山东外语教学,2004,(1):5-11.
苗兴伟.英语的评价型强势主位结构[J].山东外语教学,2007,(2):54-57.
裘燕萍.英语被动语态的人际功能[J].外语研究,2008,(2):22-26.
申丹.关于西方文体学新发展的思考——兼评辛普森的《文体学》[J].外国语,2005,(3):56-64.
申丹.及物性系统与深层象征意义[J].外语教学与研究,2006,(1):4-10.
滕延江.称呼语的人际功能及其语用翻译等值[J].西安外国语学院学报,2006,(1):32-35.
王苹.平静地面下的不平静睡眠：《呼啸山庄》里的种族政治[J].南京大学学报（哲学·人文科学·社会科学），2012,(2):132-141.
王守元.英语文体学要略[M].济南:山东大学出版社,2000.
谢之君,王仙凤.概念功能、人际功能与汉语小句英译[J].同济大学学报（社会科学版），2006,(4):62-67.
辛斌.语篇互文性的批评性分析[M].苏州:苏州大学出版社,2000.
闫素真.从功能语法视角分析小说《呼啸山庄》的人际意义[D].新疆大学,2007.
杨静远.勃朗特姐妹研究[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1983.
张德禄.功能文体学[M].济南:山东教育出版社,1998.
张德禄.韩礼德功能问题理论述评[J].外语教学与研究,1999,(1):43-49.
张德禄.论衔接[J].外国语,2001,(2):23-28.
张德禄.论衔接关系——话语组成机制研究[J].外语教学,2003,(1):1-5.
张德禄.系统功能语言学[J].外国语，2011,(3):64-65.
张德禄.衔接力与语篇连贯的程度[J].外语与外语教学,2001,(1):9-15.
张德禄.语篇衔接中的形式与意义[J].外国语,2005,(5):32-38.
张德禄.语言的功能与文体[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2005.
张福勇,李小敬.浅析《呼啸山庄》的时间哲学[J].外语与外语教学,2007,(6):40-42.
张今,张克定.英汉语信息结构对比研究[M].开封:河南大学出版社,1998.
张曼.意识流小说文体探究——对《墙上的斑点》的功能文体分析[J].天津外国学院学报,2002,(4):52-55.
赵德全.纯理功能的传译:功能语言学理论框架下的翻译研究[M].保定:河北大学出版社,2007.
赵德全.概念功能的传译——从功能语言学的角度看翻译[J].河北大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2006,(5):132-137.
朱永生.韩礼德的语篇连贯标准——外界的误解与自身的不足[J].外语教学与研究,1997,(1):20-24.
朱永生.话语分析五十年——回顾与展望[J].外国语,2003,(3):43-50.
朱永生.衔接理论的发展与完善[J].外国语,1995,(3):36-41.
朱永生.主位推进模式与语篇分析[J].外语教学与研究,1995,(3):6-8.朱永生,严世清.系统功能语言学的多维思考[M].上海：上海外语教育出版社,
2001.
Bates, E. Language and Context: The Acquisition of Pragmatics [M]. New York:Academic Press,1976.
Beaugrande, R. D.&W. U. Dressler. Introduction to Text Linguistics [M]. London/NewYork: Longman,1981.
Berry, M. Review of Halliday1978[J]. Nottingham Linguistic Circular,1982,(11):64-94.
Bloor, M.&T. Bloor. The Functional Analysis of English: A Hallidayan Approach [M].London: Arnold,1995.
Booth, C. W. The Rhetoric of Fiction [M]. London: The University of Chicago Press,Ltd.,1961.
Bront, E. Wuthering Heights [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Press,2010.
Brown, G.&G. Yule. Discourse Analysis [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching andResearch Press,2000.
Carter, R. Language as Discourse: Perspectives for Language Teaching [M]. Beijing:Peking University Press,2004.
Cecil, D.“Emily Bront and Wuthering Heights” Early Victorian Novelists [M]. London:Constable,1934.
Crump, R. W. Writings about Charlotte and Emily Bront,1846-1915[M]. Boston: G. K.Hall and Co.,1982.
Danes, F. Functional Sentence Perspective and the Organization of the Text [A]. In F.Danes (ed.). Papers on Functional Sentence Perspective [C]. Prague: Academia,1974.
Eggins, S. An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics [M]. New York andLondon: Continuum,2004.
Eggins, S.&D. Slade. Analyzing Casual Conversation [M]. London: Cassell,1997.
