论模糊限制语在《远离尘嚣》中的人际功能和语篇功能
|
摘要
模糊性是自然语言的内在属性,模糊限制语作为自然语言的一部分,在语义层面上,能够增加和减少语言的模糊性,在语用层面上,主要是作为一种语言策略来提高语言的表达效果和灵活性,实现有效交际。目前对模糊限制语的研究已拓展到语言学的各个层面,包括语义学、语用学、篇章学、话语分析、二语习得、翻译学、认知和跨文化交际学等。本文从系统功能语言学情态的视角出发,以经典小说《远离尘嚣》中的模糊限制语为语料,分析了模糊限制语在文学作品中的人际功能和语篇功能。
模糊限制语和情态具有重叠性和兼容性,被认为是情态的语言构建手段(康响英,2008),韩礼德(1994/2000)情态理论中的情态类型、情态隐喻和情态的价值取向为模糊限制语人际功能的实现提供了理论依据。语篇功能又依赖实现人际功能的语言的组织方式和组织模式,即模糊限制语直接参与语篇构建。论文依据语气推测型、直接缓和型、间接缓和型、以及变动型模糊限制语四条研究路径,分析它们在经典小说《远离尘嚣》中的人际功能。再从模糊限制语整体范畴的角度,分析它们在语篇中的组织方式和组织模式,结合具体语境探讨其语篇功能。
论文完成了以下研究内容：1)对《远离尘嚣》中的模糊限制语进行了观察、采集和分类组合；2)借助24条语料探讨了模糊限制语在塑造角色、反应角色关系、表达观点、态度、评价和实现语言得体性等方面人际功能的实现过程；3)通过分析12条语料,从模糊限制语整体范畴的角度,观察了模糊限制语在语篇构建模式、信息传达特点以及对读者的影响三方面的语篇功能。
本文的主要意义在于：1)从功能语言学情态的角度为研究模糊限制语提供依据；2)为研究模糊限制语在文学作品中的人际功能和语篇功能增加研究实例；3)增强英语学习者和研究者对模糊限制语及其功能的认识,使其提高使用模糊限制语的可接受性,从而提升语言交际能力；4)强化中国英语学习者在英文写作、理解英文原著和跨文化交际等方面的技能。因此,本文对于语言教学亦具有一定的参考价值。
Fuzziness is the innate feature of natural language. Hedges, expressions of fuzziness on semantic level make language more or less fuzzy. And on pragmatic level, hedges are employed as a language strategy to improve linguistic expressions' effect and flexibility so as to realize a successful communication. Studies of hedges from linguistic perspectives have gained great achievements, which covers the fields of semantics, pragmatics, texture, discourse analysis, second language acquisition, translation study, cognition, cross-cultural communication, etc. This thesis aims to analyze the interpersonal functions and textual functions hedges can perform in literature works in light of modality theory in systemic-functional grammar.
Hedge and modality have the interface in the aspects of definition, the overlapping words and the realization of modality. To make it specific, hedges are the linguistic construction forms of modality (Kang Xiangying:2008). The types, metaphors and the value orientations of modality in Halliday's Modality Theory (1994/2000) function as the theoretical basis for the realization of interpersonal functions of hedges. The realization of textual functions relies on the linguistic organization patterning and organization mode of interpersonal functions. That is to say, hedges directly take part in constructing text. Based on this theoretical foundation, this thesis follows four analytical approaches, namely, mood presuming shields, plausibility and attribution shields as well as approximators to explore the interpersonal functions they perform in classical novel Far from the Madding Crowd. Furthermore, from a global perspective of all the four kinds of hedges, this thesis deepens the study on textual functions in terms of hedge organizations at forms and modes in specific contexts.
This thesis has the following achievements:1) It makes observation, collection and classification of hedge items used in Far from the Madding Crowd; 2) This thesis explores the respective interpersonal functions such as portraying characters, reflecting character relationship, demonstrating views, attitudes and judgments, and achieving appropriateness of linguistic expressions with the illustrations of 24 hedge examples; 3) It examines the holistic textual functions in terms of how hedge expressions contribute to highlighting structural mechanism of a text, conveying information, expressing feelings and producing effects on readers with the interpretation of 12 hedge items.
