文学语篇中的象似性与连贯
|
摘要
语篇连贯是学术界讨论已久的问题。学者们从不同的角度对这个问题进行研究。到目前为止,语篇连贯的理论主要有：韩礼德和哈桑的语域加衔接理论,凡·戴克的宏观结构理论,威多逊的言外行为理论,曼恩和汤姆逊的修辞结构理论,丹奈士和福利士的主语推进理论。然而,随着语言学的发展,语篇连贯也可以从一个新的角度-象似性去研究。
象似性,或称理据,是符号学和认知语言学领域的一个重要理论。近年来,象似性理论在国内外得到重大发展。语言学家们描述了语言中的很多象似性现象并且总结了许多象似性原则,特别是句法象似性原则。象似性话题在近代可以追溯到皮尔斯。皮尔斯根据符号和它们的对象之间的关系,把符号分为三类：象似符,标志符和象征符。在此基础上,Haiman把象似符又分成映象符和拟象符。目前,Haiman是此领域的领军人物,他对象似性进行了详细系统的研究,推动此研究进入了一个新的阶段。Nanny和Fischer也把象似符分成映象符和拟象符。映象符又被进一步分成听觉象似,触觉象似和视觉象似。拟象符又被进一步分为结构象似和语义象似。其中,隐喻象似属于语义象似的范畴。近年来,也有学者把语篇和象似性现象结合起来,从象似性角度研究语篇连贯。本文以Haiman,Nanny和Fischer的理论为基础,从映象象似,拟象象似和隐喻象似三个方面论证象似性作为语篇连贯的手段。
本文采用文本分析和定性分析的方法,所有的分析材料都采用文学作品中的语篇,但文学作品的类型没有限制。映象象似性指语言符号和所指之间存在的一对一的关系。本文主要讨论两种映象象似性：声音象似性和视觉象似性。映象象似性在诗歌中具有重要的作用,不但能增加诗歌的美。另一方面,也能体现诗歌的主题,使得整个语篇在形式上紧凑,在内容上连贯。拟象象似性指语言符号结构和人的经验结构或观念结构之间存在的相似关系。本文主要讨论顺序象似性和对称象似性。隐喻指源域对目标域的投射。认知语言学家认为概念隐喻是人类了解世界的最基本方式。人的概念系统是隐喻的。语篇是人的概念系统的具体反射。因此,概念隐喻在语篇形成过程中起到方向标的作用,是语篇连贯的一种手段。
Text coherence, a complex and long-studied issue, has been much discussed with considerable achievements. From different perspectives, theories have been established, such as, Halliday and Hasan study this issue from register and cohesion, Van Dijk from the angle of macrostructure, Widdowson from the pragmatical aspect of illocutionary act, Mann & Thompson from rhetorical structure theory, and Danes & Fries from thematic progression. However, with the development of linguistics, text coherence can be discussed from a new angle—iconicity.
Iconicity, or motivation, one of the important theories in semiotics and cognitive linguistics, has gained great popularity both at home and abroad. Linguists have described a great many iconic phenomena in language and generalized many iconicity principles, especially iconicity principles in syntax. As a matter of fact, this issue can be traced back to Charles Sanders Peirce, who identified three different ways that a sign can stand for its referent:icon, index, and symbol. Based on Peircean trichotomy, Haiman divides icons into imagic icons and diagrammatic icons. As a leading figure in this issue, Haiman makes an elaborate and systematic study of iconicity and has brought the research into a new stage. Nanny and Fischer also divide iconicity into imagic iconicity which is further divided into oral, tactile, visual iconicity, and diagrammatic iconicity which is subdivided into structural and semantic iconicity. Here, metaphoric iconicity is grouped into semantic iconicity. In recent years, several scholars begin to combine text coherence with iconicity. studying text coherence from iconicity. Based on the previous findings and the theories of Haiman and Nanny & Fischer, this thesis studies the approaches to iconicity as a device for text coherence from the aspects of imagic iconicity, diagrammatic iconicity and metaphoric iconicity.
