论语用前提及其话语交际功能
|
摘要
对“前提”的研究起源于哲学界。二十世纪六七十年代随着语义学的发展，这个概念引起了语言学界的兴趣。语义学家把它作为一种语义关系来研究。其后，语用学的兴起又给这个概念的研究增添了一个新的视角。各家学者的介入有助于加深对前提这一概念的理解，但同时也使对它的研究复杂化。从哲学家到语用学家，各人对它的理解和界定不尽相同。我们最关心的是语用学范畴内对“前提”的研究。
认知语用学的最新成果—关联理论又为前提的研究提供了一个崭新的视角。这一理论吸收了当代认知科学、心理学以及行为科学的某些研究成果来探询推理的心理机制。关联理论具有多元化的理论背景，它比以往的语言交际理论获得了更多的理论支撑，其解释更具说服力。本文将以关联理论为指导，分析前提的本质特征，并探讨其对言语交际的影响，力求为言语交际提供一定的理论指导。
全文由六部分组成：
引言部分 简要概述了前提研究的历史及现状。并在此基础上提出了我们的看法，即关联理论为前提的研究提供了强大的解释力。
第一章 简要介绍了有关关联理论的一些观点，包括交际、推理模式、认知语境、关联原则等，分析了运用该理论研究前提的可行性。
第二章 分析了以往前提研究中的优势和不足，认为前提是一
第三章
第四章
结论部分
个语用概念，讨论了在语用学体系，特别是在关联理
论体系下研究前提的必要性。
该部分详细分析了前提的互明性、得体性、主观性、
动态性和可撤消性等特征，对前提重新进行了界定，
认为语用前提是一个语用概念，它是说话人对受话人
认知状态的适度、动态的假设。
该部分分析了语用前提对言语交际的影响。它对于交
际双方都有制约和引导作用。
在对全文内容加以总结的基础上进一步表明语用前提
与关联理论相结合的研究方法的理论和现实意义。
Originating from philosophy, presupposition aroused semanticists' interest with the development of semantics in the 60s and 70s of the twentieth century. Later, the thriving of pragmatics provided a new perspective for the study of this concept. Different studies given by different schools benefit the understanding of this concept, making the studies of this topic complicated as well. The understanding and definitions of presupposition vary from philosophers to pragmatists. Here in this paper what interest us most are the studies of presupposition in the pragmatic perspective.
Relevance Theory (RT), one of the latest achievements in the field of cognitive pragmatics offers a brand-new perspective for the study of presupposition. Based on some achievements in cognitive science, psychology and behavioristic science, RT provides us with much knowledge of the psychological mechanism of inference. Having a multi-faceted theoretic nature, RT is regarded as much more explanatorily powerful than some prior communication theories are. Guided by RT, this thesis aims at analyzing the essence of pragmatic presupposition and investigating its functions in verbal communication, attempting to provide some theoretic knowledge of presupposition for successful communication.
This paper comprises six parts:
A brief review of presupposition studies is given in the Introduction. In our view, the study of pragmatic presupposition within the framework of RT can provide a more powerful explanatory force than the existing studies of this topic can.
Chapter One briefly introduces some viewpoints in RT, including communication, inferential model, cognitive context, relevance principles,
and analyzes the feasibility of the presupposition study within this framework.
In Chapter Two, the advantages and disadvantages of some prior studies of presupposition and the necessity of presupposition study within the pragmatic scope, especially under the guidance of RT are discussed.
Chapter Three discusses the defining properties of pragmatic presupposition, including mutuality, felicity, dynamicity, subjectivity and defeasibility, and the concept of pragmatic presupposition is re-defined in this part. We hold that pragmatic presupposition is the speaker's appropriate dynamic assumption of the hearer's cognitive state.
Chapter Four deals with the functions of pragmatic presupposition in verbal communication. Pragmatic presupposition is believed to have the restrictive function and guiding function on the participants in verbal communication.
A conclusion is drawn in the last part. It is believed that presupposition study within the framework of RT has some theoretic and practical significance.