The significance of this study firstly lies in the fact that it provides an evidence for the investigation of hedges from the perspective of Modality Theory in Systemic-functional Grammar. Secondly, it increases research references for the extension of hedge study from interpersonal functions and textual functions aspects in literature works. Thirdly, it contributes to increasing language learners and researchers'awareness of hedges, serves to improve the acceptability of their hedge usage, and enhances their communication abilities. Fourthly, for Chinese English learners, this thesis helps to reinforce their abilities in English writing, appreciating original English literature works, and skills of cross-cultural communication. Therefore, it will be a valuable supplement for the study of hedges as well as language learning and teaching.
模糊限制语和情态具有重叠性和兼容性,被认为是情态的语言构建手段(康响英,2008),韩礼德(1994/2000)情态理论中的情态类型、情态隐喻和情态的价值取向为模糊限制语人际功能的实现提供了理论依据。语篇功能又依赖实现人际功能的语言的组织方式和组织模式,即模糊限制语直接参与语篇构建。论文依据语气推测型、直接缓和型、间接缓和型、以及变动型模糊限制语四条研究路径,分析它们在经典小说《远离尘嚣》中的人际功能。再从模糊限制语整体范畴的角度,分析它们在语篇中的组织方式和组织模式,结合具体语境探讨其语篇功能。
论文完成了以下研究内容：1)对《远离尘嚣》中的模糊限制语进行了观察、采集和分类组合；2)借助24条语料探讨了模糊限制语在塑造角色、反应角色关系、表达观点、态度、评价和实现语言得体性等方面人际功能的实现过程；3)通过分析12条语料,从模糊限制语整体范畴的角度,观察了模糊限制语在语篇构建模式、信息传达特点以及对读者的影响三方面的语篇功能。
本文的主要意义在于：1)从功能语言学情态的角度为研究模糊限制语提供依据；2)为研究模糊限制语在文学作品中的人际功能和语篇功能增加研究实例；3)增强英语学习者和研究者对模糊限制语及其功能的认识,使其提高使用模糊限制语的可接受性,从而提升语言交际能力；4)强化中国英语学习者在英文写作、理解英文原著和跨文化交际等方面的技能。因此,本文对于语言教学亦具有一定的参考价值。
Fuzziness is the innate feature of natural language. Hedges, expressions of fuzziness on semantic level make language more or less fuzzy. And on pragmatic level, hedges are employed as a language strategy to improve linguistic expressions' effect and flexibility so as to realize a successful communication. Studies of hedges from linguistic perspectives have gained great achievements, which covers the fields of semantics, pragmatics, texture, discourse analysis, second language acquisition, translation study, cognition, cross-cultural communication, etc. This thesis aims to analyze the interpersonal functions and textual functions hedges can perform in literature works in light of modality theory in systemic-functional grammar.
Hedge and modality have the interface in the aspects of definition, the overlapping words and the realization of modality. To make it specific, hedges are the linguistic construction forms of modality (Kang Xiangying:2008). The types, metaphors and the value orientations of modality in Halliday's Modality Theory (1994/2000) function as the theoretical basis for the realization of interpersonal functions of hedges. The realization of textual functions relies on the linguistic organization patterning and organization mode of interpersonal functions. That is to say, hedges directly take part in constructing text. Based on this theoretical foundation, this thesis follows four analytical approaches, namely, mood presuming shields, plausibility and attribution shields as well as approximators to explore the interpersonal functions they perform in classical novel Far from the Madding Crowd. Furthermore, from a global perspective of all the four kinds of hedges, this thesis deepens the study on textual functions in terms of hedge organizations at forms and modes in specific contexts.
This thesis has the following achievements:1) It makes observation, collection and classification of hedge items used in Far from the Madding Crowd; 2) This thesis explores the respective interpersonal functions such as portraying characters, reflecting character relationship, demonstrating views, attitudes and judgments, and achieving appropriateness of linguistic expressions with the illustrations of 24 hedge examples; 3) It examines the holistic textual functions in terms of how hedge expressions contribute to highlighting structural mechanism of a text, conveying information, expressing feelings and producing effects on readers with the interpretation of 12 hedge items.
The significance of this study firstly lies in the fact that it provides an evidence for the investigation of hedges from the perspective of Modality Theory in Systemic-functional Grammar. Secondly, it increases research references for the extension of hedge study from interpersonal functions and textual functions aspects in literature works. Thirdly, it contributes to increasing language learners and researchers'awareness of hedges, serves to improve the acceptability of their hedge usage, and enhances their communication abilities. Fourthly, for Chinese English learners, this thesis helps to reinforce their abilities in English writing, appreciating original English literature works, and skills of cross-cultural communication. Therefore, it will be a valuable supplement for the study of hedges as well as language learning and teaching.
