中外出版的英文城市旅游指南对比研究
摘要
旅游和语言密切相关。但是迄今为止，由于旅游现象本身的复杂性和旅游语言以及旅游语篇的主要受众为普通大众使旅游语言在中国一直缺乏系统全面的研究。本研究试图探讨针对到中国上海来旅游的西方游客的英文旅游指南这一典型的旅游语篇中的英语的使用问题。本研究以上海为例，主要对比了中外出版的英文旅游指南的语言使用特点。具体来讲有，本研究主要探讨以下三个研究问题：
1.中外出版的英文旅游指南在宏观语言层面上的语言使用特点有何异同？
2.中外出版的英文旅游指南在微观语言层面上的语言使用特点有何异同？
3.中外出版的英文旅游指南在微观语言层面上的语言使用特点的异同的形成原因是什么？
针对这些研究问题，本研究该研究主要基于自建的上海英文旅游指南语料库，采取了定性研究和定量研究相结合的混合型研究方法。在宏观语言研究层面，以定性研究为主，用功能分析和体裁分析的方法从形式、内容、语域和体裁四个变量考察分析了了中外出版的英文旅游指南语言使用特点上的异同，在微观语言研究层面，以定量研究为主，采用语料库的方法通过高频词汇，关键词和解读索引行考察分析了中外出版的英文旅游指南在词汇和语法层面上的异同。整个研究基于自建的上海英文旅游指南语料库，而且宏观和微观层面上的语言使用特点的分析都结合了语篇语境、机构语境和社会文化认知语境等旅游语言使用的语境。
研究结果表明：无论是在微观语言层面还是在宏观语言层面，中外出版的英文旅游指南既有相似之处又有差异。相似性源于二者是具有信息性，推销性和劝说性等相似交际目的的旅游指南；而差异性则源自二者是有两类典型的作者编写的。这两类作者不同的英语语言水平、认知方式、对旅游目的地的熟悉程度，对旅游目的地及其文化的态度导致了中外出版的英文旅游指南在宏观和微观两个层面的语言使用上的显著差异。
本研究的主要创新点在于本研究选取了中外出版的英文旅游指南作为研究对象。从英语语言水平上讲，国内出版的英文旅游指南的编写者是非本族语使用者而国外出版的英文旅游指南的编写者是本族语使用者。从旅游目的地的角度讲，国内出版的英文旅游指南的编写者可被看作是本地人，而国外出版的英文旅游指南的编写者是熟悉旅游目的地的外来人。编写者的英语语言水平和同旅游目的地的关系的交错导致中外出版的英文旅游指南在各个语言层面使用的显著差异。
本研究可为今后的旅游语篇研究、专门用途语篇研究以及语篇研究提供有价值的参考。本研究将为提高中国出版的英文旅游指南的可读性提供有价值的借鉴。而且，本研究可以为旅游英语教学特别是上海导游英语教学提供有价值的教学资源。另外本研究还有助于旅游行政管理部门和旅游企业更有效的宣传推广旅游目的地，把越来越多的潜在游客变成现实的游客。
Tourism and language are closely related. However, up to now, tourism discoursein China still lacks a systematic and comprehensive study due to the complexity oftourism phenomenon and large amounts of the tourism discourse are designed fromthe public. This study attempts to investigate how English is used in a typical tourismdiscourse-guidebook for westerners to tour in Shanghai, P.R. China. A contrastivestudy is carried out to explore the distinct linguistic features of English guidebooks ofShanghai published by Chinese and overseas publishers. This study addresses thefollowing three questions:
1. What are the similarities and differences of English guidebooks published byChinese and overseas publishers with regard to the linguistic features at the macrolevel?
2. What are the similarities and differences of English guidebooks published byChinese and overseas publishers with regard to the linguistic features at the microlevel?
3. What accounts for these similarities and differences between the two groupsof English guidebooks?
The contrastive study of English guidebooks adopts the mixed methodology ofquantitative and qualitative approach. The qualitative approach dominates the macrolevel analysis of the guidebook features. The similarities and differences are examinedin terms of format, content, register and genre based on register analysis and genericanalysis. At the micro level, the corpus approach is adopted to examine the lexical andgrammatical features. The linguistic context, professional settings, social, cultural andcognitive context are taken into consideration at both two levels and the whole studyis based on the self-built corpus of English guidebooks of Shanghai.
