语言顺应论视角下的新闻话语转述研究
|
摘要
话语转述是一种普遍的言语行为,体现了语言的自反性特征和人类的元表征能力,它不仅出现在日常会话中,也出现在各类机构话语中。本研究在修正的顺应论框架下,以新闻话语转述为研究对象,探讨转述者如何在新闻语境的制约下对新闻话语转述行为做出顺应性的选择。针对以往文献中话语转述研究在转述内容、转述内容与转述形式之间的关系上所存在的争议,本研究提出了以下三个研究问题：
(1)在实施新闻话语转述行为时,转述者在转述方式上做出了哪些选择?这些选择是否影响转述话语和原话语在内容方面的相似性?
(2)在实施新闻话语转述行为时,转述者在转述措辞上做出了哪些选择?这些选择是否影响转述话语和原话语在内容方面的相似性?
(3)在新闻媒体语境的制约下,新闻话语转述者使用了哪些调控策略?
为了回答以上研究问题,本研究收集了155篇新闻话语报道,共涉及1550例新闻话语转述。依据本研究对话语转述方式、转述措辞的分类以及对转述相似性基于语境的判断,我们对收集到的语料进行了标注,统计了各类转述的频次,对话语转述在转述方式和措辞及其相似性进行了定性和定量相结合的分析,并讨论了新闻语境制约下的各种转述策略。研究发现：
第一,新闻话语转述在转述方式的选择上呈现出多样性,不同转述方式的选择影响着转述语和原话语在内容方面的相似性。新闻话语转述主要选择直接型话语转述的方式,其次是混合型话语转述和间接型话语转述。新闻话语转述方式的选择影响着转述相似性,保真型转述主要由直接型话语转述实现,其次是混合型话语转述和间接型话语转述。其中,直接型话语转述主要在语言意义上与原话语相似,但大量的间接型转述和混合型转述只是在语用意义上与原话语相似。失真型转述数量不多,主要分布在间接型话语转述和混合型转述中。这说明,采纳原说话者的视角进行话语转述时更容易真实再现原话语的信息,而当转述者采用自己的视角进行转述时,则容易产生内容上的失真。当然,语料中也有一些失真型转述是从原说话者的视角来进行的,具有一定的误导性。新闻话语转述在方式上的多样化选择及其对转述语和原话语之间相似性的影响体现了话语转述行为对新闻话语交际语境的顺应。
第二,新闻话语转述行为在措辞上的选择同样呈现出多样性,不同转述措辞的选择影响着转述语与原话语在内容方面的相似性。就措辞而言,新闻话语转述主要选择字面型话语,其次是重述型话语和局部字面型话语。字面型话语转述主要出现在直接型话语中,重述型话语转述主要出现在间接型话语中,局部字面型话语转述主要出现在混合型话语中。从保真型转述来看,绝大多数字面型转述和局部字面型转述在语言意义上与原话语相似,而大多数重述型转述却只是在语用意义上与原话语相似。从失真型转述来看,大部分发生在重述型转述和局部字面转述中。这说明,当转述者不再拘泥于原话语的措辞时,就意味着对原话语的理解和表达有着更多的主观性,容易发生意义上的偏离。新闻话语转述措辞的选择及其对转述语和原话语之间相似性的影响同样也体现了话语转述行为对新闻话语交际语境的顺应。
第三,为了实现交际目的,新闻话语转述者在转述信息和语境成分方面实施了各种隐性的调控策略,在转述形式、转述标记语和元语用评述语方面实施了各种显性的调控策略。新闻话语转述者对转述信息的调控策略包括对原话语信息类型的选择、原话语信息状态的调整和原话语信息量的调整。新闻话语转述对对语境成分的使用策略包括对情景成分(如时间或地点)和特定参与者(如说话者或听话者)的选择。新闻话语转述行为在转述形式上的调控策略表现在指示语的移情使用和反先用现象、不同转述方式构成的明暗对比。此外,转述言语标记语本身可以表现转述者的主观倾向性,即便是一些中性的言语标记语也可以通过修饰语的选择来表现转述者的主观立场。元语用评述语的使用明确了转述行为的言外之力、表达对转述语义内容的评价或者通过提供其它相关信息对话语转述进行评价。各种转述策略的使用进一步说明新闻转述者对话语转述的调控和操纵,使新闻话语转述体现出转述者的主观倾向性,即便是与原话语具有高度相似性的转述语也会在特定的语境下表现出对原说话者意图的偏离。
本研究认为,新闻话语转述行为是新闻转述者在新闻交际语境下实施的一种顺应性言语行为。新闻话语转述方式、转述措辞的多样化选择及其对相似性的复杂影响反映了转述者在机构语境制约下的常规选择,但新闻话语转述行为对不同语境因素的顺应常常表现出冲突性。各种转述策略的运用则是新闻话语转述者在新闻语境制约下的主动性顺应选择,体现出新闻话语转述者较高程度的元语用意识。
本研究在理论、方法和实践方面均具有一定的启示。
在理论上,在修正的顺应论框架下,本研究对新闻话语转述在方式、措辞及其对转述内容相似性的影响、各种转述策略进行了较为系统的研究,深化了人们对于新闻话语转述行为本质的认识。同时,本研究对语言顺应论进行了局部修正,将合作原则中关于交际内容的讨论糅合到顺应论中,进一步完善了语言顺应论,增强了顺应论的操作性和解释力。
在方法上,本研究对转述语与原话语进行了较为系统的对比研究。本研究选择的转述语语料是来自新闻报纸的真实语料,所转述的原始话语均可以找到,充当参考。对比研究可以清晰地反映原话语在转述过程中所发生的变化,也能更好地理解转述形式与转述内容属性之间的相互关系。这对理解新闻话语转述及相关现象具有重要的参考意义。
在实践上,本研究有助于改善话语转述的教学方法,有助于新闻语篇的阅读与写作。在课堂教学中,教师可以引导学生了解报纸新闻话语转述在形式方面的多样化选择及其对内容相似性的影响,从而避免对各种转述语语法特点及其相互转换规则的过多强调,使学生能够灵活地转述他人的话语,并有效地进行新闻语篇的阅读与理解。
最后,需要说明的是,本研究仍然存在一些不足。后续研究可以在扩大语料规模、丰富语料类型的基础上从以下几个方面加以探讨：(1)所转述内容本身的一些特点,如严肃话题和非严肃话题是否影响新闻话语转述的方式和措辞及其相似性?(2)报刊的性质,如不同权威程度(大报和小报)、不同意识形态的报纸是否影响新闻话语转述行为的各种选择?(3)汉语语境下的新闻话语转述与英语语境下的新闻话语转述是否存在差异?(4)不同媒介中(如纸质媒介、电子刊物、电视媒介等)的新闻话语转述是否存在差异?(5)新闻话语转述的各种选择是否影响读者的理解?
Discourse reporting, as a universal speech act occurring in a variety of text-types, displays the reflexivity of human language and metarepresentative ability of human beings. This dissertation provides an empirical study of the adaptability of journalistic discourse reporting within a proposed new version of the adaptationist framework. Based on the analysis of1550reporting acts from155news articles, the study arrives at the following major findings:
Firstly, journalistic discourse reporting manifests a variety of choices in the aspect of reporting mode, which has an effect on resemblance linguistic or pragmatic meaning between reported discourse and the original discourse. In the choice of reporting mode, direct discourse reports comes first in frequency, followed by mixed discourse reports and indirect discourse reports. While faithful reports are mainly realized by direct discourse reports, followed by mixed discourse reports and indirect discourse reports, most unfaithful reports are mainly realized by mixed discourse reports and indirect discourse reports, followed by direct discourse reports. The finding suggests that deviations in information faithfulness mainly result from the adoption of the reporter's own perspective in discourse reporting. However, exceptional cases also exist in which the use of the original speaker's perspective may also be misleading.
Secondly, journalistic discourse reporting manifests a variety of choices in wording, which has an effect on the resemblance between reported discourse and the original discourse. In terms of wording choice, verbatim reports account for the biggest proportion, followed by partially verbatim reports and rephrasing reports. While most faithful reports are mainly realized by verbatim reports, followed by partially verbatim reports and rephrasing reports, most unfaithful reports are realized by partially verbatim reports and rephrasing reports, followed by verbatim reports. The finding suggests that deviations in information faithfulness mainly result from deviations in wording. However, exceptional cases also exist in which precise wording may not ensure the reporting faithfulness.
Finally, a variety of reporting strategies are employed to show the reporter's high degree of metapragmatic awareness in reporting others'discourse. Strategies in journalistic discourse reporting involve the implicit manipulation of reporting content and contextual correlates. Besides, journalistic discourse reporting also displays reporters'explicit manipulation of reporting deixis and reporting mode, reporting speech markers and metapragmatic comment. Various strategies in journalistic discourse reporting show reporters'high degree of metapragmatic awareness in monitoring their language use.