This dissertation adopts the method of text analysis and qualitative method. All the samples of text analysis are from literature works, not confined to a given type. In imagic iconicity, there is a more or less direct one-to-one relation between the linguistic sign and the signified. Imagic iconicity plays an important role in poetic language. As to this iconicity, the paper focuses on two aspects:oral iconicity and visual iconicity. Oral iconicity and visual iconicity in poetry not only add beauty to the whole text, but also are a representation of the theme of poems and make the whole text cohesive in organization and coherent in meaning. Diagrammatic iconicity refers to the resemblance between the structure of linguistic signs arid that of human experience or concept. As far as diagrammatic iconicity is concerned, sequence iconicity and symmetrical iconicity are discussed in detail. Metaphors are the mapping from the source domain to the target domain. Cognitive linguists believe that conceptual metaphors are the basic ways for people to know the world. People's conceptual system is metaphorical. And text in print is a concrete reflection of the person's conceptual system. So conceptual metaphor is a guide for text-formation, and thus, is a means of coherence.
象似性,或称理据,是符号学和认知语言学领域的一个重要理论。近年来,象似性理论在国内外得到重大发展。语言学家们描述了语言中的很多象似性现象并且总结了许多象似性原则,特别是句法象似性原则。象似性话题在近代可以追溯到皮尔斯。皮尔斯根据符号和它们的对象之间的关系,把符号分为三类：象似符,标志符和象征符。在此基础上,Haiman把象似符又分成映象符和拟象符。目前,Haiman是此领域的领军人物,他对象似性进行了详细系统的研究,推动此研究进入了一个新的阶段。Nanny和Fischer也把象似符分成映象符和拟象符。映象符又被进一步分成听觉象似,触觉象似和视觉象似。拟象符又被进一步分为结构象似和语义象似。其中,隐喻象似属于语义象似的范畴。近年来,也有学者把语篇和象似性现象结合起来,从象似性角度研究语篇连贯。本文以Haiman,Nanny和Fischer的理论为基础,从映象象似,拟象象似和隐喻象似三个方面论证象似性作为语篇连贯的手段。
本文采用文本分析和定性分析的方法,所有的分析材料都采用文学作品中的语篇,但文学作品的类型没有限制。映象象似性指语言符号和所指之间存在的一对一的关系。本文主要讨论两种映象象似性：声音象似性和视觉象似性。映象象似性在诗歌中具有重要的作用,不但能增加诗歌的美。另一方面,也能体现诗歌的主题,使得整个语篇在形式上紧凑,在内容上连贯。拟象象似性指语言符号结构和人的经验结构或观念结构之间存在的相似关系。本文主要讨论顺序象似性和对称象似性。隐喻指源域对目标域的投射。认知语言学家认为概念隐喻是人类了解世界的最基本方式。人的概念系统是隐喻的。语篇是人的概念系统的具体反射。因此,概念隐喻在语篇形成过程中起到方向标的作用,是语篇连贯的一种手段。
Text coherence, a complex and long-studied issue, has been much discussed with considerable achievements. From different perspectives, theories have been established, such as, Halliday and Hasan study this issue from register and cohesion, Van Dijk from the angle of macrostructure, Widdowson from the pragmatical aspect of illocutionary act, Mann & Thompson from rhetorical structure theory, and Danes & Fries from thematic progression. However, with the development of linguistics, text coherence can be discussed from a new angle—iconicity.
Iconicity, or motivation, one of the important theories in semiotics and cognitive linguistics, has gained great popularity both at home and abroad. Linguists have described a great many iconic phenomena in language and generalized many iconicity principles, especially iconicity principles in syntax. As a matter of fact, this issue can be traced back to Charles Sanders Peirce, who identified three different ways that a sign can stand for its referent:icon, index, and symbol. Based on Peircean trichotomy, Haiman divides icons into imagic icons and diagrammatic icons. As a leading figure in this issue, Haiman makes an elaborate and systematic study of iconicity and has brought the research into a new stage. Nanny and Fischer also divide iconicity into imagic iconicity which is further divided into oral, tactile, visual iconicity, and diagrammatic iconicity which is subdivided into structural and semantic iconicity. Here, metaphoric iconicity is grouped into semantic iconicity. In recent years, several scholars begin to combine text coherence with iconicity. studying text coherence from iconicity. Based on the previous findings and the theories of Haiman and Nanny & Fischer, this thesis studies the approaches to iconicity as a device for text coherence from the aspects of imagic iconicity, diagrammatic iconicity and metaphoric iconicity.