The result shows that at the macro and the micro linguistic level, the similaritiesand differences between guidebooks by Chinese publishers and overseas publishersdo exist. The similarities arise from the fact that they share similar communicative purposes: informational, promotional and persuasive. The significant differencesdemonstrate that the two groups of guidebooks can be considered as sub genres sincethe two groups of guidebooks are written and edited by two groups of distinct authorsor editors. The obvious differences between the authors or editors can be grouped intothe variables such as English proficiency, cognitive style, intimacy with tourismdestination and attitude toward tourism destination and its culture. These variablesaccount for the significant differences between the two groups of guidebooks.
The main contribution of the present study lies in the fact that contrastiveanalysis of English guidebooks is conducted between two distinct groups of authors oreditors. From the viewpoint of language proficiency, the Chinese authors and editorscan be regarded as non-native English speakers whereas the overseas authors can beregarded as native English speakers. From the viewpoint of tourism destination,Chinese authors are locals whereas the overseas authors are non-locals, although theyare familiar with Shanghai and China. Therefore the crossing features of the twogroups of authors or editors results in noticeable differences between the groups ofguidebooks with relation to the same tourism destination-Shanghai.
The study can shed some lights on the further tourism discourse studies,specialized discourse studies and discourse studies. The study can also provide usefulreferences for the improvement of readability of English guidebooks by Chinesepublishers. In addition, the study provides valuable resources for teachers and learnersin their tourism English teaching and learning, Shanghai's tour guide English teachingand learning in particular. Furthermore, the study also provides effective perspectiveand suggestions for tourism administrative bureaus and tourism enterprises on how topromote tourism destination in an effective and efficient way so that more and morepotential tourists can be converted into actual tourists.
1.中外出版的英文旅游指南在宏观语言层面上的语言使用特点有何异同？
2.中外出版的英文旅游指南在微观语言层面上的语言使用特点有何异同？
3.中外出版的英文旅游指南在微观语言层面上的语言使用特点的异同的形成原因是什么？
针对这些研究问题，本研究该研究主要基于自建的上海英文旅游指南语料库，采取了定性研究和定量研究相结合的混合型研究方法。在宏观语言研究层面，以定性研究为主，用功能分析和体裁分析的方法从形式、内容、语域和体裁四个变量考察分析了了中外出版的英文旅游指南语言使用特点上的异同，在微观语言研究层面，以定量研究为主，采用语料库的方法通过高频词汇，关键词和解读索引行考察分析了中外出版的英文旅游指南在词汇和语法层面上的异同。整个研究基于自建的上海英文旅游指南语料库，而且宏观和微观层面上的语言使用特点的分析都结合了语篇语境、机构语境和社会文化认知语境等旅游语言使用的语境。
研究结果表明：无论是在微观语言层面还是在宏观语言层面，中外出版的英文旅游指南既有相似之处又有差异。相似性源于二者是具有信息性，推销性和劝说性等相似交际目的的旅游指南；而差异性则源自二者是有两类典型的作者编写的。这两类作者不同的英语语言水平、认知方式、对旅游目的地的熟悉程度，对旅游目的地及其文化的态度导致了中外出版的英文旅游指南在宏观和微观两个层面的语言使用上的显著差异。
本研究的主要创新点在于本研究选取了中外出版的英文旅游指南作为研究对象。从英语语言水平上讲，国内出版的英文旅游指南的编写者是非本族语使用者而国外出版的英文旅游指南的编写者是本族语使用者。从旅游目的地的角度讲，国内出版的英文旅游指南的编写者可被看作是本地人，而国外出版的英文旅游指南的编写者是熟悉旅游目的地的外来人。编写者的英语语言水平和同旅游目的地的关系的交错导致中外出版的英文旅游指南在各个语言层面使用的显著差异。
本研究可为今后的旅游语篇研究、专门用途语篇研究以及语篇研究提供有价值的参考。本研究将为提高中国出版的英文旅游指南的可读性提供有价值的借鉴。而且，本研究可以为旅游英语教学特别是上海导游英语教学提供有价值的教学资源。另外本研究还有助于旅游行政管理部门和旅游企业更有效的宣传推广旅游目的地，把越来越多的潜在游客变成现实的游客。
Tourism and language are closely related. However, up to now, tourism discoursein China still lacks a systematic and comprehensive study due to the complexity oftourism phenomenon and large amounts of the tourism discourse are designed fromthe public. This study attempts to investigate how English is used in a typical tourismdiscourse-guidebook for westerners to tour in Shanghai, P.R. China. A contrastivestudy is carried out to explore the distinct linguistic features of English guidebooks ofShanghai published by Chinese and overseas publishers. This study addresses thefollowing three questions:
1. What are the similarities and differences of English guidebooks published byChinese and overseas publishers with regard to the linguistic features at the macrolevel?