The research has important theoretical, methodological and pedagogical implications. Theoretically, this study deepens the understanding of discourse reporting in the journalistic context by examining the reporting mode, wording, their respective effects on reporting resemblance and reporting strategies within the revised Theory of Linguistic Adaptation. Moreover, the study incorporates the communicative content in Cooperative Principle into the Theory of Linguistic Adaptation, thus contributing to the operationaliability and explanatory power of the adaptation framework. Methodologically, the comparative analysis of authentic discourse reports and the corresponding original discourse help describe a real picture of journalistic discourse reporting. Pedagogically, the study suggests that instructors improve language teaching of discourse reporting by resorting to the authentic language input while avoiding the mechanical transformation from direct discourse to indirect discourse. This will enable learners to properly report other people's discourse and have a better understanding of implicit meaning in journalistic texts as a type of public discourse.
(1)在实施新闻话语转述行为时,转述者在转述方式上做出了哪些选择?这些选择是否影响转述话语和原话语在内容方面的相似性?
(2)在实施新闻话语转述行为时,转述者在转述措辞上做出了哪些选择?这些选择是否影响转述话语和原话语在内容方面的相似性?
(3)在新闻媒体语境的制约下,新闻话语转述者使用了哪些调控策略?
为了回答以上研究问题,本研究收集了155篇新闻话语报道,共涉及1550例新闻话语转述。依据本研究对话语转述方式、转述措辞的分类以及对转述相似性基于语境的判断,我们对收集到的语料进行了标注,统计了各类转述的频次,对话语转述在转述方式和措辞及其相似性进行了定性和定量相结合的分析,并讨论了新闻语境制约下的各种转述策略。研究发现：
第一,新闻话语转述在转述方式的选择上呈现出多样性,不同转述方式的选择影响着转述语和原话语在内容方面的相似性。新闻话语转述主要选择直接型话语转述的方式,其次是混合型话语转述和间接型话语转述。新闻话语转述方式的选择影响着转述相似性,保真型转述主要由直接型话语转述实现,其次是混合型话语转述和间接型话语转述。其中,直接型话语转述主要在语言意义上与原话语相似,但大量的间接型转述和混合型转述只是在语用意义上与原话语相似。失真型转述数量不多,主要分布在间接型话语转述和混合型转述中。这说明,采纳原说话者的视角进行话语转述时更容易真实再现原话语的信息,而当转述者采用自己的视角进行转述时,则容易产生内容上的失真。当然,语料中也有一些失真型转述是从原说话者的视角来进行的,具有一定的误导性。新闻话语转述在方式上的多样化选择及其对转述语和原话语之间相似性的影响体现了话语转述行为对新闻话语交际语境的顺应。
第二,新闻话语转述行为在措辞上的选择同样呈现出多样性,不同转述措辞的选择影响着转述语与原话语在内容方面的相似性。就措辞而言,新闻话语转述主要选择字面型话语,其次是重述型话语和局部字面型话语。字面型话语转述主要出现在直接型话语中,重述型话语转述主要出现在间接型话语中,局部字面型话语转述主要出现在混合型话语中。从保真型转述来看,绝大多数字面型转述和局部字面型转述在语言意义上与原话语相似,而大多数重述型转述却只是在语用意义上与原话语相似。从失真型转述来看,大部分发生在重述型转述和局部字面转述中。这说明,当转述者不再拘泥于原话语的措辞时,就意味着对原话语的理解和表达有着更多的主观性,容易发生意义上的偏离。新闻话语转述措辞的选择及其对转述语和原话语之间相似性的影响同样也体现了话语转述行为对新闻话语交际语境的顺应。
第三,为了实现交际目的,新闻话语转述者在转述信息和语境成分方面实施了各种隐性的调控策略,在转述形式、转述标记语和元语用评述语方面实施了各种显性的调控策略。新闻话语转述者对转述信息的调控策略包括对原话语信息类型的选择、原话语信息状态的调整和原话语信息量的调整。新闻话语转述对对语境成分的使用策略包括对情景成分(如时间或地点)和特定参与者(如说话者或听话者)的选择。新闻话语转述行为在转述形式上的调控策略表现在指示语的移情使用和反先用现象、不同转述方式构成的明暗对比。此外,转述言语标记语本身可以表现转述者的主观倾向性,即便是一些中性的言语标记语也可以通过修饰语的选择来表现转述者的主观立场。元语用评述语的使用明确了转述行为的言外之力、表达对转述语义内容的评价或者通过提供其它相关信息对话语转述进行评价。各种转述策略的使用进一步说明新闻转述者对话语转述的调控和操纵,使新闻话语转述体现出转述者的主观倾向性,即便是与原话语具有高度相似性的转述语也会在特定的语境下表现出对原说话者意图的偏离。
本研究认为,新闻话语转述行为是新闻转述者在新闻交际语境下实施的一种顺应性言语行为。新闻话语转述方式、转述措辞的多样化选择及其对相似性的复杂影响反映了转述者在机构语境制约下的常规选择,但新闻话语转述行为对不同语境因素的顺应常常表现出冲突性。各种转述策略的运用则是新闻话语转述者在新闻语境制约下的主动性顺应选择,体现出新闻话语转述者较高程度的元语用意识。
本研究在理论、方法和实践方面均具有一定的启示。
在理论上,在修正的顺应论框架下,本研究对新闻话语转述在方式、措辞及其对转述内容相似性的影响、各种转述策略进行了较为系统的研究,深化了人们对于新闻话语转述行为本质的认识。同时,本研究对语言顺应论进行了局部修正,将合作原则中关于交际内容的讨论糅合到顺应论中,进一步完善了语言顺应论,增强了顺应论的操作性和解释力。
在方法上,本研究对转述语与原话语进行了较为系统的对比研究。本研究选择的转述语语料是来自新闻报纸的真实语料,所转述的原始话语均可以找到,充当参考。对比研究可以清晰地反映原话语在转述过程中所发生的变化,也能更好地理解转述形式与转述内容属性之间的相互关系。这对理解新闻话语转述及相关现象具有重要的参考意义。
在实践上,本研究有助于改善话语转述的教学方法,有助于新闻语篇的阅读与写作。在课堂教学中,教师可以引导学生了解报纸新闻话语转述在形式方面的多样化选择及其对内容相似性的影响,从而避免对各种转述语语法特点及其相互转换规则的过多强调,使学生能够灵活地转述他人的话语,并有效地进行新闻语篇的阅读与理解。
最后,需要说明的是,本研究仍然存在一些不足。后续研究可以在扩大语料规模、丰富语料类型的基础上从以下几个方面加以探讨：(1)所转述内容本身的一些特点,如严肃话题和非严肃话题是否影响新闻话语转述的方式和措辞及其相似性?(2)报刊的性质,如不同权威程度(大报和小报)、不同意识形态的报纸是否影响新闻话语转述行为的各种选择?(3)汉语语境下的新闻话语转述与英语语境下的新闻话语转述是否存在差异?(4)不同媒介中(如纸质媒介、电子刊物、电视媒介等)的新闻话语转述是否存在差异?(5)新闻话语转述的各种选择是否影响读者的理解?
Discourse reporting, as a universal speech act occurring in a variety of text-types, displays the reflexivity of human language and metarepresentative ability of human beings. This dissertation provides an empirical study of the adaptability of journalistic discourse reporting within a proposed new version of the adaptationist framework. Based on the analysis of1550reporting acts from155news articles, the study arrives at the following major findings:
Firstly, journalistic discourse reporting manifests a variety of choices in the aspect of reporting mode, which has an effect on resemblance linguistic or pragmatic meaning between reported discourse and the original discourse. In the choice of reporting mode, direct discourse reports comes first in frequency, followed by mixed discourse reports and indirect discourse reports. While faithful reports are mainly realized by direct discourse reports, followed by mixed discourse reports and indirect discourse reports, most unfaithful reports are mainly realized by mixed discourse reports and indirect discourse reports, followed by direct discourse reports. The finding suggests that deviations in information faithfulness mainly result from the adoption of the reporter's own perspective in discourse reporting. However, exceptional cases also exist in which the use of the original speaker's perspective may also be misleading.
Secondly, journalistic discourse reporting manifests a variety of choices in wording, which has an effect on the resemblance between reported discourse and the original discourse. In terms of wording choice, verbatim reports account for the biggest proportion, followed by partially verbatim reports and rephrasing reports. While most faithful reports are mainly realized by verbatim reports, followed by partially verbatim reports and rephrasing reports, most unfaithful reports are realized by partially verbatim reports and rephrasing reports, followed by verbatim reports. The finding suggests that deviations in information faithfulness mainly result from deviations in wording. However, exceptional cases also exist in which precise wording may not ensure the reporting faithfulness.
