名词化现象与英语书面语体正式程度关系之功能解析
|
摘要
韩礼德的语法隐喻理论不仅为隐喻理论研究开辟了新的视野，同时也为语言学理论的丰富和发展作出了很大贡献。许多西方语言学家都对该理论给予了极大重视，并把它运用到诸多领域。然而，在中国，对语法隐喻的研究才刚刚起步，而对语法隐喻现象与语体之间关系的研究则更少。本文试图涉足语法隐喻理论并运用这一理论进行语体研究。
本文旨在运用语法隐喻理论分析名词化现象与英语书面语篇中语体正式程度的关系。全文共由六大部分组成。
第一部分，简要介绍语体及名词化并陈述本文的写作目的。
语体研究是语言研究的一个主要方面。功能主义语言学认为语体的正式程度与语法隐喻有着密切联系。因此，作为实现语法隐喻的主要手段之一，名词化与语体也有着某种联系。弄清楚两者的内在联系对英语教学及翻译实践有很大帮助。但是，迄今为止，国内这方面的研究还不甚多，也不够系统。为此，本文作者试图在这方面作一尝试性探讨。
第二部分，介绍语体正式性的概念及其识别。
语体的正式性是个连续体。语体的正式程度在词汇选择、语法层面都有所体现。功能主义语言学认为名词化的出现频率能够显示语体正式程度的高低。
第三部分，从功能语法角度探讨名词化现象，主要论述了名词化的定义、实质，名词化结构的语义特征及其识别。
名词化是把句子中的动词或形容词转换为名词或名词词组，从而使名词或名词词组获得动词或形容词的意义而具有名词的语法功能。名词化结构的双重语义特征为其识别提供了依据。
第四部分，阐述名词化现象与语体正式程度的关系。
名词化是英语书面语篇的基本特征。名词化结构在各种功能变体
中都有不同程度的运用。名词化结构的使用可以使语体获得更正式、
严肃、客观的效果。因此，其出现频率显示了语体正式程度。
第五部分，以科技语体为例，探寻名词化与语体正式程度的关系。
文章选取了科技文献和科普文章两种正式程度不同的科技语篇作
为研究对象，并对这些语篇中名词化出现频率进行了对比分析。结果
表明，名词化的出现频率的确可以体现语体正式程度的高低。
第六部分，总结全文。
文中的理论论证与实践对比都显示出名词化结构的使用与语篇语
体的正式程度有着密切联系。根据名词化结构的出现频率来预测语篇
的正式程度是可行的。
文章最后，作者指出这篇论文只是运用功能语法理论进行语体研
究的一个初步尝试，许多问题还有待于进一步研究。
Halliday's theory of grammatical metaphor not only opens up a whole new realm of study on metaphor, but contributes to the development of linguistics as well. Many western linguists have paid much attention to this theory and applied it in many fields. However, in China, the study of grammatical metaphor is just at a preliminary stage, and even seldom seen the study of stylistic variations on the basis of the theory of grammatical metaphor. This paper purports to explore into the theory and then apply it in the study of stylistic variations of texts.
The purpose of this thesis is, as the title indicates, to analyze the relationship between nominalization and formality in English written texts. The whole thesis consists of six parts.
Part I presents a brief introduction to stylistic variation and nominalization, and then states the writing purpose of this thesis.
A classical issue in the study of language is the measurement of stylistic variation. Systemic-functional linguistics maintains that the formal features of a text are closely related to grammatical metaphors. Thus, as a major resource for creating grammatical metaphors, nominalization is also, to some extent, related to text formality. It will be helpful for English teaching and learning as well for the practice of translating in China to make clear about the relationship between nominalization and text formality. However, the work has rarely been done so far. So in this paper, the author attempts to make a tentative study of this topic.
Part II is a brief discussion of formality of language and its measurement.
Formality is a continuum. The degree of text formality can be demonstrated by the selection of words and grammatical structures. Systemic-functional linguists maintain that the frequency of the occurrence of nominalization indicates the formality degree of a text.