This dissertation adopts the method of text analysis and qualitative method. All the samples of text analysis are from literature works, not confined to a given type. In imagic iconicity, there is a more or less direct one-to-one relation between the linguistic sign and the signified. Imagic iconicity plays an important role in poetic language. As to this iconicity, the paper focuses on two aspects:oral iconicity and visual iconicity. Oral iconicity and visual iconicity in poetry not only add beauty to the whole text, but also are a representation of the theme of poems and make the whole text cohesive in organization and coherent in meaning. Diagrammatic iconicity refers to the resemblance between the structure of linguistic signs arid that of human experience or concept. As far as diagrammatic iconicity is concerned, sequence iconicity and symmetrical iconicity are discussed in detail. Metaphors are the mapping from the source domain to the target domain. Cognitive linguists believe that conceptual metaphors are the basic ways for people to know the world. People's conceptual system is metaphorical. And text in print is a concrete reflection of the person's conceptual system. So conceptual metaphor is a guide for text-formation, and thus, is a means of coherence.
引文
Anderson, Earl R. A Grammar of Iconism. Fairleigh Dickinson University Press; London:Associated University Presses,1998.
Alderson, Simon J. "Iconicity in Literature-Eighteenth-and Nineteenth-Century Prose Writing". In Form Miming Meaning-Iconicity in Language and Literature. eds. Max Nanny & Olga Fischer. Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company. 1999.
Brown, G &Yule, G. Discourse Analysis. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1983.
Cook, G. Discourse. Oxford:Oxford University Press,1989.
Cook, G. Discourse and Literature. Oxford:Oxford University Press,1994.
De Beaugrande, R.& Dressler, W. Introduction to Text Linguistics. London:Longman, 1981.
Dirven, R.& Verspoor, M. Cognitive Exploration of Language and Linguistics. John Benjamins,1998.
Fischer, A. "What, if Anything, is Phonological Iconicity?" Form Miming Meaning: Iconicity in Language and Literature. eds. Fisher, Olga &Max, Nanny. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company,1999.
Fischer,O.& Nanny, M. The Motivated Sign. Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company,2001.
Fonagy, I. "why iconicity?" Form Miming Meaning-Iconicity in Language and Literature. eds. Max Nanny & Olga Fischer. Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company,1999.
Givon, T. "Isomorphism in the Grammatical Code:Cognitive and Biological Considerations." Iconicity in Language. eds. Simone, R. Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company,1994.
Haiman, J. "The Iconicity of Grammar:Isomorphism and Motivation." Language,56 (1980):515-540.
Haiman, J. "Iconic and Economic Motivation." Language,59 (1983):781-819.
Haiman, J. Natural Syntax:Iconicity and Erosion. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1985a.
Haiman. J. Iconicity in syntax. Amsterdam:John Benjamins publishing company, 1985b.
Halliday, M.A.K.& Hasan, R. Cohesion in English. London:Longman,1976.
Halliday, M. A. K.& Hasan, R. Language, Context and Text:Aspects of language in a socio-semiotic perspective. Victoria:Deakin University,1985.
Halliday, M.A.K. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2000.
Hiraga, M. K. "Diagrams and Metaphors:Iconic Aspects in Language." Journal of Pragmatics,22(1994):5-12.
Hiraga, M. K. Metaphor and Iconicity:a Cognitive Approach to Analyzing Texts. New York:Palgrave Macmillan,2005.
Lakoff, George& Mark, Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1980.
Lakoff, G. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things. Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 1987.
Landsberg, Marge E. Syntactic iconicity and Linguistic Freezes:The Human Dimension. New York:Mouton de Gruyter,1995.
Maeder, Costantino, Fischer, Olga,& Herlofsky, William J. Outside-in, inside-out:iconicity in language and literature 4. Amsterdam:John Benjamins publishing company,2005.