认知语用学的最新成果—关联理论又为前提的研究提供了一个崭新的视角。这一理论吸收了当代认知科学、心理学以及行为科学的某些研究成果来探询推理的心理机制。关联理论具有多元化的理论背景，它比以往的语言交际理论获得了更多的理论支撑，其解释更具说服力。本文将以关联理论为指导，分析前提的本质特征，并探讨其对言语交际的影响，力求为言语交际提供一定的理论指导。
全文由六部分组成：
引言部分 简要概述了前提研究的历史及现状。并在此基础上提出了我们的看法，即关联理论为前提的研究提供了强大的解释力。
第一章 简要介绍了有关关联理论的一些观点，包括交际、推理模式、认知语境、关联原则等，分析了运用该理论研究前提的可行性。
第二章 分析了以往前提研究中的优势和不足，认为前提是一
第三章
第四章
结论部分
个语用概念，讨论了在语用学体系，特别是在关联理
论体系下研究前提的必要性。
该部分详细分析了前提的互明性、得体性、主观性、
动态性和可撤消性等特征，对前提重新进行了界定，
认为语用前提是一个语用概念，它是说话人对受话人
认知状态的适度、动态的假设。
该部分分析了语用前提对言语交际的影响。它对于交
际双方都有制约和引导作用。
在对全文内容加以总结的基础上进一步表明语用前提
与关联理论相结合的研究方法的理论和现实意义。
Originating from philosophy, presupposition aroused semanticists' interest with the development of semantics in the 60s and 70s of the twentieth century. Later, the thriving of pragmatics provided a new perspective for the study of this concept. Different studies given by different schools benefit the understanding of this concept, making the studies of this topic complicated as well. The understanding and definitions of presupposition vary from philosophers to pragmatists. Here in this paper what interest us most are the studies of presupposition in the pragmatic perspective.
Relevance Theory (RT), one of the latest achievements in the field of cognitive pragmatics offers a brand-new perspective for the study of presupposition. Based on some achievements in cognitive science, psychology and behavioristic science, RT provides us with much knowledge of the psychological mechanism of inference. Having a multi-faceted theoretic nature, RT is regarded as much more explanatorily powerful than some prior communication theories are. Guided by RT, this thesis aims at analyzing the essence of pragmatic presupposition and investigating its functions in verbal communication, attempting to provide some theoretic knowledge of presupposition for successful communication.
This paper comprises six parts:
A brief review of presupposition studies is given in the Introduction. In our view, the study of pragmatic presupposition within the framework of RT can provide a more powerful explanatory force than the existing studies of this topic can.
Chapter One briefly introduces some viewpoints in RT, including communication, inferential model, cognitive context, relevance principles,
and analyzes the feasibility of the presupposition study within this framework.
In Chapter Two, the advantages and disadvantages of some prior studies of presupposition and the necessity of presupposition study within the pragmatic scope, especially under the guidance of RT are discussed.
Chapter Three discusses the defining properties of pragmatic presupposition, including mutuality, felicity, dynamicity, subjectivity and defeasibility, and the concept of pragmatic presupposition is re-defined in this part. We hold that pragmatic presupposition is the speaker's appropriate dynamic assumption of the hearer's cognitive state.
Chapter Four deals with the functions of pragmatic presupposition in verbal communication. Pragmatic presupposition is believed to have the restrictive function and guiding function on the participants in verbal communication.
A conclusion is drawn in the last part. It is believed that presupposition study within the framework of RT has some theoretic and practical significance.
引文
Austin, J. (1991) Pride and Prejudice. Oxford University Press. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Austin, J. L. (1962) How To Do Things With Words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Burton-Roberts, N. (1989) "On Horn's Delimma: Presupposition and Negation". Journal of Linguistics 25: 95-125.
Fillmore, C. J. (1971) Verbs of Judging: an exercise in semantic description. In Fillmore&Langendon (1971: 273-90).
Fitzgerald, E Scott. (1925) The Great Gatsby. New York: Charles Scribners Sons.
Frege, G. (1952) On Sense and Reference. In P. T. Geach and M. Black (eds.) Translations from the Philosophical Writtings of Goulob Frege. Oxford: Blacewell, pp. 56-78.
Gazdar, G. J. M. (1979). Pragumtics: Implicature, Presupposition and Logic Form. New York: Academic Press, Inc.
Grundy, P. (1995)Doing Pragmatics. London: Edward Anodd.
Gutt, Ernst-Augnst. (2001) "Pragmatic Aspects of Translation: Some Relevanve Theory Observations" in Hichey, Leo. (eds). The Pragmatics of Translation. Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Horn, L. (1984) "A New Taxonomy for Pragmatic Inference: Q-based & R-Based implicature" in Schiffirn 1984: 11-42.