引文
Biber, D. (1988). Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Blum-Kulka, S. (1984). Requests and Apologies:A cross-cultural study of speech act realized patterns. Applied Linguistics,5(3).
Brown, P.& Levinson, S. (1978). Universals in language usage:politeness phenomena. In E. Goody (ed) Questions and Politeness:Strategies in Social Interaction. (pp.56-311).Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,
Brown, P.& Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness:Some Universals in Language Usage. Great Britain:Cambridge University Press.
Butler, C. S. (1990). Quantification in Science:Modal Meanings in Science Texts. In The Writing Scholar:Studies in Academic Discourse, ed. Walter Nash, 137-170. Newbury Park:Sage Publication.
Burton, G,& Dimbleby, R. (1988). Between Ourselves:An Introduction to Interpersonal Communication (Paperback). London:Hodder Arnold.
Channell, J. (1980).'More on approximations'. Journal of Pragmatics.
Clyne, M. (1991). The Socio-cultural dimension:The dilemma of the Herman-speaking scholar. In Schroider, H. (ed) Subject-oriented Texts. (PP. 49-67). Berlin:de Gruyter.
Coates, J. (1983). The Semantics of the Modal Auxiliaries. London:Croom Helm.
Coates, J. (1987). Epistemic modality and spoken discourse. Transactions of the Philological society. (85):100-112.
Crismore, A.& Vande Kopple, W. J. (1997). Hedges and Readers:Effects on Attitudes and Learning. In Markanen, R.& Schrode, H. (Eds.) Hedging, and Discourse. (pp.83-114). New York:de Gruyter.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Cole & Morgan (eds.) Syntax and Semantics 3:Speech Acts.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1973). Explorations in the Functions of Language. (pp.41-49) London:Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (1st edn). (pp.340). London:Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd edn). (pp.76).London:Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K. (2000). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rd edn). (Pp.36-68,358,362-363,367). Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1978/2001). Language as Social Semiotic:The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. (pp.52). London:Edward Arnold./ Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research.
Hyland, K. (1994). Hedging in Academic Writing and EAP Textbooks. English for Specific Purposes,13,239-256.
Hyland, K. (1998). Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. (pp.176) Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Holmes, J. (1982). Expressing Doubt and Certainty in English. RELC Journal,13, 9-29.
Hosman, L. A.1989. The Evaluative Consequences of Hedges, Hesitations, and Intensifiers:Powerful and Powerless Speech-styles. Human Communication Research,15,383-406.
Htibler, A. (1983). Understatements and Hedges in English. (pp.10-23). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kasper, G. (1981). Communcation Strategies:Modlity Reduction The Interlanguage Studies Bulletin,4,266-283.
Lakoff, G 1972. Hedges:A Study in Meaning Criteria and the Logic of Fuzzy Concepts. Chicago Linguistic Society Papers,8,183-228.
Leech, G. (1983). Principle of Pragmatics. London:Longman.
Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics (Vol 2). (pp.572, pp.797)Cambridge University Press..
Markkanen, R.,& Schroder, H. (1997). Hedging:A Challenge for Pragmatics and Discourse Analysis. In Hedging and Discourse:Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Text, ed. Raija Markkanen and Hartmut Schroder,3-18. Berlin/New York:Walter de Gruyter.
Markanen, R.& Schroder, H. (Eds.). (1997). Hedging and Discourse. New York:de Gruyter.
Nikula, T. (1997). Interlanguage view on hedging. In Markanen, R.& Schrode, H. (Eds.) Hedging and Discourse. (pp.188-207) Ne York:de Cruyter.
Palmer, F.R. (1986). Mood and Modality. (pp.16).Cambridge:Cambridge UP,
Peirce, C. S. (1902).'Vagueness', in Baldwin, M. (ed.) Dictionary of Philosophy and Psychology Ⅱ. London:Macmillan.
Perkins, M. R. (1983). Modal Expressions in English. (pp.6). Norwood, N. J.:Ablex Printer.
Prince, E., Bask, C.,& Frader, J. (1982). On Hedging in Physician-Physician Discourse. In R.D. Pietro,J. (Eds.), Linguistics and the Professions. (pp.83-97). Hillsdale, NJ:Ablex.