Nunan, D. Introducing Discourse Analysis. England:the Penguin Group,1993.
Norrman, R. "Creating the World in Our Image:A New Theory of Love Symmetry and Iconicist Desire" Form Miming Meaning-Iconicity in Language and Literature. eds. Max Nanny & Olga Fischer. Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company,1999.
Rossholm, Goran. To be and not to be:on interpretation, iconicity and fiction. New York:P. Lang, c2004.
Sadowski, Piotr "The Sound As an Echo to the Sense" The Motivated Sign. eds. Fischer, O.& Nanny, M. Amsterdam:John Benjamins publishing Company,2001.
Simone, Raffaele. Iconicity in Language. Amsterdam:John Benjamins,1994.
Sperber, D.&Wilson, D. Relevance:Communication and Cognition. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2000.
Tabakowska, Elzbieta, Ljungberg, Christina & Fischer,Olga. Insistent images. Amsterdam:Philadelphia:John Benjamins,2007.
Ungererer, F.& Schmid, H.J. An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2001.
Van Dijk, T.A. Text and Context:Exploration in the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse. London:Longman,1977.
Van Schoolneveld, Cornelis H. "A Binary Approach to Iconicity in Word Order." Syntactic Iconicity and Linguistic Freezes, ed. Marge E. Landsberg. Mouton de Gruyter Berlin New York,1995.
Webster, M."'Singing is Silence':Being and Nothing in the Visual Poetry of E. E. Cummings." Form Miming Meaning:Iconicity in Language and Literature, eds. Fisher, Olga &Max Nanny. Amsterdam:Philadelphia:J. Benjamins,1999.
Widdowson, H.G.Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford:Oxford University Press,1978.
阿红(A Hong):《当代诗歌百技》,成都：四川文艺出版社,1989。
杜文礼(Du Wenli):"语言的象似性探微”,《四川外语学院学报》,1996年第1期,第60-65页。
冯晓虎(Feng Xiaohu):《隐喻—思维的基础篇章的框架》,北京：对外经济贸易大学出版社,2004。
郭纯洁(Guo Chunjie):“语篇连贯性的认知基础”,《现代外语》,2003年第1期,第14-21页。
何爱晶(He Aijing):“语篇连贯的认知基础：整体性识解”,《外语学刊》,2008年第3期,第44-49页。
胡壮麟(Hu Zhuanglin):《语言的衔接与连贯》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,1994。
胡状麟(Hu Zhuanglin):“美国功能语言学家Givon的研究现状”,《国外语言学》,1996年第4期,第1—10页。
胡壮麟(Hu Zhuanglin):《认知隐喻学》,北京：北京大学出版社,2004。
简·爱切生(Jean Aitchison):《语言的变化：进步还是退化》,徐家祯译,北京：语文出版社,1997。
贾卫国(Jia Weiguo):“英语诗歌的语音象征”,《山东外语教学》,1999年第2期,第39-43页。
金立鑫(Jin Lixin):《语法的多视角研究》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2000。
蓝纯(Lan Chun):《认知语言学与隐喻研究》,北京：外语教学与研究出版社,2005。
李玉华(Li Yuhua):'‘英语词汇的音义联系”,《山东外语教学》,2002年第4期,第88-90页。
李鑫华(Li Xinhua):“隐喻象似性初探”,《四川外语学院学报》,2005年第2期,第70-73页。
卢植(Lu Zhi):《认知与语言》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2006。
卢卫中(Lu Weizhong):“诗歌象似修辞研究”,《外国语言文学》,2003年第1期,第60-64页。
卢卫中(Lu Weizhong):“试论英诗的篇章象似性修辞特点”,《四川外国语学院学报》,2003年第1期,第67-70页。
卢卫中(Lu Weizhong)、路云(Lu Yun)“语篇衔接与连贯的认知机制”,《外语教学》,2006年第1期,第13-18页。