Karttunen, L. (1971) Implicative Verbs. Language, 47, 340-58.
Karttunen, L. (1973) Presuppositions of Compound Sentences. Linguistic Inquiry, 4, 169-193.
Karttunen, L. & P. S. Peters (1975) Conventional implicature in Montague grammar. Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, 266-278.
Kennan, E. L. (1971) Two Kinds of Presuppositions in Natural language. In C. J. Fillmore&D. T. Langendoen (eds.). Studies in Linguistic Semantics. New York: Holt, pp. 45-54.
Lakoff, G. (1972) Linguistics and Natural Logic. In Davison&Harman (1972: 545-665).
Lakoff, G. (1972) Linguistics and Natural Logic. In Keenan (1975: 253-86).
Leech, G. N. (1981)Semantics. London: Longman.
Levinson, S. C. (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lyons, J. (1977) Semantics, Vols. 1&2. Cambridge University Press.
Matthews, E H. (2000) Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics. Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Mey, J. L. (1999) Pragmatics: An Introduction. Peking: Foreign Language Teaching & Research Press.
Miller, Arthur. (1961) The Death of A Salesman. Penguin Books Ltd.
Russell, B. (1905) On Denoting. Mind, 14, 479-93.
Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (1995) Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blaekwell.
Stalnaker, R. C. (1972) Pragmatics. In Davidson, D. & C. Harman (Eds.) (1972) Semantics Of Natural Language. Dordecht: Reidel.
Stalnaker, R. C. (1973) Presuppositions. Journal of Philosophical Logic 2, 447-457.
Strawson, P. E (1952) Introduction to Logical Theory. London: Methuen.
Thomason, R. H. (1973) Semantics, Pragmatics, Conversation and Presupposition. Mimeograph, University of Pittsburgh.
Tui, Amy B. M. (1999). English Conversation. Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Wilss, W. (2001) The Science of Translation: Problems and Methods. Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Yule, G. (1996) Pragmaacs. London: Oxford University Press.
关兰培等，1989，《简明行为科学词典》。武汉大学出版社。
何刚，1997，隐含的基本特征[J]。《外语学刊》，1997，(3)。
何兆熊，2000，《新编语用学概要》[M]。上海外语教育出版社。
何兆熊，蒋艳梅，1997，语境的动态研究[J]。《外国语》，1995，(5)。
何自然，1988，《语用学概论》[M]。长沙：湖南教育出版社。
何自然，1998，《语用学与英语学习》[M]。上海外语教育出版社。
黄国文，1988，《语篇分析概要》[M]。长沙：湖南教育出版社。
刘智慧，2003，试论语用前提的本质及其对言语行为的影响[J]。《外语教育与翻译》，2003，(1)。
吴明华，1994，语用前提设置的“远近原则”[J]。《汉语学习》，1994，(6)。
吴喜艳，2001，语用前提与话语理解[J]。《山东外语教学》，2001，(4)。
向明友，1993，试论话语前提分析[J]。《外国语》，1993，(4)。
熊学亮，1999，《认知语用学概论》[M]。上海外语教育出版社。
徐家祯。1986，浅论“前提”及影响“前提”的因素[J]。《逻辑与语言学习》，1986，(1)。
徐盛桓，1993，“预设”新论[J]。《外语学刊》，1993，(4)。
杨炳钧，尹明祥，2000，试论前提的制约因素[J]。《外语教学》，2000，(7)。
杨石乔，1994，英汉语用预设与信息中心对比[J]。《外语学刊》，1994，(4)
易仲良，1999，《英语动词语义语法学》[M]。长沙：湖南师范大学出版社。
赵艳芳，2001，《认知语言学概论》[M]。上海外语教育出版社。
朱永生，苗兴伟，2000，语用预设的语篇功能[J]。《外国语》，2000，(3)。
Austin, J. L. (1962) How To Do Things With Words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Burton-Roberts, N. (1989) "On Horn's Delimma: Presupposition and Negation". Journal of Linguistics 25: 95-125.
Fillmore, C. J. (1971) Verbs of Judging: an exercise in semantic description. In Fillmore&Langendon (1971: 273-90).
Fitzgerald, E Scott. (1925) The Great Gatsby. New York: Charles Scribners Sons.
Frege, G. (1952) On Sense and Reference. In P. T. Geach and M. Black (eds.) Translations from the Philosophical Writtings of Goulob Frege. Oxford: Blacewell, pp. 56-78.
