视觉元话语:教育语篇人际功能建构资源
|
摘要
交际领域的视觉转向使我们意识到元话语研究应被看作一个开放的范畴,不可忽略非语言或伴随语言的视觉元话语研究。根据Kumpf的视觉元话语理论,文章首先分析其实现人际功能的视觉元话语类型,尝试把它分为显性和隐性两部分,两者关系体现为前者是基础和依据;后者是结果和目的。然后,结合具体的教育语篇,分析视觉元话语人际功能的语义成分和实现方式。研究发现视觉元话语实现了语篇互动、介入、协同三种人际语义功能,体现了专家和学习者语篇空间的互动、参照和协调。该研究为教育语篇资源的人际功能建构和社会关系协商提供较开放的研究视角。
Metadiscourse,in line with the visual turn in communication,is expected to be researched in the open domain,so attention is required to pay on the visual metadiscourse,an non-linguistic / paralinguistic semiotic resource by virtue of visual devices. According to Kumpf's 10 types of visual metadiscourse,the paper attempts to divide it into two parts: the explicit and implicit types,among which the former is the basis and the latter is the purpose for interpersonal construction. Based on the analysis of interpersonal functions in specific texts from the perspective of semantic elements and its realizing devices,the paper finds that visual metadiscourse in educational texts has three interpersonal semantic elements: interaction,engagement,and coordination,which promote the textual proposition and give expressions to the referential and coordinating connections among the experts and learners in the textual space. It's hoped to facilitate the better understanding of visual metadiscourse and offer a more open perspective for the research on construing and negotiating resources for interpersonal relation in educational texts.
Metadiscourse,in line with the visual turn in communication,is expected to be researched in the open domain,so attention is required to pay on the visual metadiscourse,an non-linguistic / paralinguistic semiotic resource by virtue of visual devices. According to Kumpf's 10 types of visual metadiscourse,the paper attempts to divide it into two parts: the explicit and implicit types,among which the former is the basis and the latter is the purpose for interpersonal construction. Based on the analysis of interpersonal functions in specific texts from the perspective of semantic elements and its realizing devices,the paper finds that visual metadiscourse in educational texts has three interpersonal semantic elements: interaction,engagement,and coordination,which promote the textual proposition and give expressions to the referential and coordinating connections among the experts and learners in the textual space. It's hoped to facilitate the better understanding of visual metadiscourse and offer a more open perspective for the research on construing and negotiating resources for interpersonal relation in educational texts.
引文
[1]Abdollahzadeh,E.Poring over the findings:Interpersonal authorial engagement in applied linguistics papers[J].Journal of Pragmatics,2011(43):288-297.
[2]Adel.A.Just to give you kind of a map of where we are going:A taxonomy of metadiscourse in spoken and written academic English[J].Nordic Journal of English Studies,2010(9):69-97.
[3]Adel,A.and A.Mauranen.Metadiscourse:Diverse and divided perspectives[J].Nordic Journal of English Studies,2010(9):1-11.
[4]Crismore,A.Metadiscourse in popular and professional science discourse[A].In W.Nash,(ed.).The Writing Scholar:Studies in Academic Discourse[C].1990:118-136.
[5]Guillem S.M.Argumentation,metadiscourse and social cognition:Organizing knowledge in political communication[J].Discourse&Society,2009(6):727-746.
[6]Guo,L.Multimodal discourse analysis:Systemic functional perspectives[A].In K.L.O’Halloran(ed.).Multimodality in Biology Textbook[C].London:Continuum,2004:196-219
[7]Halliday&Dik,S.C.The Theory of Functional Grammar—Complex and Derived Construction[M].New York:Mouton de Gruyter,1997.
[8]Halliday&Matthiessen.Construing Experience Through Meaning:A Language-Based Approach to Cognition[M].London:Cassell,1999.
[9]Hyland,K.Metadiscourse:Mapping interaction in academic writing[J].Nordic Journal of English Studies,2010(9):125-143.
[10]Hyland,K.Disciplinary Discourse:Social Interactions in Academic Writing[M].Haflow:Pearson Education,2000.
[11]Hyland,Ken and Polly Tse.Metadiscourse in academic writing:A reappraisal[J].Applied Linguistics,2004(2):156-177.
[12]Ifantidou,Elly.The semantics and pragmatics of metadiscourse[J].Journal of Pragmatics,2005(37):1325-1353.
[13]Kress,G.&T.van Leeuwen.Reading Images:The Grammar of Visual Design(2ndEdition)[M].London:Routledge,2006.
[14]Kumpf,Eric P.Visual Metadicourse:Designing the considerate text[J].Technical Communicaton Quarterly,2000(9):401-424.
[15]Martin&White,The Language of Evaluation:Appraisal in English[M].Hampshire&New York:Palgrave Macmillan,2005.
[16]Mauranen.Reflexive academic talk:Observations from MICASE[A].In R Simpson and J.M Swales(eds.).Corpus Linguistics in North America[C].Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press 2001:165-178.