Russell, B. (1923). Vagueness. http://www.santafe.edu/-shalizi/Russell/vagueness/.
Schaff, A. (1962). Introduction to Semantics. (pp.23):Warsaw.
Thompson, G. (1996/2000). Introducing Functional Grammar. (p.147). London: Edward Arnold.
Van Dijk, T. A. (1977). Text and Context. (pp.7). London:Longman Inc.
Van Diji, T. A. (1983). Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. (pp.52). Orlando: Academic Press.
Varttala, T. (2001). Hedging in Scientifically Oriented Discourse:Exploring Variation According to Discipline and Intended Audience. Electronic Dissertation, Acta Electronica Universitatis Tamperensis 138. Available:Http:// acta. Uta.fi.11.
Verchueren, J. (2000). Understanding Pragmatics. Beijing, Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Watts, N., Richard, S. I.,& Konrad. E. (2005). Politeness in Language. (pp.7). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Yang, Yingli. (2003). A Contrastive Study of Hedges in English and Chinese Academic Discourse. Unpublished MA Thesis, Jilin Universitry, Changchun, China.
Zadeh, L.A. (1965).'Fuzzy Sets'. Information and control. (8):338-353.
Zadeh, L.A. Fuzzy Logic for the Management of Uncertainty, New York,1992.
陈华林,李福印,(1994),交际中的模糊限制语, 《外国语》第5期 第56-57页。
陈意德,(2000),言语交际中的模糊限制语及其语用功能,《湘潭师范学院学报》(社会科学版)第4期。
陈治安,冉永平,(1995),模糊限制语及其语用分析,《四川外语学院学报》第 1期,第18-24页。
高晓芳,张琴,(2002),模糊限制语：分类与应用,《四川外语学院学报》第5期。
何自然,(1985),模糊限制语与言语交际,《外国语》第5期。
何自然,冉永平,(2001),《语用与认知关联理论研究》,北京：外语教学与研究出版社。
胡曙中,(2005),英语语篇语言学研究。上海：上海外语教育出版社。
胡壮麟,朱永生,张德禄,(1989),《系统功能语言学》,长沙：湖南教育出版社。
黄国文,(2001), 《语篇分析的理论与实践》,上海：上海外语教育出版社。
蒋婷,(2006),论学术英语中的情态模糊限制语——一项基于语料库的研究,《外语电教化》第4期。
康响英,(2008a),论模糊语言在《礼物》中的人际、语篇功能,《外语与外语教学》第2期 第10-12页。
康响英,(2008b),模糊限制语与情态系统的界面研究,《四川外语学院学报》第3期。
金琼,(1999),维多利亚时代女性文学与中国现代女性文学,《外国文学研究》第2期
李佐文,(2001),模糊限制语的人际功能,《北京第二外国语学院学报》第6期第5页。
黎千驹,(1996),实用模糊语言学。桂林：广西师范大学出版社 第160页。
苗兴伟,(2004),人际意义与语篇的构建,《山东外语教学》第1期 第5-11页。
潘丽群,(2007),科技论文中模糊限制语的语用分析,〈硕士学位论文〉,安徽大学,合肥市。
任绍曾,(2003),语篇的多维分析,《外国语》第3期 第35-42页.
宋雅智,(2008),主位—述位及语篇功能,《外语学刊》第4期 第86页。
汪先锋,(2005),模糊限制语的元功能分析,《重庆交通学院学报》第2期第112页。
翁依琴,(2002),模糊限制语的语用分类及功能,《江西社会科学》第5期 126-128页。
伍铁平,(1999),模糊语言学。上海：上海外语教育出版社。
徐畅贤,(2006),英语模糊限制语的语用功能,《外语教学》第4期 37-39页。
谢麟珠,黄铁聚,(1996),非语言行为的交际功能,《外语学刊》第1期。
杨毓隽,(2002),模糊限制语与言语交际,《外语教学》第4期。
杨慧玲,(2001),科技论文中的模糊限制语,《四川外语学院学报》第1期 第85-86页。
赵英玲,(1999),英语科技语体中的模糊限制语,《外语与外语教学》第9期 第17页。
曾文雄,(2005),模糊限制语的语言学理论与应用研究,《外语教学》第4期 第28页。
张德禄,(1998),论话语基调的范围及体现,《外语教学与研究》第1期 第8-14页。
张德禄,(2001),论衔接。《外国语》第2期 第23-28页。
张德禄,(2005)语篇衔接中的形式与意义,《外国语》第5期 第32-38页。
Blum-Kulka, S. (1984). Requests and Apologies:A cross-cultural study of speech act realized patterns. Applied Linguistics,5(3).