Gazdar, G. J. M. (1979). Pragumtics: Implicature, Presupposition and Logic Form. New York: Academic Press, Inc.
Grundy, P. (1995)Doing Pragmatics. London: Edward Anodd.
Gutt, Ernst-Augnst. (2001) "Pragmatic Aspects of Translation: Some Relevanve Theory Observations" in Hichey, Leo. (eds). The Pragmatics of Translation. Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Horn, L. (1984) "A New Taxonomy for Pragmatic Inference: Q-based & R-Based implicature" in Schiffirn 1984: 11-42.
Karttunen, L. (1971) Implicative Verbs. Language, 47, 340-58.
Karttunen, L. (1973) Presuppositions of Compound Sentences. Linguistic Inquiry, 4, 169-193.
Karttunen, L. & P. S. Peters (1975) Conventional implicature in Montague grammar. Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, 266-278.
Kennan, E. L. (1971) Two Kinds of Presuppositions in Natural language. In C. J. Fillmore&D. T. Langendoen (eds.). Studies in Linguistic Semantics. New York: Holt, pp. 45-54.
Lakoff, G. (1972) Linguistics and Natural Logic. In Davison&Harman (1972: 545-665).
Lakoff, G. (1972) Linguistics and Natural Logic. In Keenan (1975: 253-86).
Leech, G. N. (1981)Semantics. London: Longman.
Levinson, S. C. (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lyons, J. (1977) Semantics, Vols. 1&2. Cambridge University Press.
Matthews, E H. (2000) Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics. Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Mey, J. L. (1999) Pragmatics: An Introduction. Peking: Foreign Language Teaching & Research Press.
Miller, Arthur. (1961) The Death of A Salesman. Penguin Books Ltd.
Russell, B. (1905) On Denoting. Mind, 14, 479-93.
Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (1995) Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blaekwell.
Stalnaker, R. C. (1972) Pragmatics. In Davidson, D. & C. Harman (Eds.) (1972) Semantics Of Natural Language. Dordecht: Reidel.
Stalnaker, R. C. (1973) Presuppositions. Journal of Philosophical Logic 2, 447-457.
Strawson, P. E (1952) Introduction to Logical Theory. London: Methuen.
Thomason, R. H. (1973) Semantics, Pragmatics, Conversation and Presupposition. Mimeograph, University of Pittsburgh.
Tui, Amy B. M. (1999). English Conversation. Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Wilss, W. (2001) The Science of Translation: Problems and Methods. Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Yule, G. (1996) Pragmaacs. London: Oxford University Press.
关兰培等，1989，《简明行为科学词典》。武汉大学出版社。
何刚，1997，隐含的基本特征[J]。《外语学刊》，1997，(3)。
何兆熊，2000，《新编语用学概要》[M]。上海外语教育出版社。
何兆熊，蒋艳梅，1997，语境的动态研究[J]。《外国语》，1995，(5)。
何自然，1988，《语用学概论》[M]。长沙：湖南教育出版社。
何自然，1998，《语用学与英语学习》[M]。上海外语教育出版社。
黄国文，1988，《语篇分析概要》[M]。长沙：湖南教育出版社。
刘智慧，2003，试论语用前提的本质及其对言语行为的影响[J]。《外语教育与翻译》，2003，(1)。
吴明华，1994，语用前提设置的“远近原则”[J]。《汉语学习》，1994，(6)。
吴喜艳，2001，语用前提与话语理解[J]。《山东外语教学》，2001，(4)。
向明友，1993，试论话语前提分析[J]。《外国语》，1993，(4)。
熊学亮，1999，《认知语用学概论》[M]。上海外语教育出版社。
徐家祯。1986，浅论“前提”及影响“前提”的因素[J]。《逻辑与语言学习》，1986，(1)。
徐盛桓，1993，“预设”新论[J]。《外语学刊》，1993，(4)。
杨炳钧，尹明祥，2000，试论前提的制约因素[J]。《外语教学》，2000，(7)。
杨石乔，1994，英汉语用预设与信息中心对比[J]。《外语学刊》，1994，(4)
易仲良，1999，《英语动词语义语法学》[M]。长沙：湖南师范大学出版社。
赵艳芳，2001，《认知语言学概论》[M]。上海外语教育出版社。
朱永生，苗兴伟，2000，语用预设的语篇功能[J]。《外国语》，2000，(3)。