罗良功(Luo Lianggong):《英诗概论》,武汉：武汉大学出版社,2002。
苗兴伟(Miao Xingwei)、廖美珍(Liao Meizhen):“隐喻的语篇功能研究”,《外语学刊》,2007年第6期,第51-56页。
彭家玉(Peng Jiayu)、张正平(Zhang Zhengzhong):“语篇连贯研究的新视角”,《西安外国语学院学报》,2002年第2期,第49-51页。
秦洪武(Qin Hongwu):“语言结构的顺序象似性”,《外语研究》,2001年第1期,第39—42页。
任绍曾(Ren Shaoceng):“概念隐喻和语篇连贯”,《外语教学与研究》,2006期第2期,第91-100页。
沈家煊(Shen Jiaxuan):“句法象似性问题”,《外语教学与研究》,1993年第1期,第2—8页。
束定芳(Shu Dingfang):《隐喻学研究》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2000。
汤丹(Tang Dan):“从认知角度看语言结构象似性”,《宿州学院学报》,2009年第1期,第57-60页。
汤丹(Tang Dan)、欧阳俊林(Ouyang Junlin):“语篇象似性与翻译”.广东工业大学学报,2009年第3期,第74-78。
王寅(Wang Yin):“从社会语言学角度看象似性”,《四川外语学报》,1999年第2期,第51—54页。
王寅(Wang Yin):“语言符号象似性研究简史—认知语言学讨论之一”,《山东外语教学》,2000年第3期,第1-6页。
王寅(Wang Yin):“象似性：取得文体特征的重要手段”,《四川外语学院学报》,2000年,第4期,第39-42页。
王寅(Wang Yin):“认知语言学与语篇连贯研究—八论语言的体验性：语篇连贯的认知基础”,《外语研究》,2006年第6期,第6-12页。
王寅(Wang Yin):《认知语言学》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2007。
魏在江(Wei Zaijiang):“隐喻的语篇功能兼论语篇分析与认知语言学的界面研究”,《外语教学》,2006年第5期,第10-15页。
魏在江(Wei Zaijiang):《英语语篇连贯认知对比研究》,上海：复旦大学出版社,2007。
夏日光(Xia Riguang):《中英视觉诗语篇衔接对比研究》,长沙：湖南人民出版社,2004。
夏日光(Xia Riguang):“具象与具象衔接”,《四川外语学院学报》,2005年第5期,第56-61页。
项成东(Xiang Chengdong):"语音象征及其表意功能”,《现代外语》,1993年第4期,第14-18页。
项成东(Xiang Chengdong)、韩炜(Han Wei):“语篇象似性及其认知基础”,《外语研究》,2003年第1期,第37-42页。
辛献云(Xin Xianyun):'“篇章象似性与英诗汉译”,《解放军外国语学院学报》,2006年第4期,第67-72页。
许国璋(Xu Guozhang):"语言符号任意性问题----语言哲学探索之一”,《外语教学与研究》,1988年第3期,第2-10页。
严辰松(Yan Chensong):“语言临摹性概说”,《国外语言学》,1997年第3期,第21—25页。
张德禄(Zhang Delu):“语篇连贯研究纵横谈”,《外国语》,1999年第6期,第24-31页。
张德禄(Zhang Delu):“论语篇连贯”,《外语教学与研究》,2000年第2期,第103-109页。
张德禄(Zhang Delu)“语篇内部衔接的原则”,《解放军外国语学院学报》,2001年第6期,第26-32页。
张德禄(Zhang Delu)、刘汝山(Liu Rushan):《连贯与衔接理论的发展及应用》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2003。
张德禄(Zhang Delu):“语篇连贯的宏观原则研究”,《外语与外语教学》,2006年第10期,第7-13页。
张凤(Zhang Feng)、高航(Gao Hang):“语言符号的图表象似性与隐喻象似性”,《山东外语教学》,2003年第3期,第17-23页。
张敏(Zhang Min):“从类型学和认知语法的角度看汉语重叠现象”,《国外语言学》,1997年第2期,第37—45页。
张敏(Zhang Min):《认知语言学与汉语短语》,北京：中国社会科学出版社,1998。
赵亮(Zhao Liang):“语言象似性的符号学分析”,《外语教学》,2006年第5期,第19-23页。
赵艳芳(Zhao Yanfang):《认知语言学概论》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2001。
朱永生(Zhu Yongsheng):“韩礼德的语篇连贯标准--外界的误解与自身的不足”,《外语教学与研究》,1993年第1期,第20-24页。
朱永生(Zhu Yongsheng):“韩礼德的语篇连贯标准—外界的误解与自身的不足”,《外语教学与研究》,1997年第1期,第20-24页。
朱永生(Zhu Yongsheng)、郑立信(Zheng Lixin)、苗兴伟(Miao Xingwei):《英汉语篇衔接手段对比研究》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2001。
http://es-dev.uzh.ch/
http://es-dev.uzh.ch/en/conferences/index.php
Alderson, Simon J. "Iconicity in Literature-Eighteenth-and Nineteenth-Century Prose Writing". In Form Miming Meaning-Iconicity in Language and Literature. eds. Max Nanny & Olga Fischer. Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company. 1999.
