深层回指的认知分析
|
摘要
传统上，回指被认为是建立在语言表层上的互指关系，受人称、性、数一致等句法规则的支配。从认知的角度来看，回指词的所指(即先行项)不一定是语篇的某一词或某一句法成分，但它必定是交际双方根据话语所建立的心理表征中突出的实体。本文采用这种认知的观点，以认知语言学中的图形背景分离理论、框架概念和心理完形为基础，对深层回指中的代词所指提出了三种分析方式，即“话题”分析、“激活”分析和“距离”分析。
在“话题”分析中，一段话语的“话题”通常被视为深层回指中代词的所指，这是由“话题”在交际双方根据话语所建立的心理表征中的突出性决定的。在“话题”分析中存在两个影响理解的因素，即“话题”的突出性和“话题的转移”。
在“激活”分析中，深层回指中的代词所指可以是由话语(或话语中的某一词)在交际双方的心理表征中激活的一个突出实体。在“激活”分析中也有两个影响理解的因素，即先行项的“引发”和足够的语境信息。
在“距离”分析中，代词倾向于指代话语中与其距离最近的实体，但先行项与代词之间的线性距离是一个较弱的因素，代词并不一定总是用于指代离它最近的实体，在这里，语义---逻辑分析也会影响对代词所指的理解。
对深层回指中的代词所指进行分析的这三种方式并不是彼此分离的，它们应该被视为一个整体。在分析代词深层回指的过程中，这三种方式应交替使用。此外，这三种方式存在一个共同的基础，即代词所指在交际双方根据话语所建立的心理表征中的突出性。
Anaphora is traditionally regarded as a syntactically controlled co-referential relationship on the surface level of language. It is dominated by the agreement of person, gender, number as well as other syntactic rules. This thesis takes a cognitive point of view, in which anaphor is used to refer to a psychologically prominent entity out of the surface level of language. Under this viewpoint, and based on figure/ground segregation, notion of frame and principle of proximity within cognitive linguistics, this thesis suggests three ways of analyzing pronominal deep anaphora, namely, "topic" analysis, "activation" analysis and "distance" analysis.
In "topic" analysis, the topic of a discourse tends to be construed as the antecedent of a pronoun in deep anaphora because of its prominence in the interlocutors' mental representation, as determined by figure/ground segregation. There are two factors that will affect the felicity of the topicalisation of referent in deep anaphora, namely, the prominence of the referent in the interlocutors' mental representation and the shift of topic in discourse.
In "activation" analysis, the antecedent of a pronoun in deep anaphora can be a salient entity in the interlocutors' mental representation, which is activated by the discourse (or a word in the discourse) in line with notion of frame. There are two factors that will affect the accessibility of entities in "activation" analysis, namely, the existence of an "antecedent-trigger" and sufficient contextual information.
In "distance" analysis, a pronoun tends to refer to the nearest entity according to the principle of proximity in psychological gestalt. Yet the linear distance in the discourse between a pronoun and its antecedent is a relatively weak factor. The pronoun is not always used to refer to the nearest entity in a discourse. There is another factor that will affect "distance" analysis of deep anaphora. That is semantic-logical analysis.
The three ways of analyzing deep anaphora suggested in this thesis are not separated from one another. They should be considered as a whole. While analyzing deep anaphora, the three ways should be used alternately. The common basis of the three ways is the prominence of the referent in the interlocutors' mental representation built in line with discourse.