Part III is an exploration into nominalization from a functional perspective, focusing on the definition, the nature, the semantic feature and
the detection of nominalization.
Nominalization is a type of grammatical metaphor, i.e. the use of a nominal form to express a process meaning (congruently worded as verbs) or a property meaning (congruently worded as adjectives). Nominalized structures are of double semantic features, and this provides the basis for the detection of them.
Part IV expounds the relationship between nominalization and text formality.
Nominalization is the basic characteristic of English written texts and is applied, more or less, in different functional varieties. The application of nominalization makes the texts more formal, more solemn and more objective. Thus, the frequency of the occurrence of nominalization in a text may indicate its degree of formality.
Part V explores the relationship between nominalization and formality with specific reference to scientific writings.
Texts of two scientific subgenres, the scientific literatures and the popular science articles which differ in degree of formality, are selected and investigated here. The result of the comparative study shows that the frequency of the occurrence of nominalization can be seen as an indicator of degree of text formality.
Part VI is the conclusion.
The theoretical analysis, together with the practical investigation suggest that the application of nominalization is closely related to the formality degree of the texts. It is feasible to predict the formality degree of a text in the light of the frequency of the occurrence of nominalization.
At the end of the paper, the author points out that this thesis is a tentative study of stylistic variations from a functional perspective. Much work needs to be done in this respect in the future.
本文旨在运用语法隐喻理论分析名词化现象与英语书面语篇中语体正式程度的关系。全文共由六大部分组成。
第一部分，简要介绍语体及名词化并陈述本文的写作目的。
语体研究是语言研究的一个主要方面。功能主义语言学认为语体的正式程度与语法隐喻有着密切联系。因此，作为实现语法隐喻的主要手段之一，名词化与语体也有着某种联系。弄清楚两者的内在联系对英语教学及翻译实践有很大帮助。但是，迄今为止，国内这方面的研究还不甚多，也不够系统。为此，本文作者试图在这方面作一尝试性探讨。
第二部分，介绍语体正式性的概念及其识别。
语体的正式性是个连续体。语体的正式程度在词汇选择、语法层面都有所体现。功能主义语言学认为名词化的出现频率能够显示语体正式程度的高低。
第三部分，从功能语法角度探讨名词化现象，主要论述了名词化的定义、实质，名词化结构的语义特征及其识别。
名词化是把句子中的动词或形容词转换为名词或名词词组，从而使名词或名词词组获得动词或形容词的意义而具有名词的语法功能。名词化结构的双重语义特征为其识别提供了依据。
第四部分，阐述名词化现象与语体正式程度的关系。
名词化是英语书面语篇的基本特征。名词化结构在各种功能变体
中都有不同程度的运用。名词化结构的使用可以使语体获得更正式、
严肃、客观的效果。因此，其出现频率显示了语体正式程度。
第五部分，以科技语体为例，探寻名词化与语体正式程度的关系。
文章选取了科技文献和科普文章两种正式程度不同的科技语篇作
为研究对象，并对这些语篇中名词化出现频率进行了对比分析。结果
表明，名词化的出现频率的确可以体现语体正式程度的高低。
第六部分，总结全文。
文中的理论论证与实践对比都显示出名词化结构的使用与语篇语
体的正式程度有着密切联系。根据名词化结构的出现频率来预测语篇
的正式程度是可行的。
文章最后，作者指出这篇论文只是运用功能语法理论进行语体研
究的一个初步尝试，许多问题还有待于进一步研究。
Halliday's theory of grammatical metaphor not only opens up a whole new realm of study on metaphor, but contributes to the development of linguistics as well. Many western linguists have paid much attention to this theory and applied it in many fields. However, in China, the study of grammatical metaphor is just at a preliminary stage, and even seldom seen the study of stylistic variations on the basis of the theory of grammatical metaphor. This paper purports to explore into the theory and then apply it in the study of stylistic variations of texts.