Finally, a variety of reporting strategies are employed to show the reporter's high degree of metapragmatic awareness in reporting others'discourse. Strategies in journalistic discourse reporting involve the implicit manipulation of reporting content and contextual correlates. Besides, journalistic discourse reporting also displays reporters'explicit manipulation of reporting deixis and reporting mode, reporting speech markers and metapragmatic comment. Various strategies in journalistic discourse reporting show reporters'high degree of metapragmatic awareness in monitoring their language use.
The research has important theoretical, methodological and pedagogical implications. Theoretically, this study deepens the understanding of discourse reporting in the journalistic context by examining the reporting mode, wording, their respective effects on reporting resemblance and reporting strategies within the revised Theory of Linguistic Adaptation. Moreover, the study incorporates the communicative content in Cooperative Principle into the Theory of Linguistic Adaptation, thus contributing to the operationaliability and explanatory power of the adaptation framework. Methodologically, the comparative analysis of authentic discourse reports and the corresponding original discourse help describe a real picture of journalistic discourse reporting. Pedagogically, the study suggests that instructors improve language teaching of discourse reporting by resorting to the authentic language input while avoiding the mechanical transformation from direct discourse to indirect discourse. This will enable learners to properly report other people's discourse and have a better understanding of implicit meaning in journalistic texts as a type of public discourse.
引文
1 意识形态最明显的一种表现就足语言使用,它可以反映、建构和维持意识形态的模式(Verschueren,2011,p. 18)。
1 实施者(animator)负责话语的声音产出,作者(author)负责语言表达式,负责者(principal)承担话语产生的社会意义及其影响(Goffman,1981).
1 限于篇幅,本文暂不介绍有关汉语话语转述的相关研究,具体可见黄友(2009)。
1 有关新闻话语的研究路径,具体可见曾庆香(2005)。
1 有关顺应论的基本论点,参见本义第三章。
2 有关顺应论在国内的研究综述,参见李元胜(2007)、黄成大(2008)。
1 具体介绍参见谢朝鲜、陈新仁(2007,p.87)。
1 如:Mr Major warned yesterday of the dangers of Britain being left behind if a group of European Union members pushed ahead with a single currency. (The Independent on Sunday,'Blair Puts Labour Troops on Alert for Snap Election') (Semino et al.,1997, p.30)
Atawneth, A. M. (2009). The discourse of war in the Middle East:Analysis of media reporting. Journal of Pragmatics,2,263-278.
Austin, J. L. (2002). How to Do Things with Words. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Haberland, H. (1986). Reported speech in Yoruba. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), Direct Dpeech an Indirect Speech (pp.219-253). Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination:Four essays (M. Holquist, Ed., C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). Austin:University of Texas Press.
Bamgbose, A. (1986). Reported speech in Yoruba. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), Direct Speech and Indirect Speech (pp.77-97). Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
Banfield, A. (1973). Narrative Style and the Grammar of Direct and Indirect speech. Foundations of Language,1,1-39.
Banfield, A. (1978). Where Epistemology, Style, and Grammar Meet Literary History: The Development of Represented Speech and Thought. New Literary History,3, 415-454
Baynham, M. (1996). Direct speech:What's it doing in non-narrative discourse? Journal of Pragmatics,25,61-81.
Bell, A. (1991). The Language of News Media. Oxford:OUP.
Bolden, G. (2004). The quote and beyond:Defining boundaries of reported speech in conversational Russian. Journal of Pragmatics,36,1071-1118.
Blum-Kulka, S.& Olshtain, E. (1984). Requests and apologies:A cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns. Applied Linguistics,3,195-213.
Blyth, C. Jr.S. et al. (1990). I'm like,'say what?!':A new quotative in American oral narrative. American Speech,3,215-227.
Buttny, R. (1997). Reported speech in talking race on campus. Human Communication Research,23,477-5-6
Calsamiglia, H. Ferrero, C.L. (2003). Role and position of scientific voices:Reported speech in the media. Discourse Studies,2,147-173.
Cappelen, H.& E. Lepore. (1997). Varieties of quotation. Mind,106:429-450.
Carnap, R. (1947). Meaning and Necessity. Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press.
Carston, R. (2002). Thoughts and Utterances:The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Malden:Blackwell.
Carston, R. (2009, July). Metaphor, lexical pragmatics and metarepresentation. Paper presented at the 11th China Pragmatics conference, Wuhan University, China.
Christie, Christine. (1998). Rewriting rights:a relevance theoretical analysis of press constructions of sextual harassment and the responses of readers. Language and Literature,3,215-234
Church, A. (1950). On Carnap's analysis of statements of assertion and belief. Analysis, 10,97-99.
Clark, H. H.& Gerrig, R. J.(1990). Quotation as demonstration. Language,66,764-805
Clift, R. (2006). Indexing stance:Reported speech as an interactional evidential. Journal of Sociolinguistics,5,569-595.
Clift, R.& Holt, E. (2007). Introduction. In E. Holt & R. Clift (Ed.) Reporting Talk: Reported Speech in Interaction (pp.1-15). Cambridge:CUP.
Cohen, A.& Manion, L.(1991). Research Methods in Education (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.
Collins, D. E. (2000). Reanimated Voices:Speech Reporting in a Historical-pragmatic Perspective. John Benhamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia.
Coulmas, F. (1985). Direct and indirect speech:General problems and problems of Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics,9,41-63.
Coulmas, F. (1986a). Reported speech:Some general issues. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), Direct Speech and Indirect Speech (pp.1-28).Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
Coulmas, F. (Ed.). (1986b). Direct Speech and Indirect Speech. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2007). Accessing and accounting. In E. Holt & R. Clift (Ed.) Reporting Talk:Reported Speech in Interaction (pp.81-119). Cambridge:CUP.
Davidson, D. (1984). Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
de Brabanter, P. (Ed.). (2005). Hybrid Quotations. Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company
Dor, D. (2003). On newspaper headlines as relevance optimizers. Journal of Pragmatics,35,695-721.
Drew, P. (1998). Complaints about transgressions and misconduct. Research on Language and Social Interaction,31,295-325.
Edmonson, W. (1981). Spoken Discourse:A Model for Analysis. New York:Longman Group Limited.
Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis:The Critical Study of Language. London/New York:Longman.
Ferrara, A. (1980). An extended theory of speech acts. Journal of Pragmatics,12, 341-350.
Fetzer,A. (2006). "Minister, we will see how the public judges you."Media references in political interviews. Journal of pragmatics,38,180-195.
Fetzer, A. (2008). Theme zones in English media discourse:Forms and functions. Journal of Pragmatics,40,1543-1568
Fox, W. (1999). Writing the News:A Guide for Print Journalists (Li Bin, Trans.). Beijing:Xinhua Press.
Fraser, B. (1980). Conversational mitigation. Journal of Pragmatics,4,341-350.
Galatolo, R. (2007). Active voiceing in court. In E. Holt & R. Clift (Ed.) Reporting Talk: Reported Speech in Interaction (pp.195-220). Cambridge:CUP.
Givon, T. (1980). The binding hierarchy and the typology of complements. Studies in Language,5,333-78.
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame Analysis:An Essay in the Organization of Experience. York, Pennsylvania:Northeastern University Press.
Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of Talk. Oxford, England:Blackwell.
Green, G. (1996). Pragmatics and Natural Language Understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA Publishers.
Grice, H. P. (2002). Studies in the Way of Words. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Gumperz, J. G (1982). Discourse Strategies. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Gundel, J. K. et al (1993). Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language,69,274-307.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd ed.) [M]. London:Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K.& Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London:Longman.
Harman, I. P. (1990). Teaching indirect speech:Deixis points the way. ELT Journal,44, 230-238.
Harwood, N. (2009). An interview-based study of the functions of citations in academic writing across two disciplines. Journal of Pragmatics,41,497-518.
Holmes, J. (1984). Modifying illocutional force. Journal of pragmatics,8,345-365.
Holt, E. (1996). Reporting on talk:The use of direct reported speech in conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction,3,219-215.
Holt, E. (2000). Reporting and reacting:Concurrent responses to reported speech. Research on Language and Social Interaction,33,425-454.
Holt, E.& Clift, R. (2007). Reporting Talk:Reported Speech in Interaction. Cambridge: CUP.
Horn, L. R. (1984). Towards a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference:Q-based and R-based implicature. In D. Schiffrin (Ed.), Meaning, Form, and Use in Context: Linguistic Applications (pp.11-42). Washingtong, D. C.:Georgetown University Press.