[17]Sinclair,J.Planes of discourse[A].In S.Rizri(ed.).The Twofold Voice:Essays in Honour of Ramesh Mohan[C].Salzburg:Salzburg University Press,1981:70-89.
[18]Swales,J.M.Genre Analysis:English in Academic and Research Settings[M].Cambridge:CUP,1990.
[19]Thompson,G.Interaction in academic writing:Learning to argue with the reader[J].Applied Linguistics,2001(1):58-78.
[20]Vande Kopple.Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse[J].College Composition and Communication,1985(1):82-93.
[21]辛志英,黄国文.元话语的评价赋值功能[J].外语教学,2010(6):1-5.
[22]徐赳纠.关于元话语的范围和分类[J].当代语言学,2006(4):345-346.
[23]徐赳纠,付晓丽.篇章中括号元话语的形式表现及功能分析[J].当代修辞学,2012(4):20-30.
[24]杨信彰.人际视角下的评价理论和元话语理论[A].张敬源,彭漪,何伟,主编.系统功能语言学前沿动态——第八届中国系统功能语言学学术活动周报告文集[C].北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2009:148.
[25]杨信彰.系统功能语言学与教育语篇分析[J].四川外国语学院学报,2007(6):17-18.
[26]袁邦株,徐润英.社会科学论文中人际意义分析模式探索[J].外语教学,2010(6):33-34.
[2]Adel.A.Just to give you kind of a map of where we are going:A taxonomy of metadiscourse in spoken and written academic English[J].Nordic Journal of English Studies,2010(9):69-97.
[3]Adel,A.and A.Mauranen.Metadiscourse:Diverse and divided perspectives[J].Nordic Journal of English Studies,2010(9):1-11.
[4]Crismore,A.Metadiscourse in popular and professional science discourse[A].In W.Nash,(ed.).The Writing Scholar:Studies in Academic Discourse[C].1990:118-136.
[5]Guillem S.M.Argumentation,metadiscourse and social cognition:Organizing knowledge in political communication[J].Discourse&Society,2009(6):727-746.
[6]Guo,L.Multimodal discourse analysis:Systemic functional perspectives[A].In K.L.O’Halloran(ed.).Multimodality in Biology Textbook[C].London:Continuum,2004:196-219
[7]Halliday&Dik,S.C.The Theory of Functional Grammar—Complex and Derived Construction[M].New York:Mouton de Gruyter,1997.
[8]Halliday&Matthiessen.Construing Experience Through Meaning:A Language-Based Approach to Cognition[M].London:Cassell,1999.
[9]Hyland,K.Metadiscourse:Mapping interaction in academic writing[J].Nordic Journal of English Studies,2010(9):125-143.
[10]Hyland,K.Disciplinary Discourse:Social Interactions in Academic Writing[M].Haflow:Pearson Education,2000.
[11]Hyland,Ken and Polly Tse.Metadiscourse in academic writing:A reappraisal[J].Applied Linguistics,2004(2):156-177.
[12]Ifantidou,Elly.The semantics and pragmatics of metadiscourse[J].Journal of Pragmatics,2005(37):1325-1353.
[13]Kress,G.&T.van Leeuwen.Reading Images:The Grammar of Visual Design(2ndEdition)[M].London:Routledge,2006.
[14]Kumpf,Eric P.Visual Metadicourse:Designing the considerate text[J].Technical Communicaton Quarterly,2000(9):401-424.
[15]Martin&White,The Language of Evaluation:Appraisal in English[M].Hampshire&New York:Palgrave Macmillan,2005.
[16]Mauranen.Reflexive academic talk:Observations from MICASE[A].In R Simpson and J.M Swales(eds.).Corpus Linguistics in North America[C].Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press 2001:165-178.
[17]Sinclair,J.Planes of discourse[A].In S.Rizri(ed.).The Twofold Voice:Essays in Honour of Ramesh Mohan[C].Salzburg:Salzburg University Press,1981:70-89.
[18]Swales,J.M.Genre Analysis:English in Academic and Research Settings[M].Cambridge:CUP,1990.
[19]Thompson,G.Interaction in academic writing:Learning to argue with the reader[J].Applied Linguistics,2001(1):58-78.
[20]Vande Kopple.Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse[J].College Composition and Communication,1985(1):82-93.
[21]辛志英,黄国文.元话语的评价赋值功能[J].外语教学,2010(6):1-5.
[22]徐赳纠.关于元话语的范围和分类[J].当代语言学,2006(4):345-346.
[23]徐赳纠,付晓丽.篇章中括号元话语的形式表现及功能分析[J].当代修辞学,2012(4):20-30.
[24]杨信彰.人际视角下的评价理论和元话语理论[A].张敬源,彭漪,何伟,主编.系统功能语言学前沿动态——第八届中国系统功能语言学学术活动周报告文集[C].北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2009:148.
[25]杨信彰.系统功能语言学与教育语篇分析[J].四川外国语学院学报,2007(6):17-18.
[26]袁邦株,徐润英.社会科学论文中人际意义分析模式探索[J].外语教学,2010(6):33-34.