The purpose of this thesis is, as the title indicates, to analyze the relationship between nominalization and formality in English written texts. The whole thesis consists of six parts.
Part I presents a brief introduction to stylistic variation and nominalization, and then states the writing purpose of this thesis.
A classical issue in the study of language is the measurement of stylistic variation. Systemic-functional linguistics maintains that the formal features of a text are closely related to grammatical metaphors. Thus, as a major resource for creating grammatical metaphors, nominalization is also, to some extent, related to text formality. It will be helpful for English teaching and learning as well for the practice of translating in China to make clear about the relationship between nominalization and text formality. However, the work has rarely been done so far. So in this paper, the author attempts to make a tentative study of this topic.
Part II is a brief discussion of formality of language and its measurement.
Formality is a continuum. The degree of text formality can be demonstrated by the selection of words and grammatical structures. Systemic-functional linguists maintain that the frequency of the occurrence of nominalization indicates the formality degree of a text.
Part III is an exploration into nominalization from a functional perspective, focusing on the definition, the nature, the semantic feature and
the detection of nominalization.
Nominalization is a type of grammatical metaphor, i.e. the use of a nominal form to express a process meaning (congruently worded as verbs) or a property meaning (congruently worded as adjectives). Nominalized structures are of double semantic features, and this provides the basis for the detection of them.
Part IV expounds the relationship between nominalization and text formality.
Nominalization is the basic characteristic of English written texts and is applied, more or less, in different functional varieties. The application of nominalization makes the texts more formal, more solemn and more objective. Thus, the frequency of the occurrence of nominalization in a text may indicate its degree of formality.
Part V explores the relationship between nominalization and formality with specific reference to scientific writings.
Texts of two scientific subgenres, the scientific literatures and the popular science articles which differ in degree of formality, are selected and investigated here. The result of the comparative study shows that the frequency of the occurrence of nominalization can be seen as an indicator of degree of text formality.
Part VI is the conclusion.
The theoretical analysis, together with the practical investigation suggest that the application of nominalization is closely related to the formality degree of the texts. It is feasible to predict the formality degree of a text in the light of the frequency of the occurrence of nominalization.
At the end of the paper, the author points out that this thesis is a tentative study of stylistic variations from a functional perspective. Much work needs to be done in this respect in the future.
引文
1． Butt,David & Rhondda Fahey & Sue Spinks & Colin Yollop.(1995) .Using functional grammar: an explorer's guide.Sydney: National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research,Macquarie University.
2． Halliday,M.A.K.(1978) .Language as social semiotic: the social interpretation of language and meaning.London: Edward Arnold.
3． Halliday,M.A.K.(1979b) (with Ruquaiya Hasan).Cohesion in English.London: Longman.
4． Halliday,M.A.K.& Ququaiya Hasan (1991) Language,context and text: aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5． Halliday,M.A.K.(1994) An introduction to functional grammar.London:Edward Arnold.
6． Hernanaez Jose Ignacio Albentosa." Distribution of information,objectivity and prestige in British up-markets: a case study of the Gardian Weekly".Universidad de Castilla La Mancha.On-line.Available from jialben@.vpa-cv.uclm.cs
7． Heylighen Francis & Fewaele Jean-Marc."Formality of language: definition and measurement".23 June.1996 On-line.Available from http://pcp.lanl.gov/Papers/Formality.html
8． Kies.Daniel "The grammatical foundations of style: final matters".Modern English Grammar English 126． 9 Jan.2000． On-line.Available from http// papyr.com/hypertextbooks/engl_126/style3． htm
9． Thompson,Geoff.(1996) Introducing functional grammar.Liverpool: University of Liverpool.