2. What are the similarities and differences of English guidebooks published byChinese and overseas publishers with regard to the linguistic features at the microlevel?
3. What accounts for these similarities and differences between the two groupsof English guidebooks?
The contrastive study of English guidebooks adopts the mixed methodology ofquantitative and qualitative approach. The qualitative approach dominates the macrolevel analysis of the guidebook features. The similarities and differences are examinedin terms of format, content, register and genre based on register analysis and genericanalysis. At the micro level, the corpus approach is adopted to examine the lexical andgrammatical features. The linguistic context, professional settings, social, cultural andcognitive context are taken into consideration at both two levels and the whole studyis based on the self-built corpus of English guidebooks of Shanghai.
The result shows that at the macro and the micro linguistic level, the similaritiesand differences between guidebooks by Chinese publishers and overseas publishersdo exist. The similarities arise from the fact that they share similar communicative purposes: informational, promotional and persuasive. The significant differencesdemonstrate that the two groups of guidebooks can be considered as sub genres sincethe two groups of guidebooks are written and edited by two groups of distinct authorsor editors. The obvious differences between the authors or editors can be grouped intothe variables such as English proficiency, cognitive style, intimacy with tourismdestination and attitude toward tourism destination and its culture. These variablesaccount for the significant differences between the two groups of guidebooks.
The main contribution of the present study lies in the fact that contrastiveanalysis of English guidebooks is conducted between two distinct groups of authors oreditors. From the viewpoint of language proficiency, the Chinese authors and editorscan be regarded as non-native English speakers whereas the overseas authors can beregarded as native English speakers. From the viewpoint of tourism destination,Chinese authors are locals whereas the overseas authors are non-locals, although theyare familiar with Shanghai and China. Therefore the crossing features of the twogroups of authors or editors results in noticeable differences between the groups ofguidebooks with relation to the same tourism destination-Shanghai.
The study can shed some lights on the further tourism discourse studies,specialized discourse studies and discourse studies. The study can also provide usefulreferences for the improvement of readability of English guidebooks by Chinesepublishers. In addition, the study provides valuable resources for teachers and learnersin their tourism English teaching and learning, Shanghai's tour guide English teachingand learning in particular. Furthermore, the study also provides effective perspectiveand suggestions for tourism administrative bureaus and tourism enterprises on how topromote tourism destination in an effective and efficient way so that more and morepotential tourists can be converted into actual tourists.
引文
Barlow, M.(2000). MonoConc Pro2.0.Houston: Athelstan Publications.
Bhatia, V. K.(1993). Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings.London: Longman.
Bhatia, V. K.(2004). Worlds of Written Discourse: A Genre-based View. London:Continuum.
Biber, D.(1988). Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Bülher, K.(1934). Sprachtherie. Fischer: Stuttgart.
Cappelli, G.(2006). Sun, Sea, Sex and the Unspoilt Countryside: How the EnglishLanguage Makes Tourists out of Readers. Pari: Pari Publishing.
Castello, E.(2002). Tourist-information Texts: a Corpus-based Study of four relatedgenres. Padova: Unipress.
Cohen, E.(1972). Toward a Sociology of International Tourism. Social Research,39,164-182.
Dann, G.(1996). The Language of Tourism: A Sociolinguistic Perspective.Wallingford: CAB International.
Mu oz, I. D.(2011). Tourist Translations as a Mediation tool: Misunderstandings andDifficulties. Cadernos de Tradu o,27,29-49.