Horn, L. R. (1988). Pragmatic theory. In F. Newmeyer (Ed.), Linguistics:The Cambridge Survey (Vols.1, pp.113-145). Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Ifantidow, E. (2009). Newspaper headlines and relevance:Ad hoc concepts in ad hoc contexts. Journal of Pragmatics,41,699-720.
Ikeo, R. (2009). An elaboration of the faithfulness claims in direct writing. Journal of Pragmatics,41,999-1016.
Jaffe, A. (2001). Review of Jef Verschueren's Understanding Pragmatics. Language in Society,30,104-106.
Jespersen, O. (1924). The Philosophy of Grammar. London:George Allen and Unwin.
Jespersen, O. (1954). A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. London: George Allen and Unwin.
Jucker, A.& Ziv,Y. (1998). Discourse Markers:Description and Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kuo S. H. (2001). Reported speech in Chinese political discourse. Discourse Studies,2, 181-202.
Lakoff, G.& Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh. New York:Basic Books.
Labov, W. (1972). Language in the Inner City. Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania Press.
Lauerbach, G. (2006).Discourse representation in political interviews:The construction of identities and relations through voicing and ventriloquizing. Journal of Pragmatics,38,195-215.
Leech, G N. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London:Longman.
Leech, G. N.& Short, M. H. (2001). Style in Fiction:A Linguistic Introduction to English Fictional Prose. Beijing:Foreign Languages and Research Press.(Original work published,1981)
Lehrer, A. (1989). Remembering and presenting prose:Quoted speech as a data source. Discourse Processes,12,105-125.
Levinson, S. (1979). Activity types and language. Linguistics,17,365-399.
Levinson, S. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge:CUP.
Levinson, S. (1987). Pragmatics and the grammar of anaphora. Journal of Linguistics, 23,379-434.
Li, C. (1986). Direct and indirect study:A functional study. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), Direct Speech and Indirect Speech (pp.29-45). Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
Lucy, J. (1993). A. Reflexive Language:Reported Speech and Metapragmatics. Cambridge:CUP.
Lyons, J. (1975). Deixis as the source of reference. In E. L. Keenan (Ed.), Formal Semantics of Natural Language (pp.61-83). Cambridge:CUP.
Macaulay, R. (2001). You're like'why not?':The quotative expressions of Glasgow adolescents. Journal of Sociolinguistics,1,3-21.
Mayes, P. (1990). Quotation in spoken English. Studies in Language,14,325-363.
Maynard, Senko K... (1997). Textual ventriloquism:quotation and the assumed voice in Japanese newspaper columns. Poetics,24,379-392.
McCawley, J. D.(1988).The Syntactic Phenomena of English. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
McHale, B. (1978). Free indirect discourse:A survey of recent accounts. PTL,3, 249-287.
Mey, J. L. (2001). Pragmatics:An Introduction. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Mushin, I. (2001). Japanese reportive evidentiality and the pragmatics of retelling. Journal of Pragmatics,33,1361-1390.
Musolff, A. (1995). Promising to end a war= language of peace? The rhetoric of allied news management in the Gulf War 1991. In Schaffner et al (Eds.), Language and Peace (pp.93-108). Dartmouth Publishing Co, Brookfield, Vt.
Myers, G. (1999). Functions of Reported Speech in Group Discussions. Applied Linguistics,20,376-401.
Noh, Mun-Ju (2000). Metarepresentation:A Relevance-theory Approach. John Benjamins Publishing Company/Amsterdam/Philadelphia.
Park Yujong. (2005). Interaction between grammar and multimodal resources:quoting different characters in Korean multiparty conversation, Discourse Studies,1, 79-104
Politis, P.& Kakavoulia, M. (2006). Direct discourse in the Greek press:From evidentiality to subjectivity. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses,19,345-363.
Quine, W. V. (1956). Quantifiers and propositional attitudes. Journal of Philosophy,6, 177-187.
Quine, W. V. (1960). Word and Object. Cambridge, MA:MIT press.
Quine, W. V. (1986). Philosophy of Logic (2nd ed.). Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Quirk R. et al. (1972). A Universal Grammar of English. London:Longman Group Limited.
Quirk, R. et al. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman Group Limited.
Recanati, F. (2001). Open quotation. Mind,110,637-687.
Redeker, G. (1991). Linguistic markers of discourse structure. Linguistics,29, 1139-1172.
Richards, J. et al. (2005). Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Richard, M. (1999). Propositional attitude. In Hale B.& Wright, C. (Eds.), A Companion to the Philosophy of Language (pp.197-226). BlackWell Publishing Ltd.
Saeed, J. I. (2003). Semantics (2nd ed.). UK:Blackwell Publishing.
Saka, P. (1998). Quotation and use-mention distinction. Mind,107,113-135.
Sbisa, M. (2001). Illocutional force and degrees of strength in language use. Journal of Pragmatics,33,1791-1814.
Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse Markers. New York:Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. (1979). Expression and Meaning:Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Semino E. et al. (1997).Using a corpus to test a model of speech and thought presentation. Poetics,25,17-43
Semino, E.& Short, M. (2004). Corpus Stylistics:Speech, Writing and Thought Presentation in a Corpus of English Writing. Rougledge, London.
Short, M. et al. (2002). Revisiting the notion of faithfulness in discourse presentation using a corpus approach. Language and Literature,4,325-355
Shukrun-Nagar, P. (2009). Quotation markers as intertextual codes in electoral propaganda, Text& Talk,4:459-480
Slembrouck, S. (1992). The parliamentary Hansard 'verbatim' report:The written construction of spoken discourse. Language and Literature,2,101-119.
Sleurs, K. et al. (2003). Constructing press releases, constructing quotations:A case study. Journal of Sociolinguistics,2,192-212.
Sperber, D.& Wilson, D. (2001). Relevance:Cognition and Communication. Beijing: Foreign Languages and Research Press. (Original work published,1995)
Sperber, D.& D.Wilson. (2007, July). Verbal metaphors. Paper presented at the 10th China Pragmatics conference, Nanjing University, China.
Sternberg, M.(1982a). Proteus in quotation-land:mimesis and the forms of reported discourse. Poetics Today,2,107-156.
Sternberg, M.(1982b). Point of view and the indirections of direct speech. Language and Style,1,67-117.
Tannen, D. (1986). Introducing Constructed Dialogue in Greek and American Conversational and Literary Narrative. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), Direct Speech and Indirect Speech (pp.311-332). Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
Tannen, D. (2007). Talking Voices:Repetition, Dialogue and Imagery in Conversational Discourse (2nd ed.). Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in Interaction:An Introduction to Pragmatics. New York: Longman.
Thompson, G. (1994). Reporting (Wang Zhiguang, Trans.). Beijing:Foreign Languages Press.
Thompson, G. (1996). Voices in the text:Discourse perspectives on language reports. Applied Linguistics,17,501-530.
Turner, K. (2002). A note on the neo-Gricean foundations of societal pragmatics. International Journal of pragmatics,12,1-17
van Dijk, T. A. (2003). News as Discourse (Zeng Qingxiang, Trans.). Beijing:Huaxia Press. (Original work published 1988)
Vandelanotte, L. (2004a). From representational to scopal'distancing indirect speech or thought':A cline of subjectification. Text,4,547-585.
Vandelanotte, L. (2004b). Deixis and grounding in speech and thought representation. Journal of Pragmatics,36,489-520。
Van der Henst, J. B. et al., (2002). Truthfulness and relevance in telling the time. Mind and Language,5,457-466.
Verschueren, J. (1985). International News Reporting:Metapragmatic Metaphors and the U-2. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins.
Verschueren, J. (1987). Pragmatics as a Theory of Linguistic Adaptation. Antwerp: International Pragmatics Association.
Verschueren, J. (2000). Understanding Pragmatics. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. (Original work published,1999)
Verschueren, J. (2011). Engaging with Language Use and Ideology:Pragmatic Guidelines for Empirical Ideology Research. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, forthcoming.
Verschueren, J.& Ostman, J.O. (2009). Key Notions for Pragmatics. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Vincent, D.& Perrin, L. (1999). On the narrative vs non-narrative functions of reported speech:A socio-pragmatic study. Journal of Sociolinguistics,3,291-313.
Volosinov, V. N. (1986). Marxism and the Philosophy of Language (L. Matejka & I. R. Titunik, Trans.). Cambridge:Harvard University Press.
Waugh, L. (1995). Reported speech in journalistic discourse:The relation of function and text. Text,1,129-173.
Weizman, E. (2006). Roles and identities in news interviews:The Israeli context. Journal of Pragmatics,38,154-179.
Wierzbick, A. (1974). The semantics of direct and indirect discourse. Papers in Linguistics,7,267-307.