Brown, P.& Levinson, S. (1978). Universals in language usage:politeness phenomena. In E. Goody (ed) Questions and Politeness:Strategies in Social Interaction. (pp.56-311).Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,
Brown, P.& Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness:Some Universals in Language Usage. Great Britain:Cambridge University Press.
Butler, C. S. (1990). Quantification in Science:Modal Meanings in Science Texts. In The Writing Scholar:Studies in Academic Discourse, ed. Walter Nash, 137-170. Newbury Park:Sage Publication.
Burton, G,& Dimbleby, R. (1988). Between Ourselves:An Introduction to Interpersonal Communication (Paperback). London:Hodder Arnold.
Channell, J. (1980).'More on approximations'. Journal of Pragmatics.
Clyne, M. (1991). The Socio-cultural dimension:The dilemma of the Herman-speaking scholar. In Schroider, H. (ed) Subject-oriented Texts. (PP. 49-67). Berlin:de Gruyter.
Coates, J. (1983). The Semantics of the Modal Auxiliaries. London:Croom Helm.
Coates, J. (1987). Epistemic modality and spoken discourse. Transactions of the Philological society. (85):100-112.
Crismore, A.& Vande Kopple, W. J. (1997). Hedges and Readers:Effects on Attitudes and Learning. In Markanen, R.& Schrode, H. (Eds.) Hedging, and Discourse. (pp.83-114). New York:de Gruyter.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Cole & Morgan (eds.) Syntax and Semantics 3:Speech Acts.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1973). Explorations in the Functions of Language. (pp.41-49) London:Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (1st edn). (pp.340). London:Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd edn). (pp.76).London:Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K. (2000). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rd edn). (Pp.36-68,358,362-363,367). Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1978/2001). Language as Social Semiotic:The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. (pp.52). London:Edward Arnold./ Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research.
Hyland, K. (1994). Hedging in Academic Writing and EAP Textbooks. English for Specific Purposes,13,239-256.
Hyland, K. (1998). Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. (pp.176) Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Holmes, J. (1982). Expressing Doubt and Certainty in English. RELC Journal,13, 9-29.
Hosman, L. A.1989. The Evaluative Consequences of Hedges, Hesitations, and Intensifiers:Powerful and Powerless Speech-styles. Human Communication Research,15,383-406.
Htibler, A. (1983). Understatements and Hedges in English. (pp.10-23). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kasper, G. (1981). Communcation Strategies:Modlity Reduction The Interlanguage Studies Bulletin,4,266-283.
Lakoff, G 1972. Hedges:A Study in Meaning Criteria and the Logic of Fuzzy Concepts. Chicago Linguistic Society Papers,8,183-228.
Leech, G. (1983). Principle of Pragmatics. London:Longman.
Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics (Vol 2). (pp.572, pp.797)Cambridge University Press..
Markkanen, R.,& Schroder, H. (1997). Hedging:A Challenge for Pragmatics and Discourse Analysis. In Hedging and Discourse:Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Text, ed. Raija Markkanen and Hartmut Schroder,3-18. Berlin/New York:Walter de Gruyter.
Markanen, R.& Schroder, H. (Eds.). (1997). Hedging and Discourse. New York:de Gruyter.
Nikula, T. (1997). Interlanguage view on hedging. In Markanen, R.& Schrode, H. (Eds.) Hedging and Discourse. (pp.188-207) Ne York:de Cruyter.
Palmer, F.R. (1986). Mood and Modality. (pp.16).Cambridge:Cambridge UP,
Peirce, C. S. (1902).'Vagueness', in Baldwin, M. (ed.) Dictionary of Philosophy and Psychology Ⅱ. London:Macmillan.
Perkins, M. R. (1983). Modal Expressions in English. (pp.6). Norwood, N. J.:Ablex Printer.
Prince, E., Bask, C.,& Frader, J. (1982). On Hedging in Physician-Physician Discourse. In R.D. Pietro,J. (Eds.), Linguistics and the Professions. (pp.83-97). Hillsdale, NJ:Ablex.
Russell, B. (1923). Vagueness. http://www.santafe.edu/-shalizi/Russell/vagueness/.