Francesconi, S.(2007). English for Tourism Promotion: Italy in British Tourism Text.Milano: Hoepli.
Francesconi, S.(2012). Generic Integrity and Innovation in TourismTtexts in English.Trento: Tangram Ediz Scientifiche.
Fusari, S.(2009). Multilingual Tourist Videos as Specialized Discourse: the CaseStudy of Val Gardena, Quaderni del CeSLiC. Occasional papers, Centro diStudi (CeSLiC) Linguistico-Culturali, Bologna.
Gotti, M.(2003). Specialized Discourse: Linguistic Features and ChangingConventions. Bern: Peter Lang.
Gotti, M.(2005). Investigating Specialized Discourse. Bern: Peter Lang.
Gotti, M.(2006). The Language of Tourism as Specialized Discourse. In O. Palusci&S. Francesconi (eds.), Translating tourism: linguistic/culturalrepresentations. Trento, Editrice Università degli Studi di Trento,15-34.
Hall, E. T.(1976). Beyond Culture. New York: Doubleday.
Halliday, M. A. K., Hasan, R.(1985). Language, Context and Text: Aspects ofLanguage in a Social-semiotic Perspective. Victoria: Deakin UniversityPress.
Halliday, M. A. K.(1978). Language as Social Semiotic. London, Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K.(1994). Functional Grammar. London, Edward Arnold.
Hasan, R.(1978) Text in the Systemic-Functional Model. In W. Dreesler (ed.),Current Trends in Text Linguistics, Berlin, de Gruyte,228-246.
Hoffmannn, L.(1998). Caracteristiques dels llenguatges d’especialistat, In J. Brumme(ed.) Llenguatges d’especialitat: selecció de textos. Barcelona, IULA,21-69.
Hunstion, S.(2000). Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction ofDiscourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hyon, S.(1996). Genre in Three Traditions: Implications for ESL. TESOLQuarterly,30(4),693-722.
Lam, P. Y.(2007). A Corpus-driven Lexico-grammatical Analysis of English TourismIndustry Texts and the Study of its Pedagogic Implications in English forSpecific Purposes. Language and Computers,61(1),71-89.
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English.(2003). London: Longman.
MacCannell, D.(1976). The Tourist: A New Theory of the Leisure Class. New York:Schocken Books.
Manca, E.(2010). From Phraseology to culture: Qualifying Adjectives in theLanguage of Tourism. In U. R mer&R. Schulze (eds.) Patterns,Meaningful Units and Specialized Discourses. Amsterdam: John BenjaminsPublishing,105-122.
Marzá, N. E.(2011). A Comprehensive Corpus-based Study of the use of Evaluative andAdjectives in Promotional Hotel Websites. Odisea,12,97-123.
Morris, H.(2002). The farm Tourism Market. Insights,13,67-64.
Nigro, M. G.(2006). The Language of Tourism as LSP? A corpus-based Study of theDiscourse of Guidebooks. In Modern Approaches to TerminologicalTheories and Applications, H. Picht (ed.) Modern approaches toterminological theories and applications,187-97.
Pierini, P.(2009). Adjectives in Tourism English on the Web: A Corpus-based Study.Círculo de lingüística aplicada a la comunicación,40,93-116.
Richards, G.(1996). Cultural Tourism in Europe. Wallingford: CAB International.
Salmaso, S.(2010/2011). A Corpus-based Analysis of Online Texts PromotingTourist Accommodation in the UK and in the USA. Padova: UniversitáDegli di Padova Thesis.
Schiffrin, D., Tannen, D.&Hamilton, H. E.(2001). The Handbook of DiscourseAnalysis. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Scott, M.(1999). WordSmith Tools.3.0. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Scott, M.(2007). WordSmith Tools.4.0. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sinclair, J. M.(1991). Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.
Snell-Hornby, Mary (1990). Dynamics in Meaning as a Problem for BilingualLexicography In: Tomaszczyk,J (ed). Meaning and Lexicography,Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing,209-226.
Stellin, B.(2012/2013)“Where to stay” in the UK and Italy: a Comparative Study ofthe Language of Holiday Accommodation Advertisements. Padova:Universitá Degli di Padova Thesis.