Brown, G &Yule, G. Discourse Analysis. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1983.
Cook, G. Discourse. Oxford:Oxford University Press,1989.
Cook, G. Discourse and Literature. Oxford:Oxford University Press,1994.
De Beaugrande, R.& Dressler, W. Introduction to Text Linguistics. London:Longman, 1981.
Dirven, R.& Verspoor, M. Cognitive Exploration of Language and Linguistics. John Benjamins,1998.
Fischer, A. "What, if Anything, is Phonological Iconicity?" Form Miming Meaning: Iconicity in Language and Literature. eds. Fisher, Olga &Max, Nanny. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company,1999.
Fischer,O.& Nanny, M. The Motivated Sign. Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company,2001.
Fonagy, I. "why iconicity?" Form Miming Meaning-Iconicity in Language and Literature. eds. Max Nanny & Olga Fischer. Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company,1999.
Givon, T. "Isomorphism in the Grammatical Code:Cognitive and Biological Considerations." Iconicity in Language. eds. Simone, R. Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company,1994.
Haiman, J. "The Iconicity of Grammar:Isomorphism and Motivation." Language,56 (1980):515-540.
Haiman, J. "Iconic and Economic Motivation." Language,59 (1983):781-819.
Haiman, J. Natural Syntax:Iconicity and Erosion. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1985a.
Haiman. J. Iconicity in syntax. Amsterdam:John Benjamins publishing company, 1985b.
Halliday, M.A.K.& Hasan, R. Cohesion in English. London:Longman,1976.
Halliday, M. A. K.& Hasan, R. Language, Context and Text:Aspects of language in a socio-semiotic perspective. Victoria:Deakin University,1985.
Halliday, M.A.K. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2000.
Hiraga, M. K. "Diagrams and Metaphors:Iconic Aspects in Language." Journal of Pragmatics,22(1994):5-12.
Hiraga, M. K. Metaphor and Iconicity:a Cognitive Approach to Analyzing Texts. New York:Palgrave Macmillan,2005.
Lakoff, George& Mark, Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1980.
Lakoff, G. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things. Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 1987.
Landsberg, Marge E. Syntactic iconicity and Linguistic Freezes:The Human Dimension. New York:Mouton de Gruyter,1995.
Maeder, Costantino, Fischer, Olga,& Herlofsky, William J. Outside-in, inside-out:iconicity in language and literature 4. Amsterdam:John Benjamins publishing company,2005.
Nunan, D. Introducing Discourse Analysis. England:the Penguin Group,1993.
Norrman, R. "Creating the World in Our Image:A New Theory of Love Symmetry and Iconicist Desire" Form Miming Meaning-Iconicity in Language and Literature. eds. Max Nanny & Olga Fischer. Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company,1999.
Rossholm, Goran. To be and not to be:on interpretation, iconicity and fiction. New York:P. Lang, c2004.
Sadowski, Piotr "The Sound As an Echo to the Sense" The Motivated Sign. eds. Fischer, O.& Nanny, M. Amsterdam:John Benjamins publishing Company,2001.
Simone, Raffaele. Iconicity in Language. Amsterdam:John Benjamins,1994.