在“话题”分析中，一段话语的“话题”通常被视为深层回指中代词的所指，这是由“话题”在交际双方根据话语所建立的心理表征中的突出性决定的。在“话题”分析中存在两个影响理解的因素，即“话题”的突出性和“话题的转移”。
在“激活”分析中，深层回指中的代词所指可以是由话语(或话语中的某一词)在交际双方的心理表征中激活的一个突出实体。在“激活”分析中也有两个影响理解的因素，即先行项的“引发”和足够的语境信息。
在“距离”分析中，代词倾向于指代话语中与其距离最近的实体，但先行项与代词之间的线性距离是一个较弱的因素，代词并不一定总是用于指代离它最近的实体，在这里，语义---逻辑分析也会影响对代词所指的理解。
对深层回指中的代词所指进行分析的这三种方式并不是彼此分离的，它们应该被视为一个整体。在分析代词深层回指的过程中，这三种方式应交替使用。此外，这三种方式存在一个共同的基础，即代词所指在交际双方根据话语所建立的心理表征中的突出性。
Anaphora is traditionally regarded as a syntactically controlled co-referential relationship on the surface level of language. It is dominated by the agreement of person, gender, number as well as other syntactic rules. This thesis takes a cognitive point of view, in which anaphor is used to refer to a psychologically prominent entity out of the surface level of language. Under this viewpoint, and based on figure/ground segregation, notion of frame and principle of proximity within cognitive linguistics, this thesis suggests three ways of analyzing pronominal deep anaphora, namely, "topic" analysis, "activation" analysis and "distance" analysis.
In "topic" analysis, the topic of a discourse tends to be construed as the antecedent of a pronoun in deep anaphora because of its prominence in the interlocutors' mental representation, as determined by figure/ground segregation. There are two factors that will affect the felicity of the topicalisation of referent in deep anaphora, namely, the prominence of the referent in the interlocutors' mental representation and the shift of topic in discourse.
In "activation" analysis, the antecedent of a pronoun in deep anaphora can be a salient entity in the interlocutors' mental representation, which is activated by the discourse (or a word in the discourse) in line with notion of frame. There are two factors that will affect the accessibility of entities in "activation" analysis, namely, the existence of an "antecedent-trigger" and sufficient contextual information.
In "distance" analysis, a pronoun tends to refer to the nearest entity according to the principle of proximity in psychological gestalt. Yet the linear distance in the discourse between a pronoun and its antecedent is a relatively weak factor. The pronoun is not always used to refer to the nearest entity in a discourse. There is another factor that will affect "distance" analysis of deep anaphora. That is semantic-logical analysis.
The three ways of analyzing deep anaphora suggested in this thesis are not separated from one another. They should be considered as a whole. While analyzing deep anaphora, the three ways should be used alternately. The common basis of the three ways is the prominence of the referent in the interlocutors' mental representation built in line with discourse.
引文
Ariel, M. 1988. "Referring and Accessibility". Journal of Linguistics 24, 65-87
Ariel, M. 1990. Accessing Noun-Phrase Antecedents. London: Routledge
Bosch, P. 1983. Agreement and Anaphora. London: Academic Press Inc. (London) LTD
Brown, G and G. Yule. 2000. Discourse Analysis. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press
Bussmann, H. 2000. Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press
Chafe, W. 1987. "Cognitive Constraints on Information Flow." Coherence and Grounding in Discourse, 21-51
Cornish, F.1996. " 'Antecedentless' Anaphors: Deixis, Anaphora, or What? Some Evidence From English and French." Journal of Linguistics 32, 19-41
Crystal, D. 1991. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Beijing: World Publishing Corporation
Cullingford, R.E. 1986. Natural Language Processing. Rowman & Littlefield
Fillmore, Charles C. 1975. "An Alternative to Checklist Theories of Meaning." Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, 123-31
Fillmore, Charles C. 1985. "Frames and the Semantics of Understanding." Quaderni
di Semantica 6, 222-54
Fillmore, Charles C. and Beryl T. Atkins. 1992. "Toward a Frame-based Lexicon: The Semantics of RISK and its Neighbors." Frames, Fields and Contrasts, 75-102