Swales, J. M.(1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. M.,&Burke, A.(2003). Its Really Fascinating work: Differences inEvaluative Adjectives across Academic Registers. Language andComputers,46(1),1-18.
Taylor, T. C.(1997). Linguistic Management of Shared and Unshared Information:from the Fairy Tales Through the Scientific Articles to the Novels. In: F.Gozzi and A.L. Johnson (eds.). Scienza e Immaginario, Pisa, ETS,133-138.
Urry, J.(1990). The Tourist Gaze: Leisure and Travel in Contemporary Societies.London: Sage Publications.
Vesto, C.(2006). Tourism Discourse and the Representation of Italy: A CriticalAnalysis of English Guidebooks. Napoli, Universit á Degli di NapoliThesis.
Hallett, R. W.,&Kaplan-Weinger, J.(2010). Official Tourism Websites: a DiscourseAnalysis Perspective. Clevedon: Channel View Books.
Thurlow, C.,&Jaworski, A.(2010). Tourism Discourse: Language and GlobalMobility. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bhattacharyya, D. P.(1997). Mediating India: An Analysis of a Guidebook.Annals of Tourism Research,24(2),371-389.
van Dijk, T.(1993) Analysing Racism through Discourse Analysis: SomeMethodological Reflections In Stanfield, J. H., II, E.,&Dennis, R. M.(1993). Race and Ethnicity in Research Methods. London: SAGEPublications.
van Dijk, T. A.(2001). Discourse, Ideology and Context. Folia Linguistica,35(1/2),11-40.
Maci, S. M.(2007). Virtual Touring: the Web-language of Tourism. Linguistica eFilologia,25,41-65.
Kress, G.&van Leeuwen, T.(1996,2004). Reading Images: the Grammar of VisualDesign, London, Rutledge.
Ip, J. Y. L.(2008). Analyzing Tourism Discourse: A Case Study of a Hong KongTravel Brochure. LCOM Papers1,1-19.
Gold, J. R.(1994). Locating the Message: Place Promotion as Image Communication.In J. R. Gold,&S. V. Ward (eds), Place Promotion: The Use of Publicityand Marketing to Sell Towns and Regions. Chichester: John Wiley&SonsLtd,19–37.
Martin, J. R.,&White, P. R.(2005). The Language of Evaluation. Basingstoke, NewYork: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hutchinson, T&Waters, Alan.(1999). English for Specific Purposes: aLearning-centered Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Eggins, S.(1994). An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. PinterPublishers.
Malinowski, B.(1923). Psycho-analysis and Anthropology. Nature,112,650-651.
Ramm, W.(2000). Textual Variation in Travel Guides. In Ventola, E.(eds.)Discourse and Community. Doing Functional Linguistics. Tübingen: GunterNarr Verlag.147-167.
陈丽君.基于资源概念的旅游语言研究[D].上海:华东师范大学,2012.
韩荔华.导游语言概论[M].北京:旅游教育出版社,2005.
康宁.基于语料库的中、英、美网站英语旅游文本中的评价语言对比研究[D].上海:上海外国语大学,2011.
李德超,王克非.新型双语旅游语料库的研制和应用[J].现代外语,2010,(1):46-54.
田海龙.旅游研究的语篇视角[J].南京社会科学,2009,(8):124-128
曾利沙.论旅游指南翻译的主题信息突出策略原则[J].上海翻译,2005,(1):19-24.
桑潇.景点介绍网络旅游语篇的多模态话语分析[D].青岛:中国海洋大学,2011.
闵大勇,詹允昭,王义芳.旅游翻译初探[J].中国翻译,1991,(3):34-37.
谷建军.论旅游和语言的关系[J].旅游学刊,1997,(4):49-52.
Bhatia, V. K.(1993). Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings.London: Longman.
Bhatia, V. K.(2004). Worlds of Written Discourse: A Genre-based View. London:Continuum.
Biber, D.(1988). Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Bülher, K.(1934). Sprachtherie. Fischer: Stuttgart.
Cappelli, G.(2006). Sun, Sea, Sex and the Unspoilt Countryside: How the EnglishLanguage Makes Tourists out of Readers. Pari: Pari Publishing.