Wilson, D.& Sperber, D. (1993). Linguistic form and relevance. Lingua 90,1-25.
Yule, G. et al. (1992). On reporting what was said. ELT Journal,3,245-251.
Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford:OUP.
Zipf, G. K. (1949). Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort:An Introduction to Human Ecology. New York:Hafner.
陈洁,徐晨,2006,新闻标题语的顺应性研究——《人民日报》国内版与海外版同一新闻事件的标题语比较.江汉大学学报(1)：88-92。
陈新仁,2001,试论语用解释的全释条件.现代外语(4)：378-389。
陈新仁,2004,会话信息过量现象的语用研究.西安：陕西师范大学出版社。
陈新仁,2007,论语用的真实性.外语与外语教学(9)：1-3。
陈新仁,2010,语。语言顺应论：问题与建议.语用学研究(第三辑).北京：高等教育出版社。
陈新仁,吴珏,2006,中国英语学习者对因果类话语标记语的使用情况——基于语料库的研究.国外外语教学(3)：38-41,封三。
陈新仁,余维,2008,语用学研究需要更宽广的视野——日本语用论学会第十届年会报道.中国外语(2)：108-111。
段业辉等,2007,新闻语言比较研究.北京：商务印书馆。
富饶,2007,广告转述语言的语用认知分析.外语学刊(4)：73-76。
高俊霞,2006,引语类新闻标题的语用分析.洛阳师范学院学报(6)：92-94。
顾曰国,2002,导读In Austin, J. L. How to Do Things with Words. Beijing:Foreign Languages and Research Press.
何自然,2000,导读In Verschueren, J. Understanding Pragmatics. Beijing:Foreign Languages and Research Press.
何自然,2001,导读.In Sperber, D.& Wilson, D. Relevance:Cognition and Communication. Beijing:Foreign Languages and Research Press.
何自然,陈新仁,2004a,当代语用学.北京：北京大学出版社。
何自然,陈新仁,2004b,英语语用语法.北京：外语教学与研究出版社。
何自然,于国栋,1999,《语用学的理解》——Verschueren的新作评介.现代外语(4)：428-435。
何自然,张淑玲,2004,非真实性话语作为语用策略的顺应性研究.外国语(6)：25-31。
胡春阳,2007,话语分析：传播研究的新路径.上海：上海世纪出版集团。
黄成夫,2008,顺应理论在中国研究的回顾与展望.长沙大学学报(3)：82-84。
黄敏,2008,事实报道与话语倾向——新闻中引语的元语用学研究.新闻与传播研究(2)：10-16。
黄衍,2001, Reflections on theoretical pragmatics.外国语(1)：2-14。
黄莹,2006,我国政治话语体裁中人际意义的变迁——基于《人民日报》元旦社论的个案研究.广东外语外贸大学学报(2)：42-45。
黄友,2009,转述话语研究.未出版博士论文。复旦大学,上海。
贾中恒,2000,转述语及其语用功能初探.外国语(2)：35-41。
江国成,2010-5-25,发改委：“三年内免谈房产税”言论失实.新华每日电讯.2010-5-28, http://news.xinhuanet.com/mrdx/2010-05/25/content_13555959.htm
李福印,2006,语义学概论.北京：北京大学出版社。
李金凤,2008,也谈转述言语与新闻语篇的对话性.外语与翻译(3)：23-30
李曙光,2007,语篇对话性与英语书面新闻语篇分析.外语学刊(6)：109-114。
李元胜,2007,顺应论在中国的研究综述.成都大学学报(3)：123-126。
李悦娥,范宏雅,2002,话语分析.上海：上海外语教育出版社。
李战子,2002,话语的人际意义研究.上海：上海外语教育出版社。
廖巧云,2005a,合作·关联·顺应模式与交际成败.四川外语学院学报(2)：58-63。
廖巧云,2005b,C-R-A模式：言语交际的三维解释.成都：四川大学出版社。
廖巧云,2006,合作·关联·顺应模式再探.外语教学(3)：20-23。
廖益清,2006,英语投射型小句复合体的功能语言学分析.外语学刊(1)：59-67
刘建明,2005,新闻学前言——新闻学关注的11个焦点.北京：清华大学出版社。
刘其中,2003,净语良言——与青年记者谈新闻写作.北京：新华出版社。
刘森林,2007,语用策略.北京：社会科学文献出版社。
刘正光,吴志高,2000,选择—顺应：评Verschueren 《理解语用学》的理论基础.外语学刊(4)：84-90。
吕公礼,1999,Grice准则中的基本范畴及内在关系.外国语(1)：21-28。
吕公礼,2007,语言信息新论.北京：中国社会科学出版社。
马景秀,2008,新闻话语直接引语的“修辞—评价”机制.外语教学理论与实践(4)：77-81。
彭建武,2001,语言转述现象的认知语用分析.外语教学与研究(5)：359-366。
彭建武,2003,语言转述现象的认知研究.未出版博士论文。复旦大学,上海。
钱冠连,2000,语用学：统一连贯的理论框架——J. Verschueren《如何理解语用学》述评.外语教学与研究(3)：230-232。
钱冠连,霍永寿(译著),2003,语用学诠释.北京：清华大学出版社。
冉永平,2000,话语标记语的语用学研究综述.外语研究(4)：8-14。
冉永平,2002,元表征结构及其理解.外语与外语教学(4)：15-18。
冉永平,2004,言语交际的顺应-关联性分析.外语学刊(2)：28-33。
冉永平,2005,论语用元语言现象及其语用指向.外语学刊(6)：1-6。
冉永平,2007,语用学传统议题的深入研究新兴议题的不断拓展——第十届国际语用学研讨会述评.外语教学(6)：5-10。
申丹,1991,小说中人物话语的不同表达方式.外语教学与研究(1)：13-18。
中丹,1999,有关小说中人物话语表达形式的几点思考.外语与外语教学(1)：33-37。
申丹,2001,导读.In Leech, G. N.& M. H. Short, Style in fiction:A linguistic introduction to English fictional prose. Beijing:Foreign Languages and Research Press.
唐青叶,2004,学术语篇中的转述现象.外语与外语教学(2)：3-6。
汪吉,2001,对话中的省略和语用推理.外语研究(1)：59-62。
王俊杰,2006,英美报刊新闻作品选读.北京：中国广播电视出版社。
文秋芳等,2004,应用语言学研究方法与论文写作.北京：外语教学与研究出版社
吴珏,陈新仁,(2008),英汉新闻标题中的预设机制：调查与分析.外语教学(4)：30-34
谢朝群,陈新仁,2007,语用三论：关联论·顺应论·模因论.上海：上海教育出版社。
谢少万,2003,也评“顺应理论”.西安外国语学院学报(3)：9-11。
辛斌,1998,新闻语篇转述引语的批评性分析.外语教学与研究(2)：9-14。
辛斌,2000a,语篇互文性的批评性分析.苏州：苏州大学出版社。
辛斌,2000b,语篇互文性的语用分析.外语研究(3)：14-16。
辛斌,2002,批评性语篇分析方法论.外国语(6)：34-41。
辛斌,2005,批评语言学：理论与应用.上海：上海外语教育出版社。
辛斌,2006,《中国日报》和《纽约时报》中转述方式和消息来源的比较分析.外语与外语教学(3)：1-4。
辛斌,2007,转述言语与新闻语篇的对话性.外国语(4)：35-42。
辛斌,2009,引语研究：理论与问题.外语与外语教学(1)：1-6。
辛斌,李曙光,2010,汉英报纸新闻语篇互文性研究.北京：外语教学与研究出版社。
徐赳赳,1996,叙述文中直接引语分析.语言教学与研究(1)：52-66
徐盛桓,1996,信息状态研究.现代外语(2)：5-12。
徐涛,贾丽莉,2007,转述话语背后的意识操控——对两篇新闻报道的批判性话语分析.外国语言文学研究(1)：42-50
徐学平,2005,顺应论与语用距离.外国语言文学(2)：91-95。
杨保军,2006,新闻真实论.北京：中国人民大学出版社。
杨林秀,2007,《社会语言学——说话者选择研究》述评.当代语言学(3)：277-279。
杨平,2001,关联—顺应模式.外国语(6)：21-28。
曾蕾,2000a,从功能语言学角度看“投射”与语篇分析.外语与外语教学(11)：15-17。
曾蕾,2000b,英汉投射小句复合体的功能与语义分析.现代外语(2)：163-173。
曾庆香,2005,新闻叙事学.北京：中国广播电视出版社。
詹全旺,2009,新闻言语行为分析.安徽大学学报(1)：50-54。
张克定,2000,语用句法学论纲.外语与外语教学(10)：25-28。
张丽萍,2009,论法庭情境中话语标记语——从法庭话语中的“我(们)认为”谈起.南京理工大学学报社会科学版(1)：37-40。
张权,1994,试论指示词语的先用现象.现代外语(2)：5-12。
张荣建,1998,管领词的引述功能与话语功能.外国语(2)：48-52。
张荣建,2001,书面语和会话中的引语分析.外国语(2)：42-47。
张荣建,2007,英语引语的多视角分析.重庆师范大学学报(2)：103-107。
张艳君,2009,顺应论中的合作原则.外语学刊(5)：81-84。
章振邦,1988,新编英语语法.上海：上海译文出版社。
郑立华,2005,试论说话者角色的分离.外语学刊(5)：49-54。
周晓红,2008,直接引语：间接的意识形态——对两则新闻语篇中直接引语的批评性分析.中山大学研究生学刊(1)：123-128。
1 实施者(animator)负责话语的声音产出,作者(author)负责语言表达式,负责者(principal)承担话语产生的社会意义及其影响(Goffman,1981).