Sperber, D.&Wilson, D. Relevance:Communication and Cognition. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2000.
Tabakowska, Elzbieta, Ljungberg, Christina & Fischer,Olga. Insistent images. Amsterdam:Philadelphia:John Benjamins,2007.
Ungererer, F.& Schmid, H.J. An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2001.
Van Dijk, T.A. Text and Context:Exploration in the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse. London:Longman,1977.
Van Schoolneveld, Cornelis H. "A Binary Approach to Iconicity in Word Order." Syntactic Iconicity and Linguistic Freezes, ed. Marge E. Landsberg. Mouton de Gruyter Berlin New York,1995.
Webster, M."'Singing is Silence':Being and Nothing in the Visual Poetry of E. E. Cummings." Form Miming Meaning:Iconicity in Language and Literature, eds. Fisher, Olga &Max Nanny. Amsterdam:Philadelphia:J. Benjamins,1999.
Widdowson, H.G.Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford:Oxford University Press,1978.
阿红(A Hong):《当代诗歌百技》,成都：四川文艺出版社,1989。
杜文礼(Du Wenli):"语言的象似性探微”,《四川外语学院学报》,1996年第1期,第60-65页。
冯晓虎(Feng Xiaohu):《隐喻—思维的基础篇章的框架》,北京：对外经济贸易大学出版社,2004。
郭纯洁(Guo Chunjie):“语篇连贯性的认知基础”,《现代外语》,2003年第1期,第14-21页。
何爱晶(He Aijing):“语篇连贯的认知基础：整体性识解”,《外语学刊》,2008年第3期,第44-49页。
胡壮麟(Hu Zhuanglin):《语言的衔接与连贯》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,1994。
胡状麟(Hu Zhuanglin):“美国功能语言学家Givon的研究现状”,《国外语言学》,1996年第4期,第1—10页。
胡壮麟(Hu Zhuanglin):《认知隐喻学》,北京：北京大学出版社,2004。
简·爱切生(Jean Aitchison):《语言的变化：进步还是退化》,徐家祯译,北京：语文出版社,1997。
贾卫国(Jia Weiguo):“英语诗歌的语音象征”,《山东外语教学》,1999年第2期,第39-43页。
金立鑫(Jin Lixin):《语法的多视角研究》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2000。
蓝纯(Lan Chun):《认知语言学与隐喻研究》,北京：外语教学与研究出版社,2005。
李玉华(Li Yuhua):'‘英语词汇的音义联系”,《山东外语教学》,2002年第4期,第88-90页。
李鑫华(Li Xinhua):“隐喻象似性初探”,《四川外语学院学报》,2005年第2期,第70-73页。
卢植(Lu Zhi):《认知与语言》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2006。
卢卫中(Lu Weizhong):“诗歌象似修辞研究”,《外国语言文学》,2003年第1期,第60-64页。
卢卫中(Lu Weizhong):“试论英诗的篇章象似性修辞特点”,《四川外国语学院学报》,2003年第1期,第67-70页。
卢卫中(Lu Weizhong)、路云(Lu Yun)“语篇衔接与连贯的认知机制”,《外语教学》,2006年第1期,第13-18页。
罗良功(Luo Lianggong):《英诗概论》,武汉：武汉大学出版社,2002。
苗兴伟(Miao Xingwei)、廖美珍(Liao Meizhen):“隐喻的语篇功能研究”,《外语学刊》,2007年第6期,第51-56页。
彭家玉(Peng Jiayu)、张正平(Zhang Zhengzhong):“语篇连贯研究的新视角”,《西安外国语学院学报》,2002年第2期,第49-51页。