Eggins, S.&D. Slade. Discourse Analysis [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching andResearch Press,2000.
Firbas, J. Functional Sentence Perspective in Written and Spoken Communication [M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1992.
Firth, A.&J. Wagner. On Discourse, Communication, and Some Fundamental Conceptsin SFL Research [J]. The Modern Language Journal,1997.81(3):285-300.
Fries, P. On the Status of Theme in English: Arguments from Discourse [J]. ForumLinguisticum,1981,(6. I):1-38.
Fries, P.&G. Francis. Exploring Theme: Problems for Research [J]. Occasional Papersin Systemic Linguistics,1992,(6):45-60.
Forster, E. M. Aspects of the Novel [M]. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World,1927.
Fowler, R., Hodge, R., Kress, G.&T. Trew. Language and Control [M]. London:Routledge and Kegan Paul,1979.
Garner, W. R. The Processing of Information and Structure [M]. New York: Wiley,1974.
Givon, T. Functionalism and Grammar [M]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins,1995.
Halliday, M. A. K. An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2rdedition)[M]. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2000.
Halliday, M. A. K. An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rdedition)[M]. Beijing:Foreign language Teaching and Research Press,2008.
Halliday, M. A. K. Explorations in the Foundation of Language [M]. London: Arnold,1973.
Halliday, M. A. K. Foreword [Z]. In M. Cummings&R. Simmons. The Language ofLiterature [M], Oxford: Pergamon Press,1983.
Halliday, M. A. K. Language, Context and Text: Aspects of Language in a SocialSemiotics Perspective [M]. Geelong Victoria: Deakin University Press,1985.
Halliday, M. A. K. Language as System and Language as Instance: the Corpus as aTheoretical Construct [A]. In J. Svartvik (ed.). Directions in Corpus Linguistics:Proceedings of Nobel Symposium82[C]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter,1992.
Halliday, M. A. K. Linguistic Function and Literary Style: An Inquiry into the Languageof William Golding’s The Inheritors [A]. In S. Chatman (ed.). Literary Style: ASymposium [C]. Oxford: Oxford University Press,1971; reprinted in Freeman, D.C.(ed.). Essays in Modern Stylistics [C]. London: Methuen,1981.
Halliday, M. A. K. Linguistic Studies of Text and Discourse [A]. In W. Jonathan (ed.).Volumes in the Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday [C]. London&New York:Continuum,2002.
Halliday, M. A. K. Notes on Transitivity and Theme in English (part3)[J]. Journal ofLinguistics,1968,4(2),179-215.
Halliday, M. A. K. Quantitative Studies and Probabilities in Grammar [A]. In M. Hoey(ed.). Data, Description, Discourse: Papers on English Language in Honour ofJohn McH. Sinclair [C]. London: Harper Collins,1993.
Halliday, M. A. K.&C. M. I. M. Matthiessen. An Introduction to Functional Grammar(3rdedition)[M]. London: Arnold,2004.
Halliday, M. A. K.&J. R. Martin. Readings in Systemic Linguistics [M]. Chicago:Trafalgar Square Publishing,1981.
Halliday, M. A. K.&R. Hasan. Cohesion in English [M]. London: Longman,1976;reprinted, Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2001.
Henderson, P. Wuthering Heights and Selected Poems [M]. London: J. M. Dent and Sons,1955.
Hoey, M. Language as Choice: What is Chosen?[A]. In G. Thompson&S. Hunston(eds.). System and Corpus: Exploring Connections [C]. London: Equinox,2006.
Hoye, L. E. Adverbs and Modality in English [M]. New York: Addison Wesley LongmanInc,1997.
Iser, W. The Act of Reading: A Theory o f Aesthetic Response [M]. London&Henley:Routledge&Kegan Paul,1978(3):63.
Jaworski, A.&N. Coupland. The Discourse Reader [M]. London: Routledge,1999.
Kettle, A. An Introduction to the English Novel [M]. London: Hutchinson House,1951.
Kilpert, D. Getting the Full Picture: A Reflection on the Work of M. A. K. Halliday [J].Language Sciences,2003(25):159-209.
Leech, G. N.&M. H. Short. Style in Fiction: A Linguistic Introduction to EnglishFictional Prose [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2001.
Lodge, D. Language of Fiction [M]. London: Routledge&Kegan Paul,1966.
Lovejoy, K. B.&D. M. Lance. Information Management and Cohesion in the Study ofWritten Discourse [J]. Linguistics and Education,1991,(3),251-273.