Fox, B.1987. "Anaphora in Popular Written English Narratives." Coherence and Grounding in Discourse, 157-74
Garnharn, A. 2001. Mental Models and the Interpretation of Anaphora. East Sussex: Psychology Press Ltd
Givon, T. 1983. Topic Continuity in Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
Givon, T. 1989. The Grammar of Referential Coherence as Mental Processing Instructions. University of Oregon
Greene, S. B., Gerrig, R. J., Mckoon, G. & Ratcliff, R. 1994. "Unheralded Pronouns and Management by Common Ground." Journal of Memory and Language 33, 511-526
Halliday, M.A.K. 2000. Introduction to Functional Grammar. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press
Halliday, M.A.K. & Hasan, R. 2001. Cohesion in English. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press
Hankamer, J & Sag, I. 1976. "Deep and Surface Anaphora". Linguistic Inquiry 7, 391-426
Kenworthy, J. 1991. An Introduction to Modern Linguistics. New York: Longman
Group Inc
Lakoff, G. 1976. Pronouns and Reference. New York: Academic Press
Langacker, R.W.1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol 1." Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press
Langacker, R.W.1991. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol 2." Descriptive Application. Stanford: Stanford University Press
Levinson, S.C. 2001. Pragmatics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press
Murphy, G.L.1985a. "Psychological Explanations of Deep and Surface Anaphora". Journal of Pragmatics 9, 785-813
Murphy, G. L. 1985b. "Processes of Understanding Anaphora". Journal of Memory and Language 24, 290-303
Reinhart, T. 1983. Anaphora and Semantic Interpretation. Chicago: Chicago University Press
Richards, J. C., Platt, J. &Platt, H.2000. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching & Applied Linguistics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press
Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. 2001. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press
Tasmowski-de Ryck, L. & Verluyten, P.1982. "Linguistic Control of Pronouns." Journal of Semantics 1,323-346
Tasmowski-de Ryck, L. & Verluyten, P.1985. "Control Mechanisms of Anaphora." Journal of Semantics 5, 341-370
Ungerer, F. & Schmid, H. J. 2001. An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press
Van Hoek, K. 1995. "Conceptual Reference Points: A Cognitive Grammar Account of Pronominal Anaphora Constraints". Language 71, 310-340
Van Hoek, K. 1997. Anaphora and Conceptual Structure. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press
Ward, G., Richard, S. & Gail, M. 1991. "A Pragmatic analysis of So-called Anaphoric Islands". Language 67, 439-474
Watt, W.1975. "The Indiscreteness with Which Impenetrables are Penetrated." Lingua 37, 95-128
Webber, B. L. 1979. A Formal Approach to Discourse Anaphora. New York: Garland Press
Williams, E.S. 1977. "On Deep and Surface Anaphora". Linguistic Inquiry 8, 692-696
Yule, G. 1979. "Pragmatically Controlled Anaphora". Lingua 49, 127-135
21st Century. May 17, 2001. Beijing: China Daily Publishing House.
21st Century. Oct 30, 2003. Beijing: China Daily Publishing House.
Charles Dickens. 1993. David Copperfield.北京：外文出版社
郭群英，毛卓亮．1998．《英国文学教程》．石家庄：河北教育出版社
胡壮麟．1994．《语篇的衔接与连贯》．上海：上海外语教育出版社
黄国文．1988．《语篇分析概要》．长沙：湖南教育出版社
李宜燮，常耀信．1991．《美国文学选读》．天津：南开大学出版社
秦洪武．2001．“第三人称代词在深层回指中的应用分析”．《当代语言学》第1期，55-64
熊学亮．1999．《认知语用学概论》．上海：上海外语教育出版社
赵艳芳．2001．《认知语言学概论》．上海：上海外语教育出版社
Ariel, M. 1990. Accessing Noun-Phrase Antecedents. London: Routledge
Bosch, P. 1983. Agreement and Anaphora. London: Academic Press Inc. (London) LTD
Brown, G and G. Yule. 2000. Discourse Analysis. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press
Bussmann, H. 2000. Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press
Chafe, W. 1987. "Cognitive Constraints on Information Flow." Coherence and Grounding in Discourse, 21-51
Cornish, F.1996. " 'Antecedentless' Anaphors: Deixis, Anaphora, or What? Some Evidence From English and French." Journal of Linguistics 32, 19-41