秦洪武(Qin Hongwu):“语言结构的顺序象似性”,《外语研究》,2001年第1期,第39—42页。
任绍曾(Ren Shaoceng):“概念隐喻和语篇连贯”,《外语教学与研究》,2006期第2期,第91-100页。
沈家煊(Shen Jiaxuan):“句法象似性问题”,《外语教学与研究》,1993年第1期,第2—8页。
束定芳(Shu Dingfang):《隐喻学研究》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2000。
汤丹(Tang Dan):“从认知角度看语言结构象似性”,《宿州学院学报》,2009年第1期,第57-60页。
汤丹(Tang Dan)、欧阳俊林(Ouyang Junlin):“语篇象似性与翻译”.广东工业大学学报,2009年第3期,第74-78。
王寅(Wang Yin):“从社会语言学角度看象似性”,《四川外语学报》,1999年第2期,第51—54页。
王寅(Wang Yin):“语言符号象似性研究简史—认知语言学讨论之一”,《山东外语教学》,2000年第3期,第1-6页。
王寅(Wang Yin):“象似性：取得文体特征的重要手段”,《四川外语学院学报》,2000年,第4期,第39-42页。
王寅(Wang Yin):“认知语言学与语篇连贯研究—八论语言的体验性：语篇连贯的认知基础”,《外语研究》,2006年第6期,第6-12页。
王寅(Wang Yin):《认知语言学》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2007。
魏在江(Wei Zaijiang):“隐喻的语篇功能兼论语篇分析与认知语言学的界面研究”,《外语教学》,2006年第5期,第10-15页。
魏在江(Wei Zaijiang):《英语语篇连贯认知对比研究》,上海：复旦大学出版社,2007。
夏日光(Xia Riguang):《中英视觉诗语篇衔接对比研究》,长沙：湖南人民出版社,2004。
夏日光(Xia Riguang):“具象与具象衔接”,《四川外语学院学报》,2005年第5期,第56-61页。
项成东(Xiang Chengdong):"语音象征及其表意功能”,《现代外语》,1993年第4期,第14-18页。
项成东(Xiang Chengdong)、韩炜(Han Wei):“语篇象似性及其认知基础”,《外语研究》,2003年第1期,第37-42页。
辛献云(Xin Xianyun):'“篇章象似性与英诗汉译”,《解放军外国语学院学报》,2006年第4期,第67-72页。
许国璋(Xu Guozhang):"语言符号任意性问题----语言哲学探索之一”,《外语教学与研究》,1988年第3期,第2-10页。
严辰松(Yan Chensong):“语言临摹性概说”,《国外语言学》,1997年第3期,第21—25页。
张德禄(Zhang Delu):“语篇连贯研究纵横谈”,《外国语》,1999年第6期,第24-31页。
张德禄(Zhang Delu):“论语篇连贯”,《外语教学与研究》,2000年第2期,第103-109页。
张德禄(Zhang Delu)“语篇内部衔接的原则”,《解放军外国语学院学报》,2001年第6期,第26-32页。
张德禄(Zhang Delu)、刘汝山(Liu Rushan):《连贯与衔接理论的发展及应用》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2003。
张德禄(Zhang Delu):“语篇连贯的宏观原则研究”,《外语与外语教学》,2006年第10期,第7-13页。
张凤(Zhang Feng)、高航(Gao Hang):“语言符号的图表象似性与隐喻象似性”,《山东外语教学》,2003年第3期,第17-23页。
张敏(Zhang Min):“从类型学和认知语法的角度看汉语重叠现象”,《国外语言学》,1997年第2期,第37—45页。
张敏(Zhang Min):《认知语言学与汉语短语》,北京：中国社会科学出版社,1998。
赵亮(Zhao Liang):“语言象似性的符号学分析”,《外语教学》,2006年第5期,第19-23页。
赵艳芳(Zhao Yanfang):《认知语言学概论》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2001。
朱永生(Zhu Yongsheng):“韩礼德的语篇连贯标准--外界的误解与自身的不足”,《外语教学与研究》,1993年第1期,第20-24页。
朱永生(Zhu Yongsheng):“韩礼德的语篇连贯标准—外界的误解与自身的不足”,《外语教学与研究》,1997年第1期,第20-24页。
朱永生(Zhu Yongsheng)、郑立信(Zheng Lixin)、苗兴伟(Miao Xingwei):《英汉语篇衔接手段对比研究》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2001。
http://es-dev.uzh.ch/
http://es-dev.uzh.ch/en/conferences/index.php