Castello, E.(2002). Tourist-information Texts: a Corpus-based Study of four relatedgenres. Padova: Unipress.
Cohen, E.(1972). Toward a Sociology of International Tourism. Social Research,39,164-182.
Dann, G.(1996). The Language of Tourism: A Sociolinguistic Perspective.Wallingford: CAB International.
Mu oz, I. D.(2011). Tourist Translations as a Mediation tool: Misunderstandings andDifficulties. Cadernos de Tradu o,27,29-49.
Francesconi, S.(2007). English for Tourism Promotion: Italy in British Tourism Text.Milano: Hoepli.
Francesconi, S.(2012). Generic Integrity and Innovation in TourismTtexts in English.Trento: Tangram Ediz Scientifiche.
Fusari, S.(2009). Multilingual Tourist Videos as Specialized Discourse: the CaseStudy of Val Gardena, Quaderni del CeSLiC. Occasional papers, Centro diStudi (CeSLiC) Linguistico-Culturali, Bologna.
Gotti, M.(2003). Specialized Discourse: Linguistic Features and ChangingConventions. Bern: Peter Lang.
Gotti, M.(2005). Investigating Specialized Discourse. Bern: Peter Lang.
Gotti, M.(2006). The Language of Tourism as Specialized Discourse. In O. Palusci&S. Francesconi (eds.), Translating tourism: linguistic/culturalrepresentations. Trento, Editrice Università degli Studi di Trento,15-34.
Hall, E. T.(1976). Beyond Culture. New York: Doubleday.
Halliday, M. A. K., Hasan, R.(1985). Language, Context and Text: Aspects ofLanguage in a Social-semiotic Perspective. Victoria: Deakin UniversityPress.
Halliday, M. A. K.(1978). Language as Social Semiotic. London, Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K.(1994). Functional Grammar. London, Edward Arnold.
Hasan, R.(1978) Text in the Systemic-Functional Model. In W. Dreesler (ed.),Current Trends in Text Linguistics, Berlin, de Gruyte,228-246.
Hoffmannn, L.(1998). Caracteristiques dels llenguatges d’especialistat, In J. Brumme(ed.) Llenguatges d’especialitat: selecció de textos. Barcelona, IULA,21-69.
Hunstion, S.(2000). Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction ofDiscourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hyon, S.(1996). Genre in Three Traditions: Implications for ESL. TESOLQuarterly,30(4),693-722.
Lam, P. Y.(2007). A Corpus-driven Lexico-grammatical Analysis of English TourismIndustry Texts and the Study of its Pedagogic Implications in English forSpecific Purposes. Language and Computers,61(1),71-89.
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English.(2003). London: Longman.
MacCannell, D.(1976). The Tourist: A New Theory of the Leisure Class. New York:Schocken Books.
Manca, E.(2010). From Phraseology to culture: Qualifying Adjectives in theLanguage of Tourism. In U. R mer&R. Schulze (eds.) Patterns,Meaningful Units and Specialized Discourses. Amsterdam: John BenjaminsPublishing,105-122.
Marzá, N. E.(2011). A Comprehensive Corpus-based Study of the use of Evaluative andAdjectives in Promotional Hotel Websites. Odisea,12,97-123.
Morris, H.(2002). The farm Tourism Market. Insights,13,67-64.
Nigro, M. G.(2006). The Language of Tourism as LSP? A corpus-based Study of theDiscourse of Guidebooks. In Modern Approaches to TerminologicalTheories and Applications, H. Picht (ed.) Modern approaches toterminological theories and applications,187-97.
Pierini, P.(2009). Adjectives in Tourism English on the Web: A Corpus-based Study.Círculo de lingüística aplicada a la comunicación,40,93-116.
Richards, G.(1996). Cultural Tourism in Europe. Wallingford: CAB International.
Salmaso, S.(2010/2011). A Corpus-based Analysis of Online Texts PromotingTourist Accommodation in the UK and in the USA. Padova: UniversitáDegli di Padova Thesis.
Schiffrin, D., Tannen, D.&Hamilton, H. E.(2001). The Handbook of DiscourseAnalysis. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Scott, M.(1999). WordSmith Tools.3.0. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Scott, M.(2007). WordSmith Tools.4.0. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sinclair, J. M.(1991). Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.