Crystal, D. 1991. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Beijing: World Publishing Corporation
Cullingford, R.E. 1986. Natural Language Processing. Rowman & Littlefield
Fillmore, Charles C. 1975. "An Alternative to Checklist Theories of Meaning." Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, 123-31
Fillmore, Charles C. 1985. "Frames and the Semantics of Understanding." Quaderni
di Semantica 6, 222-54
Fillmore, Charles C. and Beryl T. Atkins. 1992. "Toward a Frame-based Lexicon: The Semantics of RISK and its Neighbors." Frames, Fields and Contrasts, 75-102
Fox, B.1987. "Anaphora in Popular Written English Narratives." Coherence and Grounding in Discourse, 157-74
Garnharn, A. 2001. Mental Models and the Interpretation of Anaphora. East Sussex: Psychology Press Ltd
Givon, T. 1983. Topic Continuity in Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
Givon, T. 1989. The Grammar of Referential Coherence as Mental Processing Instructions. University of Oregon
Greene, S. B., Gerrig, R. J., Mckoon, G. & Ratcliff, R. 1994. "Unheralded Pronouns and Management by Common Ground." Journal of Memory and Language 33, 511-526
Halliday, M.A.K. 2000. Introduction to Functional Grammar. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press
Halliday, M.A.K. & Hasan, R. 2001. Cohesion in English. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press
Hankamer, J & Sag, I. 1976. "Deep and Surface Anaphora". Linguistic Inquiry 7, 391-426
Kenworthy, J. 1991. An Introduction to Modern Linguistics. New York: Longman
Group Inc
Lakoff, G. 1976. Pronouns and Reference. New York: Academic Press
Langacker, R.W.1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol 1." Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press
Langacker, R.W.1991. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol 2." Descriptive Application. Stanford: Stanford University Press
Levinson, S.C. 2001. Pragmatics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press
Murphy, G.L.1985a. "Psychological Explanations of Deep and Surface Anaphora". Journal of Pragmatics 9, 785-813
Murphy, G. L. 1985b. "Processes of Understanding Anaphora". Journal of Memory and Language 24, 290-303
Reinhart, T. 1983. Anaphora and Semantic Interpretation. Chicago: Chicago University Press
Richards, J. C., Platt, J. &Platt, H.2000. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching & Applied Linguistics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press
Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. 2001. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press
Tasmowski-de Ryck, L. & Verluyten, P.1982. "Linguistic Control of Pronouns." Journal of Semantics 1,323-346
Tasmowski-de Ryck, L. & Verluyten, P.1985. "Control Mechanisms of Anaphora." Journal of Semantics 5, 341-370
Ungerer, F. & Schmid, H. J. 2001. An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press
Van Hoek, K. 1995. "Conceptual Reference Points: A Cognitive Grammar Account of Pronominal Anaphora Constraints". Language 71, 310-340
Van Hoek, K. 1997. Anaphora and Conceptual Structure. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press
Ward, G., Richard, S. & Gail, M. 1991. "A Pragmatic analysis of So-called Anaphoric Islands". Language 67, 439-474
Watt, W.1975. "The Indiscreteness with Which Impenetrables are Penetrated." Lingua 37, 95-128
Webber, B. L. 1979. A Formal Approach to Discourse Anaphora. New York: Garland Press
Williams, E.S. 1977. "On Deep and Surface Anaphora". Linguistic Inquiry 8, 692-696
Yule, G. 1979. "Pragmatically Controlled Anaphora". Lingua 49, 127-135
21st Century. May 17, 2001. Beijing: China Daily Publishing House.
21st Century. Oct 30, 2003. Beijing: China Daily Publishing House.
Charles Dickens. 1993. David Copperfield.北京：外文出版社
郭群英，毛卓亮．1998．《英国文学教程》．石家庄：河北教育出版社
胡壮麟．1994．《语篇的衔接与连贯》．上海：上海外语教育出版社
黄国文．1988．《语篇分析概要》．长沙：湖南教育出版社
李宜燮，常耀信．1991．《美国文学选读》．天津：南开大学出版社
秦洪武．2001．“第三人称代词在深层回指中的应用分析”．《当代语言学》第1期，55-64
熊学亮．1999．《认知语用学概论》．上海：上海外语教育出版社
赵艳芳．2001．《认知语言学概论》．上海：上海外语教育出版社