1 限于篇幅,本文暂不介绍有关汉语话语转述的相关研究,具体可见黄友(2009)。
1 有关新闻话语的研究路径,具体可见曾庆香(2005)。
1 有关顺应论的基本论点,参见本义第三章。
2 有关顺应论在国内的研究综述,参见李元胜(2007)、黄成大(2008)。
1 具体介绍参见谢朝鲜、陈新仁(2007,p.87)。
1 如:Mr Major warned yesterday of the dangers of Britain being left behind if a group of European Union members pushed ahead with a single currency. (The Independent on Sunday,'Blair Puts Labour Troops on Alert for Snap Election') (Semino et al.,1997, p.30)
Atawneth, A. M. (2009). The discourse of war in the Middle East:Analysis of media reporting. Journal of Pragmatics,2,263-278.
Austin, J. L. (2002). How to Do Things with Words. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Haberland, H. (1986). Reported speech in Yoruba. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), Direct Dpeech an Indirect Speech (pp.219-253). Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination:Four essays (M. Holquist, Ed., C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). Austin:University of Texas Press.
Bamgbose, A. (1986). Reported speech in Yoruba. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), Direct Speech and Indirect Speech (pp.77-97). Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
Banfield, A. (1973). Narrative Style and the Grammar of Direct and Indirect speech. Foundations of Language,1,1-39.
Banfield, A. (1978). Where Epistemology, Style, and Grammar Meet Literary History: The Development of Represented Speech and Thought. New Literary History,3, 415-454
Baynham, M. (1996). Direct speech:What's it doing in non-narrative discourse? Journal of Pragmatics,25,61-81.
Bell, A. (1991). The Language of News Media. Oxford:OUP.
Bolden, G. (2004). The quote and beyond:Defining boundaries of reported speech in conversational Russian. Journal of Pragmatics,36,1071-1118.
Blum-Kulka, S.& Olshtain, E. (1984). Requests and apologies:A cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns. Applied Linguistics,3,195-213.
Blyth, C. Jr.S. et al. (1990). I'm like,'say what?!':A new quotative in American oral narrative. American Speech,3,215-227.
Buttny, R. (1997). Reported speech in talking race on campus. Human Communication Research,23,477-5-6
Calsamiglia, H. Ferrero, C.L. (2003). Role and position of scientific voices:Reported speech in the media. Discourse Studies,2,147-173.
Cappelen, H.& E. Lepore. (1997). Varieties of quotation. Mind,106:429-450.
Carnap, R. (1947). Meaning and Necessity. Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press.
Carston, R. (2002). Thoughts and Utterances:The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Malden:Blackwell.
Carston, R. (2009, July). Metaphor, lexical pragmatics and metarepresentation. Paper presented at the 11th China Pragmatics conference, Wuhan University, China.
Christie, Christine. (1998). Rewriting rights:a relevance theoretical analysis of press constructions of sextual harassment and the responses of readers. Language and Literature,3,215-234
Church, A. (1950). On Carnap's analysis of statements of assertion and belief. Analysis, 10,97-99.
Clark, H. H.& Gerrig, R. J.(1990). Quotation as demonstration. Language,66,764-805
Clift, R. (2006). Indexing stance:Reported speech as an interactional evidential. Journal of Sociolinguistics,5,569-595.
Clift, R.& Holt, E. (2007). Introduction. In E. Holt & R. Clift (Ed.) Reporting Talk: Reported Speech in Interaction (pp.1-15). Cambridge:CUP.
Cohen, A.& Manion, L.(1991). Research Methods in Education (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.
Collins, D. E. (2000). Reanimated Voices:Speech Reporting in a Historical-pragmatic Perspective. John Benhamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia.
Coulmas, F. (1985). Direct and indirect speech:General problems and problems of Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics,9,41-63.
Coulmas, F. (1986a). Reported speech:Some general issues. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), Direct Speech and Indirect Speech (pp.1-28).Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
Coulmas, F. (Ed.). (1986b). Direct Speech and Indirect Speech. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2007). Accessing and accounting. In E. Holt & R. Clift (Ed.) Reporting Talk:Reported Speech in Interaction (pp.81-119). Cambridge:CUP.
Davidson, D. (1984). Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
de Brabanter, P. (Ed.). (2005). Hybrid Quotations. Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company
Dor, D. (2003). On newspaper headlines as relevance optimizers. Journal of Pragmatics,35,695-721.
Drew, P. (1998). Complaints about transgressions and misconduct. Research on Language and Social Interaction,31,295-325.
Edmonson, W. (1981). Spoken Discourse:A Model for Analysis. New York:Longman Group Limited.
Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis:The Critical Study of Language. London/New York:Longman.
Ferrara, A. (1980). An extended theory of speech acts. Journal of Pragmatics,12, 341-350.
Fetzer,A. (2006). "Minister, we will see how the public judges you."Media references in political interviews. Journal of pragmatics,38,180-195.
Fetzer, A. (2008). Theme zones in English media discourse:Forms and functions. Journal of Pragmatics,40,1543-1568
Fox, W. (1999). Writing the News:A Guide for Print Journalists (Li Bin, Trans.). Beijing:Xinhua Press.
Fraser, B. (1980). Conversational mitigation. Journal of Pragmatics,4,341-350.
Galatolo, R. (2007). Active voiceing in court. In E. Holt & R. Clift (Ed.) Reporting Talk: Reported Speech in Interaction (pp.195-220). Cambridge:CUP.
Givon, T. (1980). The binding hierarchy and the typology of complements. Studies in Language,5,333-78.
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame Analysis:An Essay in the Organization of Experience. York, Pennsylvania:Northeastern University Press.
Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of Talk. Oxford, England:Blackwell.
Green, G. (1996). Pragmatics and Natural Language Understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA Publishers.
Grice, H. P. (2002). Studies in the Way of Words. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Gumperz, J. G (1982). Discourse Strategies. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Gundel, J. K. et al (1993). Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language,69,274-307.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd ed.) [M]. London:Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K.& Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London:Longman.
Harman, I. P. (1990). Teaching indirect speech:Deixis points the way. ELT Journal,44, 230-238.
Harwood, N. (2009). An interview-based study of the functions of citations in academic writing across two disciplines. Journal of Pragmatics,41,497-518.
Holmes, J. (1984). Modifying illocutional force. Journal of pragmatics,8,345-365.
Holt, E. (1996). Reporting on talk:The use of direct reported speech in conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction,3,219-215.
Holt, E. (2000). Reporting and reacting:Concurrent responses to reported speech. Research on Language and Social Interaction,33,425-454.
Holt, E.& Clift, R. (2007). Reporting Talk:Reported Speech in Interaction. Cambridge: CUP.
Horn, L. R. (1984). Towards a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference:Q-based and R-based implicature. In D. Schiffrin (Ed.), Meaning, Form, and Use in Context: Linguistic Applications (pp.11-42). Washingtong, D. C.:Georgetown University Press.
Horn, L. R. (1988). Pragmatic theory. In F. Newmeyer (Ed.), Linguistics:The Cambridge Survey (Vols.1, pp.113-145). Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Ifantidow, E. (2009). Newspaper headlines and relevance:Ad hoc concepts in ad hoc contexts. Journal of Pragmatics,41,699-720.
Ikeo, R. (2009). An elaboration of the faithfulness claims in direct writing. Journal of Pragmatics,41,999-1016.
Jaffe, A. (2001). Review of Jef Verschueren's Understanding Pragmatics. Language in Society,30,104-106.
Jespersen, O. (1924). The Philosophy of Grammar. London:George Allen and Unwin.
Jespersen, O. (1954). A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. London: George Allen and Unwin.
Jucker, A.& Ziv,Y. (1998). Discourse Markers:Description and Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kuo S. H. (2001). Reported speech in Chinese political discourse. Discourse Studies,2, 181-202.