10． Unsworth Len."The nominal group: Nouns-more than the name of Things".Language and Literacy across the Cirriculum-Session6． 9 Jan.2000． On-line.Available from http://www.edfac.usyd.edu.au/staff/unswortl/EDUP3022Session6．
html
11．陈治业，1991，“科技英语的文体特点”，《外语教学》第1期。
12．程雨民，2000，《英语语体学》，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
13．范文芳，1996，“语法隐喻对语篇阅读难易程度的影响”，《北京大学学报》(外语语言文学专刊)。
14．范文芳，1999，“名词化隐喻的语篇衔接功能”，《外语研究》第1期。
15．范文芳，2000，“英语语气隐喻”，《外语与外语教学》第4期。
16．范文芳，2001，《语法隐喻理论研究》，北京：外语教学与研究出版社。
17．冯树鉴，1991，“科技翻译中文体之运用”，《外语教学》第3期
18．顾玉兰，1993，“谈和概念的内涵及汉译问题”，《外语研究》第1期。
19．胡壮麟，1984，“韩礼德的语言观”，《外语教学与研究》第1期。
20．胡壮麟，刘润清，李延福，1988，《语言学教程》，北京大学出版社。
21．胡壮麟，朱永生，张德禄，1989，《系统功能语法概论》，湖南教育出版社。
22．胡壮麟，1990b，《语言系统与功能》，北京大学出版社。
23．胡壮麟，1991，“功能主义纵横谈”，《外国语》第3期。
24．胡壮麟，1996，“语法隐喻”，《外语教学与研究》第4期。
25．胡壮麟，方琰，1997，《功能语言学在中国的进展》。北京：清华大学出版社。
26．胡壮麟，2000，“评语法隐喻的韩礼德模式”，《外语教学与研究》第2期。
27．侯维瑞，1988，《英语语体》，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
28．刘世生，1994，“系统功能理论对现代文体学的影响”，《外国语》第一期。
29．秦秀白，1990，《文体学概论》，湖南教育出版社。
30．束定芳，1996，“试论现代隐喻学的研究目标、方法和任务”，《外国语》第2期。
31．束定芳，2000，“论隐喻产生的认知、心理和语言原因”，《外语学刊》第2期。
32．王德春，2000，《语言学概论》，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
33．肖建安，王志军，2000“名物化结构与功能及变体特征”，《外语与外语教学》第6期。
34．许力生，1997，“当代语体研究的不同模式与取向”，《外国语》第5期。
35．严世清，1995，“隐喻理论史探”，《外国语》第5期。
36．杨丰宁，1996，“名词化现象及其原因”，《外语教学》第3期。
37．杨炳钧，尹明祥，2000，“系统功能语法核心思想对语言教学的指导意义”，《外语学刊》第3期。
38．杨信彰，1995，“英语书面语体中的词汇密度特征”，《解放军外语学院学报》第3期。
39．杨信彰，1998，“隐喻的两种解释”，《外语与外语教学》第10期。
40．张德禄，1993，“科技英语的语言特色”，《山东外语教学》第1期。
41．朱永生，1993，《语言、语篇、语境》北京：清华大学出版社。
42．朱永生，1994，“英语中的语法比喻现象”，《外国语》第1期。
43．朱永生，严世清，2000，“语法隐喻理论的理据和贡献”，《外语教学与研究》第2期。
44．祝畹瑾，2001，《社会语言学概论》，湖南教育出版社。
2． Halliday,M.A.K.(1978) .Language as social semiotic: the social interpretation of language and meaning.London: Edward Arnold.
3． Halliday,M.A.K.(1979b) (with Ruquaiya Hasan).Cohesion in English.London: Longman.
4． Halliday,M.A.K.& Ququaiya Hasan (1991) Language,context and text: aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5． Halliday,M.A.K.(1994) An introduction to functional grammar.London:Edward Arnold.