Snell-Hornby, Mary (1990). Dynamics in Meaning as a Problem for BilingualLexicography In: Tomaszczyk,J (ed). Meaning and Lexicography,Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing,209-226.
Stellin, B.(2012/2013)“Where to stay” in the UK and Italy: a Comparative Study ofthe Language of Holiday Accommodation Advertisements. Padova:Universitá Degli di Padova Thesis.
Swales, J. M.(1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. M.,&Burke, A.(2003). Its Really Fascinating work: Differences inEvaluative Adjectives across Academic Registers. Language andComputers,46(1),1-18.
Taylor, T. C.(1997). Linguistic Management of Shared and Unshared Information:from the Fairy Tales Through the Scientific Articles to the Novels. In: F.Gozzi and A.L. Johnson (eds.). Scienza e Immaginario, Pisa, ETS,133-138.
Urry, J.(1990). The Tourist Gaze: Leisure and Travel in Contemporary Societies.London: Sage Publications.
Vesto, C.(2006). Tourism Discourse and the Representation of Italy: A CriticalAnalysis of English Guidebooks. Napoli, Universit á Degli di NapoliThesis.
Hallett, R. W.,&Kaplan-Weinger, J.(2010). Official Tourism Websites: a DiscourseAnalysis Perspective. Clevedon: Channel View Books.
Thurlow, C.,&Jaworski, A.(2010). Tourism Discourse: Language and GlobalMobility. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bhattacharyya, D. P.(1997). Mediating India: An Analysis of a Guidebook.Annals of Tourism Research,24(2),371-389.
van Dijk, T.(1993) Analysing Racism through Discourse Analysis: SomeMethodological Reflections In Stanfield, J. H., II, E.,&Dennis, R. M.(1993). Race and Ethnicity in Research Methods. London: SAGEPublications.
van Dijk, T. A.(2001). Discourse, Ideology and Context. Folia Linguistica,35(1/2),11-40.
Maci, S. M.(2007). Virtual Touring: the Web-language of Tourism. Linguistica eFilologia,25,41-65.
Kress, G.&van Leeuwen, T.(1996,2004). Reading Images: the Grammar of VisualDesign, London, Rutledge.
Ip, J. Y. L.(2008). Analyzing Tourism Discourse: A Case Study of a Hong KongTravel Brochure. LCOM Papers1,1-19.
Gold, J. R.(1994). Locating the Message: Place Promotion as Image Communication.In J. R. Gold,&S. V. Ward (eds), Place Promotion: The Use of Publicityand Marketing to Sell Towns and Regions. Chichester: John Wiley&SonsLtd,19–37.
Martin, J. R.,&White, P. R.(2005). The Language of Evaluation. Basingstoke, NewYork: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hutchinson, T&Waters, Alan.(1999). English for Specific Purposes: aLearning-centered Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Eggins, S.(1994). An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. PinterPublishers.
Malinowski, B.(1923). Psycho-analysis and Anthropology. Nature,112,650-651.
Ramm, W.(2000). Textual Variation in Travel Guides. In Ventola, E.(eds.)Discourse and Community. Doing Functional Linguistics. Tübingen: GunterNarr Verlag.147-167.
陈丽君.基于资源概念的旅游语言研究[D].上海:华东师范大学,2012.
韩荔华.导游语言概论[M].北京:旅游教育出版社,2005.
康宁.基于语料库的中、英、美网站英语旅游文本中的评价语言对比研究[D].上海:上海外国语大学,2011.
李德超,王克非.新型双语旅游语料库的研制和应用[J].现代外语,2010,(1):46-54.
田海龙.旅游研究的语篇视角[J].南京社会科学,2009,(8):124-128
曾利沙.论旅游指南翻译的主题信息突出策略原则[J].上海翻译,2005,(1):19-24.
桑潇.景点介绍网络旅游语篇的多模态话语分析[D].青岛:中国海洋大学,2011.
闵大勇,詹允昭,王义芳.旅游翻译初探[J].中国翻译,1991,(3):34-37.
谷建军.论旅游和语言的关系[J].旅游学刊,1997,(4):49-52.