Lakoff, G.& Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh. New York:Basic Books.
Labov, W. (1972). Language in the Inner City. Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania Press.
Lauerbach, G. (2006).Discourse representation in political interviews:The construction of identities and relations through voicing and ventriloquizing. Journal of Pragmatics,38,195-215.
Leech, G N. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London:Longman.
Leech, G. N.& Short, M. H. (2001). Style in Fiction:A Linguistic Introduction to English Fictional Prose. Beijing:Foreign Languages and Research Press.(Original work published,1981)
Lehrer, A. (1989). Remembering and presenting prose:Quoted speech as a data source. Discourse Processes,12,105-125.
Levinson, S. (1979). Activity types and language. Linguistics,17,365-399.
Levinson, S. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge:CUP.
Levinson, S. (1987). Pragmatics and the grammar of anaphora. Journal of Linguistics, 23,379-434.
Li, C. (1986). Direct and indirect study:A functional study. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), Direct Speech and Indirect Speech (pp.29-45). Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
Lucy, J. (1993). A. Reflexive Language:Reported Speech and Metapragmatics. Cambridge:CUP.
Lyons, J. (1975). Deixis as the source of reference. In E. L. Keenan (Ed.), Formal Semantics of Natural Language (pp.61-83). Cambridge:CUP.
Macaulay, R. (2001). You're like'why not?':The quotative expressions of Glasgow adolescents. Journal of Sociolinguistics,1,3-21.
Mayes, P. (1990). Quotation in spoken English. Studies in Language,14,325-363.
Maynard, Senko K... (1997). Textual ventriloquism:quotation and the assumed voice in Japanese newspaper columns. Poetics,24,379-392.
McCawley, J. D.(1988).The Syntactic Phenomena of English. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
McHale, B. (1978). Free indirect discourse:A survey of recent accounts. PTL,3, 249-287.
Mey, J. L. (2001). Pragmatics:An Introduction. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Mushin, I. (2001). Japanese reportive evidentiality and the pragmatics of retelling. Journal of Pragmatics,33,1361-1390.
Musolff, A. (1995). Promising to end a war= language of peace? The rhetoric of allied news management in the Gulf War 1991. In Schaffner et al (Eds.), Language and Peace (pp.93-108). Dartmouth Publishing Co, Brookfield, Vt.
Myers, G. (1999). Functions of Reported Speech in Group Discussions. Applied Linguistics,20,376-401.
Noh, Mun-Ju (2000). Metarepresentation:A Relevance-theory Approach. John Benjamins Publishing Company/Amsterdam/Philadelphia.
Park Yujong. (2005). Interaction between grammar and multimodal resources:quoting different characters in Korean multiparty conversation, Discourse Studies,1, 79-104
Politis, P.& Kakavoulia, M. (2006). Direct discourse in the Greek press:From evidentiality to subjectivity. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses,19,345-363.
Quine, W. V. (1956). Quantifiers and propositional attitudes. Journal of Philosophy,6, 177-187.
Quine, W. V. (1960). Word and Object. Cambridge, MA:MIT press.
Quine, W. V. (1986). Philosophy of Logic (2nd ed.). Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Quirk R. et al. (1972). A Universal Grammar of English. London:Longman Group Limited.
Quirk, R. et al. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman Group Limited.
Recanati, F. (2001). Open quotation. Mind,110,637-687.
Redeker, G. (1991). Linguistic markers of discourse structure. Linguistics,29, 1139-1172.
Richards, J. et al. (2005). Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Richard, M. (1999). Propositional attitude. In Hale B.& Wright, C. (Eds.), A Companion to the Philosophy of Language (pp.197-226). BlackWell Publishing Ltd.
Saeed, J. I. (2003). Semantics (2nd ed.). UK:Blackwell Publishing.
Saka, P. (1998). Quotation and use-mention distinction. Mind,107,113-135.
Sbisa, M. (2001). Illocutional force and degrees of strength in language use. Journal of Pragmatics,33,1791-1814.
Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse Markers. New York:Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. (1979). Expression and Meaning:Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Semino E. et al. (1997).Using a corpus to test a model of speech and thought presentation. Poetics,25,17-43
Semino, E.& Short, M. (2004). Corpus Stylistics:Speech, Writing and Thought Presentation in a Corpus of English Writing. Rougledge, London.
Short, M. et al. (2002). Revisiting the notion of faithfulness in discourse presentation using a corpus approach. Language and Literature,4,325-355
Shukrun-Nagar, P. (2009). Quotation markers as intertextual codes in electoral propaganda, Text& Talk,4:459-480
Slembrouck, S. (1992). The parliamentary Hansard 'verbatim' report:The written construction of spoken discourse. Language and Literature,2,101-119.
Sleurs, K. et al. (2003). Constructing press releases, constructing quotations:A case study. Journal of Sociolinguistics,2,192-212.
Sperber, D.& Wilson, D. (2001). Relevance:Cognition and Communication. Beijing: Foreign Languages and Research Press. (Original work published,1995)
Sperber, D.& D.Wilson. (2007, July). Verbal metaphors. Paper presented at the 10th China Pragmatics conference, Nanjing University, China.
Sternberg, M.(1982a). Proteus in quotation-land:mimesis and the forms of reported discourse. Poetics Today,2,107-156.
Sternberg, M.(1982b). Point of view and the indirections of direct speech. Language and Style,1,67-117.
Tannen, D. (1986). Introducing Constructed Dialogue in Greek and American Conversational and Literary Narrative. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), Direct Speech and Indirect Speech (pp.311-332). Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
Tannen, D. (2007). Talking Voices:Repetition, Dialogue and Imagery in Conversational Discourse (2nd ed.). Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in Interaction:An Introduction to Pragmatics. New York: Longman.
Thompson, G. (1994). Reporting (Wang Zhiguang, Trans.). Beijing:Foreign Languages Press.
Thompson, G. (1996). Voices in the text:Discourse perspectives on language reports. Applied Linguistics,17,501-530.
Turner, K. (2002). A note on the neo-Gricean foundations of societal pragmatics. International Journal of pragmatics,12,1-17
van Dijk, T. A. (2003). News as Discourse (Zeng Qingxiang, Trans.). Beijing:Huaxia Press. (Original work published 1988)
Vandelanotte, L. (2004a). From representational to scopal'distancing indirect speech or thought':A cline of subjectification. Text,4,547-585.
Vandelanotte, L. (2004b). Deixis and grounding in speech and thought representation. Journal of Pragmatics,36,489-520。
Van der Henst, J. B. et al., (2002). Truthfulness and relevance in telling the time. Mind and Language,5,457-466.
Verschueren, J. (1985). International News Reporting:Metapragmatic Metaphors and the U-2. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins.
Verschueren, J. (1987). Pragmatics as a Theory of Linguistic Adaptation. Antwerp: International Pragmatics Association.
Verschueren, J. (2000). Understanding Pragmatics. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. (Original work published,1999)
Verschueren, J. (2011). Engaging with Language Use and Ideology:Pragmatic Guidelines for Empirical Ideology Research. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, forthcoming.
Verschueren, J.& Ostman, J.O. (2009). Key Notions for Pragmatics. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Vincent, D.& Perrin, L. (1999). On the narrative vs non-narrative functions of reported speech:A socio-pragmatic study. Journal of Sociolinguistics,3,291-313.
Volosinov, V. N. (1986). Marxism and the Philosophy of Language (L. Matejka & I. R. Titunik, Trans.). Cambridge:Harvard University Press.
Waugh, L. (1995). Reported speech in journalistic discourse:The relation of function and text. Text,1,129-173.
Weizman, E. (2006). Roles and identities in news interviews:The Israeli context. Journal of Pragmatics,38,154-179.
Wierzbick, A. (1974). The semantics of direct and indirect discourse. Papers in Linguistics,7,267-307.
Wilson, D.& Sperber, D. (1993). Linguistic form and relevance. Lingua 90,1-25.
Yule, G. et al. (1992). On reporting what was said. ELT Journal,3,245-251.
Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford:OUP.
Zipf, G. K. (1949). Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort:An Introduction to Human Ecology. New York:Hafner.