Malinowski, B. The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages [A]. In C.K. Ogden&I.A. Richards (eds.). The Meaning of Meaning [C]. London: Kegan Paul,1923.
Malinowski, B. Coral Gardens and Their Magic [M]. London: Allen&Unwin,1935.
Maugham, W. S. Ten Novels and Their Authors [M]. London: Heinemann,1954.
Martin, J. R. English Text: System and Structure [M]. Philadelphia-Amsterdam: JohnBenjamins,1992.
Martin, J. R. Theme, Method of Development and Existentiality: The Price of Reply [J].Occasional Papers in Systemic Linguistics,1992(6):174-83.
Martin, J. R.&P. R. R. White. The Language of Evaluation [M]. Palgrave: Macmillian,2005.
Martin, J. R.&R. David. Working with Discourse: Meaning Beyond the Clause [M].Beijing: Beijing University Press,2004.
Ravelli, L. Getting Started with Functional Analysis of Texts [A]. In L. Unsworth (ed.).Researching Language in Schools and Communities: Functional LinguisticPerspectives [C]. London: Continuum International Publishing Group,2006.
Renkema, J. Introduction to Discourse Studies [M]. Amsterdam: Benjamins,2004.
Shklovsky, V. Art as Technique [M]. Lincol: University of Nebraska Press,1965.
Short, M. Exploring the Language of Poems, Plays and Pose [M]. London and New York:Longman,1996.
Short, M. Who Is Stylistics [J]. Journal of Foreign Languages,1984,33(5),14-21.
Simpson, P. Language, Ideology and Point of View [M]. London: Routledge,1993.
Simpson, P. Language through Literature [M]. New York: Routledge,1997.
Simpson, P. Stylistics: A Resource Book for Students [M]. London&New York:Routledge,2004.
Spitzer, L. Linguistics and Literary History [M]. Princeton: Princeton University Press,1948.
Steiner, E. A Functional Perspective on Language, Action&Interpretation [M]. Berlinand New York: Mouton de Gruyter,1991.
Stotsky, S. Type of Lexical Cohesion in Expository Writing: Implications for Developingthe Vocabulary of Academic Discourse [J]. College Composition andCommunication,1983,34(4):430-446.
Thompson, G. Introducing Functional Grammar [M]. Beijing: Foreign LanguageTeaching and Research Press,2000.
Thornborrow, J.&S. Wareing. Patterns in Language: Stylistics for Students of Languageand Literature [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2000.
Toolan, M. Compromising Positions: Systemic Linguistics and the Locally ManagedSemiotics of Dialogue [A]. In Birch, D.&M. O’Toole (eds.). Functions of Style [M].London: Edward Arnold,1988.
Ventola, E.&A. Mauranen. Functional and Systemic Linguistics: Approaches and Uses[M]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter,1991.
Wales, K. A Dictionary of Stylistics [M]. London: Longman,1989.
Widdowson, H. G. Stylistics and the Teaching of Literature [M]. London: Longman Press,1975.
Witt, S.&L. Faigley. Coherence, Cohesion, and Writing Quality [J]. CollegeComposition and Communication,1981,(32):189-204.
Woolf, V.“Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights” The Common Reader: First Series [M].London: Hogarth Press,1925.
Wright, L.&J. Hope. Stylistics: A Practical Coursebook [M]. Beijing: Foreign LanguageTeaching and Research Press,2009.
邓颖玲.在希斯克利夫形象的后面——《呼啸山庄》中希斯克利夫创作模型考证[J].外语与外语教学,2003,(6):36-40.
丁素萍.概念功能中的语义级差与体现形式研究[J].外语与外语教学,2007,(9):4-8.
丁素萍.会话中的概念功能和语言体现形式研究[J].外语教学,2005,(3):10-16.
方平.爱和恨,都是生命在燃烧——试论《呼啸山庄》中的希克厉[J].外国文学研究,1989(2):3-7,20.
方平.希望在人间——论《呼啸山庄》.呼啸山庄译序[Z].上海:上海译文出版社,2010.
方琰.系统功能语法与语篇分析[J].外语教学,2005(6):1-5.
付晓丽,付天军.英语文学语篇的级差系统分析[J].河北师范大学学报（哲学社会科学版）,2009,(3):115-119.
公静,方琰.英语法庭辩论语篇的概念功能分析[J].外语研究,2005,(3):11-16.