6． Hernanaez Jose Ignacio Albentosa." Distribution of information,objectivity and prestige in British up-markets: a case study of the Gardian Weekly".Universidad de Castilla La Mancha.On-line.Available from jialben@.vpa-cv.uclm.cs
7． Heylighen Francis & Fewaele Jean-Marc."Formality of language: definition and measurement".23 June.1996 On-line.Available from http://pcp.lanl.gov/Papers/Formality.html
8． Kies.Daniel "The grammatical foundations of style: final matters".Modern English Grammar English 126． 9 Jan.2000． On-line.Available from http// papyr.com/hypertextbooks/engl_126/style3． htm
9． Thompson,Geoff.(1996) Introducing functional grammar.Liverpool: University of Liverpool.
10． Unsworth Len."The nominal group: Nouns-more than the name of Things".Language and Literacy across the Cirriculum-Session6． 9 Jan.2000． On-line.Available from http://www.edfac.usyd.edu.au/staff/unswortl/EDUP3022Session6．
html
11．陈治业，1991，“科技英语的文体特点”，《外语教学》第1期。
12．程雨民，2000，《英语语体学》，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
13．范文芳，1996，“语法隐喻对语篇阅读难易程度的影响”，《北京大学学报》(外语语言文学专刊)。
14．范文芳，1999，“名词化隐喻的语篇衔接功能”，《外语研究》第1期。
15．范文芳，2000，“英语语气隐喻”，《外语与外语教学》第4期。
16．范文芳，2001，《语法隐喻理论研究》，北京：外语教学与研究出版社。
17．冯树鉴，1991，“科技翻译中文体之运用”，《外语教学》第3期
18．顾玉兰，1993，“谈和概念的内涵及汉译问题”，《外语研究》第1期。
19．胡壮麟，1984，“韩礼德的语言观”，《外语教学与研究》第1期。
20．胡壮麟，刘润清，李延福，1988，《语言学教程》，北京大学出版社。
21．胡壮麟，朱永生，张德禄，1989，《系统功能语法概论》，湖南教育出版社。
22．胡壮麟，1990b，《语言系统与功能》，北京大学出版社。
23．胡壮麟，1991，“功能主义纵横谈”，《外国语》第3期。
24．胡壮麟，1996，“语法隐喻”，《外语教学与研究》第4期。
25．胡壮麟，方琰，1997，《功能语言学在中国的进展》。北京：清华大学出版社。
26．胡壮麟，2000，“评语法隐喻的韩礼德模式”，《外语教学与研究》第2期。
27．侯维瑞，1988，《英语语体》，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
28．刘世生，1994，“系统功能理论对现代文体学的影响”，《外国语》第一期。
29．秦秀白，1990，《文体学概论》，湖南教育出版社。
30．束定芳，1996，“试论现代隐喻学的研究目标、方法和任务”，《外国语》第2期。
31．束定芳，2000，“论隐喻产生的认知、心理和语言原因”，《外语学刊》第2期。
32．王德春，2000，《语言学概论》，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
33．肖建安，王志军，2000“名物化结构与功能及变体特征”，《外语与外语教学》第6期。
34．许力生，1997，“当代语体研究的不同模式与取向”，《外国语》第5期。
35．严世清，1995，“隐喻理论史探”，《外国语》第5期。
36．杨丰宁，1996，“名词化现象及其原因”，《外语教学》第3期。
37．杨炳钧，尹明祥，2000，“系统功能语法核心思想对语言教学的指导意义”，《外语学刊》第3期。
38．杨信彰，1995，“英语书面语体中的词汇密度特征”，《解放军外语学院学报》第3期。
39．杨信彰，1998，“隐喻的两种解释”，《外语与外语教学》第10期。
40．张德禄，1993，“科技英语的语言特色”，《山东外语教学》第1期。
41．朱永生，1993，《语言、语篇、语境》北京：清华大学出版社。
42．朱永生，1994，“英语中的语法比喻现象”，《外国语》第1期。
43．朱永生，严世清，2000，“语法隐喻理论的理据和贡献”，《外语教学与研究》第2期。
44．祝畹瑾，2001，《社会语言学概论》，湖南教育出版社。