Schaff, A. (1962). Introduction to Semantics. (pp.23):Warsaw.
Thompson, G. (1996/2000). Introducing Functional Grammar. (p.147). London: Edward Arnold.
Van Dijk, T. A. (1977). Text and Context. (pp.7). London:Longman Inc.
Van Diji, T. A. (1983). Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. (pp.52). Orlando: Academic Press.
Varttala, T. (2001). Hedging in Scientifically Oriented Discourse:Exploring Variation According to Discipline and Intended Audience. Electronic Dissertation, Acta Electronica Universitatis Tamperensis 138. Available:Http:// acta. Uta.fi.11.
Verchueren, J. (2000). Understanding Pragmatics. Beijing, Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Watts, N., Richard, S. I.,& Konrad. E. (2005). Politeness in Language. (pp.7). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Yang, Yingli. (2003). A Contrastive Study of Hedges in English and Chinese Academic Discourse. Unpublished MA Thesis, Jilin Universitry, Changchun, China.
Zadeh, L.A. (1965).'Fuzzy Sets'. Information and control. (8):338-353.
Zadeh, L.A. Fuzzy Logic for the Management of Uncertainty, New York,1992.
陈华林,李福印,(1994),交际中的模糊限制语, 《外国语》第5期 第56-57页。
陈意德,(2000),言语交际中的模糊限制语及其语用功能,《湘潭师范学院学报》(社会科学版)第4期。
陈治安,冉永平,(1995),模糊限制语及其语用分析,《四川外语学院学报》第 1期,第18-24页。
高晓芳,张琴,(2002),模糊限制语：分类与应用,《四川外语学院学报》第5期。
何自然,(1985),模糊限制语与言语交际,《外国语》第5期。
何自然,冉永平,(2001),《语用与认知关联理论研究》,北京：外语教学与研究出版社。
胡曙中,(2005),英语语篇语言学研究。上海：上海外语教育出版社。
胡壮麟,朱永生,张德禄,(1989),《系统功能语言学》,长沙：湖南教育出版社。
黄国文,(2001), 《语篇分析的理论与实践》,上海：上海外语教育出版社。
蒋婷,(2006),论学术英语中的情态模糊限制语——一项基于语料库的研究,《外语电教化》第4期。
康响英,(2008a),论模糊语言在《礼物》中的人际、语篇功能,《外语与外语教学》第2期 第10-12页。
康响英,(2008b),模糊限制语与情态系统的界面研究,《四川外语学院学报》第3期。
金琼,(1999),维多利亚时代女性文学与中国现代女性文学,《外国文学研究》第2期
李佐文,(2001),模糊限制语的人际功能,《北京第二外国语学院学报》第6期第5页。
黎千驹,(1996),实用模糊语言学。桂林：广西师范大学出版社 第160页。
苗兴伟,(2004),人际意义与语篇的构建,《山东外语教学》第1期 第5-11页。
潘丽群,(2007),科技论文中模糊限制语的语用分析,〈硕士学位论文〉,安徽大学,合肥市。
任绍曾,(2003),语篇的多维分析,《外国语》第3期 第35-42页.
宋雅智,(2008),主位—述位及语篇功能,《外语学刊》第4期 第86页。
汪先锋,(2005),模糊限制语的元功能分析,《重庆交通学院学报》第2期第112页。
翁依琴,(2002),模糊限制语的语用分类及功能,《江西社会科学》第5期 126-128页。
伍铁平,(1999),模糊语言学。上海：上海外语教育出版社。
徐畅贤,(2006),英语模糊限制语的语用功能,《外语教学》第4期 37-39页。
谢麟珠,黄铁聚,(1996),非语言行为的交际功能,《外语学刊》第1期。
杨毓隽,(2002),模糊限制语与言语交际,《外语教学》第4期。
杨慧玲,(2001),科技论文中的模糊限制语,《四川外语学院学报》第1期 第85-86页。
赵英玲,(1999),英语科技语体中的模糊限制语,《外语与外语教学》第9期 第17页。
曾文雄,(2005),模糊限制语的语言学理论与应用研究,《外语教学》第4期 第28页。
张德禄,(1998),论话语基调的范围及体现,《外语教学与研究》第1期 第8-14页。
张德禄,(2001),论衔接。《外国语》第2期 第23-28页。
张德禄,(2005)语篇衔接中的形式与意义,《外国语》第5期 第32-38页。