胡壮麟.文体学[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2000.
胡壮麟.语篇的衔接与连贯[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,1994.
黄国文.杜牧《清明》英译文的逻辑功能分析[J].外语与翻译,2002,(1):1-6.
黄国文.《清明》一诗英译文的人际功能探讨[J].外语教学,2002,(3):34-38.
黄国文.语篇分析的理论与实践：广告语篇研究[M].上海:上海外国语教育出版社,2001.
黄国文.语篇分析概要[M].长沙:湖南教育出版社,1988.
黄国文.中国的语篇分析研究——写在中国英汉语篇分析研究会成立之际[J].外语教学,2007,(5):6-9.
黄国文,辛志英.语篇功能中的复杂主位[J].外语与外语教学,2009,(12):1-4.
黄雪娥.爱米丽的“人际关系”及其悲剧命运——从人际功能的角度探讨《献给爱米丽的玫瑰》[J].外语教学,2003,(5):88-92.
李运兴.“主位”概念在翻译研究中的应用[J].外语与外语教学,2002,(7):19-22.
李战子.功能语法中的人际意义框架的扩展[J].外语研究,2001,(1):52-53.
李战子,施卫华.韩礼德系统功能语法面貌刷新——第三版《功能语法引论》述评[J].外语教学,2006,(2):92-94.
刘世生.西方文体学论纲[M].济南:山东教育出版社,1998.
苗兴伟.人际意义与语篇的建构[J].山东外语教学,2004,(1):5-11.
苗兴伟.英语的评价型强势主位结构[J].山东外语教学,2007,(2):54-57.
裘燕萍.英语被动语态的人际功能[J].外语研究,2008,(2):22-26.
申丹.关于西方文体学新发展的思考——兼评辛普森的《文体学》[J].外国语,2005,(3):56-64.
申丹.及物性系统与深层象征意义[J].外语教学与研究,2006,(1):4-10.
滕延江.称呼语的人际功能及其语用翻译等值[J].西安外国语学院学报,2006,(1):32-35.
王苹.平静地面下的不平静睡眠：《呼啸山庄》里的种族政治[J].南京大学学报（哲学·人文科学·社会科学），2012,(2):132-141.
王守元.英语文体学要略[M].济南:山东大学出版社,2000.
谢之君,王仙凤.概念功能、人际功能与汉语小句英译[J].同济大学学报（社会科学版），2006,(4):62-67.
辛斌.语篇互文性的批评性分析[M].苏州:苏州大学出版社,2000.
闫素真.从功能语法视角分析小说《呼啸山庄》的人际意义[D].新疆大学,2007.
杨静远.勃朗特姐妹研究[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1983.
张德禄.功能文体学[M].济南:山东教育出版社,1998.
张德禄.韩礼德功能问题理论述评[J].外语教学与研究,1999,(1):43-49.
张德禄.论衔接[J].外国语,2001,(2):23-28.
张德禄.论衔接关系——话语组成机制研究[J].外语教学,2003,(1):1-5.
张德禄.系统功能语言学[J].外国语，2011,(3):64-65.
张德禄.衔接力与语篇连贯的程度[J].外语与外语教学,2001,(1):9-15.
张德禄.语篇衔接中的形式与意义[J].外国语,2005,(5):32-38.
张德禄.语言的功能与文体[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2005.
张福勇,李小敬.浅析《呼啸山庄》的时间哲学[J].外语与外语教学,2007,(6):40-42.
张今,张克定.英汉语信息结构对比研究[M].开封:河南大学出版社,1998.
张曼.意识流小说文体探究——对《墙上的斑点》的功能文体分析[J].天津外国学院学报,2002,(4):52-55.
赵德全.纯理功能的传译:功能语言学理论框架下的翻译研究[M].保定:河北大学出版社,2007.
赵德全.概念功能的传译——从功能语言学的角度看翻译[J].河北大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2006,(5):132-137.
朱永生.韩礼德的语篇连贯标准——外界的误解与自身的不足[J].外语教学与研究,1997,(1):20-24.
朱永生.话语分析五十年——回顾与展望[J].外国语,2003,(3):43-50.
朱永生.衔接理论的发展与完善[J].外国语,1995,(3):36-41.
朱永生.主位推进模式与语篇分析[J].外语教学与研究,1995,(3):6-8.朱永生,严世清.系统功能语言学的多维思考[M].上海：上海外语教育出版社,
2001.