陈洁,徐晨,2006,新闻标题语的顺应性研究——《人民日报》国内版与海外版同一新闻事件的标题语比较.江汉大学学报(1)：88-92。
陈新仁,2001,试论语用解释的全释条件.现代外语(4)：378-389。
陈新仁,2004,会话信息过量现象的语用研究.西安：陕西师范大学出版社。
陈新仁,2007,论语用的真实性.外语与外语教学(9)：1-3。
陈新仁,2010,语。语言顺应论：问题与建议.语用学研究(第三辑).北京：高等教育出版社。
陈新仁,吴珏,2006,中国英语学习者对因果类话语标记语的使用情况——基于语料库的研究.国外外语教学(3)：38-41,封三。
陈新仁,余维,2008,语用学研究需要更宽广的视野——日本语用论学会第十届年会报道.中国外语(2)：108-111。
段业辉等,2007,新闻语言比较研究.北京：商务印书馆。
富饶,2007,广告转述语言的语用认知分析.外语学刊(4)：73-76。
高俊霞,2006,引语类新闻标题的语用分析.洛阳师范学院学报(6)：92-94。
顾曰国,2002,导读In Austin, J. L. How to Do Things with Words. Beijing:Foreign Languages and Research Press.
何自然,2000,导读In Verschueren, J. Understanding Pragmatics. Beijing:Foreign Languages and Research Press.
何自然,2001,导读.In Sperber, D.& Wilson, D. Relevance:Cognition and Communication. Beijing:Foreign Languages and Research Press.
何自然,陈新仁,2004a,当代语用学.北京：北京大学出版社。
何自然,陈新仁,2004b,英语语用语法.北京：外语教学与研究出版社。
何自然,于国栋,1999,《语用学的理解》——Verschueren的新作评介.现代外语(4)：428-435。
何自然,张淑玲,2004,非真实性话语作为语用策略的顺应性研究.外国语(6)：25-31。
胡春阳,2007,话语分析：传播研究的新路径.上海：上海世纪出版集团。
黄成夫,2008,顺应理论在中国研究的回顾与展望.长沙大学学报(3)：82-84。
黄敏,2008,事实报道与话语倾向——新闻中引语的元语用学研究.新闻与传播研究(2)：10-16。
黄衍,2001, Reflections on theoretical pragmatics.外国语(1)：2-14。
黄莹,2006,我国政治话语体裁中人际意义的变迁——基于《人民日报》元旦社论的个案研究.广东外语外贸大学学报(2)：42-45。
黄友,2009,转述话语研究.未出版博士论文。复旦大学,上海。
贾中恒,2000,转述语及其语用功能初探.外国语(2)：35-41。
江国成,2010-5-25,发改委：“三年内免谈房产税”言论失实.新华每日电讯.2010-5-28, http://news.xinhuanet.com/mrdx/2010-05/25/content_13555959.htm
李福印,2006,语义学概论.北京：北京大学出版社。
李金凤,2008,也谈转述言语与新闻语篇的对话性.外语与翻译(3)：23-30
李曙光,2007,语篇对话性与英语书面新闻语篇分析.外语学刊(6)：109-114。
李元胜,2007,顺应论在中国的研究综述.成都大学学报(3)：123-126。
李悦娥,范宏雅,2002,话语分析.上海：上海外语教育出版社。
李战子,2002,话语的人际意义研究.上海：上海外语教育出版社。
廖巧云,2005a,合作·关联·顺应模式与交际成败.四川外语学院学报(2)：58-63。
廖巧云,2005b,C-R-A模式：言语交际的三维解释.成都：四川大学出版社。
廖巧云,2006,合作·关联·顺应模式再探.外语教学(3)：20-23。
廖益清,2006,英语投射型小句复合体的功能语言学分析.外语学刊(1)：59-67
刘建明,2005,新闻学前言——新闻学关注的11个焦点.北京：清华大学出版社。
刘其中,2003,净语良言——与青年记者谈新闻写作.北京：新华出版社。
刘森林,2007,语用策略.北京：社会科学文献出版社。
刘正光,吴志高,2000,选择—顺应：评Verschueren 《理解语用学》的理论基础.外语学刊(4)：84-90。
吕公礼,1999,Grice准则中的基本范畴及内在关系.外国语(1)：21-28。
吕公礼,2007,语言信息新论.北京：中国社会科学出版社。
马景秀,2008,新闻话语直接引语的“修辞—评价”机制.外语教学理论与实践(4)：77-81。
彭建武,2001,语言转述现象的认知语用分析.外语教学与研究(5)：359-366。
彭建武,2003,语言转述现象的认知研究.未出版博士论文。复旦大学,上海。
钱冠连,2000,语用学：统一连贯的理论框架——J. Verschueren《如何理解语用学》述评.外语教学与研究(3)：230-232。
钱冠连,霍永寿(译著),2003,语用学诠释.北京：清华大学出版社。
冉永平,2000,话语标记语的语用学研究综述.外语研究(4)：8-14。
冉永平,2002,元表征结构及其理解.外语与外语教学(4)：15-18。
冉永平,2004,言语交际的顺应-关联性分析.外语学刊(2)：28-33。
冉永平,2005,论语用元语言现象及其语用指向.外语学刊(6)：1-6。
冉永平,2007,语用学传统议题的深入研究新兴议题的不断拓展——第十届国际语用学研讨会述评.外语教学(6)：5-10。
申丹,1991,小说中人物话语的不同表达方式.外语教学与研究(1)：13-18。
中丹,1999,有关小说中人物话语表达形式的几点思考.外语与外语教学(1)：33-37。
申丹,2001,导读.In Leech, G. N.& M. H. Short, Style in fiction:A linguistic introduction to English fictional prose. Beijing:Foreign Languages and Research Press.
唐青叶,2004,学术语篇中的转述现象.外语与外语教学(2)：3-6。
汪吉,2001,对话中的省略和语用推理.外语研究(1)：59-62。
王俊杰,2006,英美报刊新闻作品选读.北京：中国广播电视出版社。
文秋芳等,2004,应用语言学研究方法与论文写作.北京：外语教学与研究出版社
吴珏,陈新仁,(2008),英汉新闻标题中的预设机制：调查与分析.外语教学(4)：30-34
谢朝群,陈新仁,2007,语用三论：关联论·顺应论·模因论.上海：上海教育出版社。
谢少万,2003,也评“顺应理论”.西安外国语学院学报(3)：9-11。
辛斌,1998,新闻语篇转述引语的批评性分析.外语教学与研究(2)：9-14。
辛斌,2000a,语篇互文性的批评性分析.苏州：苏州大学出版社。
辛斌,2000b,语篇互文性的语用分析.外语研究(3)：14-16。
辛斌,2002,批评性语篇分析方法论.外国语(6)：34-41。
辛斌,2005,批评语言学：理论与应用.上海：上海外语教育出版社。
辛斌,2006,《中国日报》和《纽约时报》中转述方式和消息来源的比较分析.外语与外语教学(3)：1-4。
辛斌,2007,转述言语与新闻语篇的对话性.外国语(4)：35-42。
辛斌,2009,引语研究：理论与问题.外语与外语教学(1)：1-6。
辛斌,李曙光,2010,汉英报纸新闻语篇互文性研究.北京：外语教学与研究出版社。
徐赳赳,1996,叙述文中直接引语分析.语言教学与研究(1)：52-66
徐盛桓,1996,信息状态研究.现代外语(2)：5-12。
徐涛,贾丽莉,2007,转述话语背后的意识操控——对两篇新闻报道的批判性话语分析.外国语言文学研究(1)：42-50
徐学平,2005,顺应论与语用距离.外国语言文学(2)：91-95。
杨保军,2006,新闻真实论.北京：中国人民大学出版社。
杨林秀,2007,《社会语言学——说话者选择研究》述评.当代语言学(3)：277-279。
杨平,2001,关联—顺应模式.外国语(6)：21-28。
曾蕾,2000a,从功能语言学角度看“投射”与语篇分析.外语与外语教学(11)：15-17。
曾蕾,2000b,英汉投射小句复合体的功能与语义分析.现代外语(2)：163-173。
曾庆香,2005,新闻叙事学.北京：中国广播电视出版社。
詹全旺,2009,新闻言语行为分析.安徽大学学报(1)：50-54。
张克定,2000,语用句法学论纲.外语与外语教学(10)：25-28。
张丽萍,2009,论法庭情境中话语标记语——从法庭话语中的“我(们)认为”谈起.南京理工大学学报社会科学版(1)：37-40。
张权,1994,试论指示词语的先用现象.现代外语(2)：5-12。
张荣建,1998,管领词的引述功能与话语功能.外国语(2)：48-52。
张荣建,2001,书面语和会话中的引语分析.外国语(2)：42-47。
张荣建,2007,英语引语的多视角分析.重庆师范大学学报(2)：103-107。
张艳君,2009,顺应论中的合作原则.外语学刊(5)：81-84。
章振邦,1988,新编英语语法.上海：上海译文出版社。
郑立华,2005,试论说话者角色的分离.外语学刊(5)：49-54。
周晓红,2008,直接引语：间接的意识形态——对两则新闻语篇中直接引语的批评性分析.中山大学研究生学刊(1)：123-128。