《老友记》言语幽默认知过程的关联理论阐释
|
摘要
幽默,作为人类一种独特的、重要的交际方式,长期以来吸引着学术界的关注。哲学、美学、人类学、社会学、心理学等诸多领域都对幽默从不同侧面进行过研究。近来,幽默逐渐为语言学所关注。语言作为幽默的载体成为了幽默研究的重点。但是幽默是如何产生,又如何被听话人理解到的呢?综观前人研究,分析语言本身并不能给出满意的答案。我们认为,从语用的角度分析言语幽默的过程可以对某些问题找到更加合理的解释。本文以言语幽默为研究对象,以斯帕伯和威尔逊的关联理论为支撑和分析模式,以幽默接受者为出发点,试图从认知语用学角度探讨言语幽默产生和理解的认知过程。
关联理论是关于人类交际与认知的普遍理论。它的提出为解释诸多语言现象提供了新的视角。在关联理论看来,幽默话语的理解同其他话语理解一样,是一个听话人寻求关联的认知过程。本文选取美国著名情景喜剧《老友记》为语料做个案研究,用定性分析的方法,阐述了关联理论如何有效解释幽默产生和理解的认知过程。作者同时还就跨文化幽默交际失误这一现象做了尝试性分析,并认为关联理论中认知环境及互明的概念能够很好的解释幽默理解失败。
全文共分为五章。第一章介绍研究背景、理论基础和目的。第二章探讨幽默的定义并回顾了前人对幽默研究的成果与不足。第三章描述本文的研究方法,数据收集方法和分析方法。第四章为本文的重点,在关联理论的框架下分析了幽默产生、理解的认知过程及幽默理解的失败。第五章讨论该研究的结果,并提出本研究的不足,为以后的进一步研究提出建议。
本研究以情景喜剧为语料分析对象,是对言语幽默认知过程的尝试性研究。本文旨在促进言语幽默的欣赏,并对幽默研究有所贡献。
Humor, as a distinctive way of human communication, has long received attention from a variety of disciplines, such as philosophy, aesthetics, anthropology, sociology, psychology, etc. Recent years have seen humor study in the domain of linguistics as language is a natural carrier of humor. However, it seems that the study of language itself cannot adequately account for how humor is produced and how it is appreciated by the addressee, which are the essential questions of pragmatics. With these questions, the current research attempts to unfold the cognitive process involved in humor production and interpretation. Sperber & Wilson's Relevance theory is adopted as the theoretic foundation for the general design of the research.
Relevance theory, as a general theory for human cognition and communication, provides a new perspective on utterance understanding. According to RT, the process of humor understanding, like other forms of communication, is essentially a process searching for relevance. And it is this process which the communicator can predict and manipulate to some extent that provides good ground for humor. Through a case study of the American sitcom Friends and a detailed analysis of the sample humor in a qualitative approach, the cognitive process of verbal humor may be depicted. The thesis also probes into the failure of humor in cross-cultural settings. The notion of cognitive environment and mutual manifestness is found to be a good explanation for this problem.
The thesis consists of five chapters. Chapter one outlines the background of the study, its theoretic foundation and its research purpose. Chapter two reviews the previous studies on humor, which lays a good ground for the present study. Chapter three describes the design of the research: its general approach and the method of data collection. Chapter four serves as the major focus of the study, which discusses the cognitive process of verbal humor from three aspects: humor production, humor interpretation and the failure in humor appreciation. The last chapter summarizes the major findings and limitations of the study with suggestions for further study in this area.
Overall, this study is a tentative exploration of the cognitive process of verbal humor. It hopes to make some contribution to the study of humor and facilitate humor communication.
关联理论是关于人类交际与认知的普遍理论。它的提出为解释诸多语言现象提供了新的视角。在关联理论看来,幽默话语的理解同其他话语理解一样,是一个听话人寻求关联的认知过程。本文选取美国著名情景喜剧《老友记》为语料做个案研究,用定性分析的方法,阐述了关联理论如何有效解释幽默产生和理解的认知过程。作者同时还就跨文化幽默交际失误这一现象做了尝试性分析,并认为关联理论中认知环境及互明的概念能够很好的解释幽默理解失败。
全文共分为五章。第一章介绍研究背景、理论基础和目的。第二章探讨幽默的定义并回顾了前人对幽默研究的成果与不足。第三章描述本文的研究方法,数据收集方法和分析方法。第四章为本文的重点,在关联理论的框架下分析了幽默产生、理解的认知过程及幽默理解的失败。第五章讨论该研究的结果,并提出本研究的不足,为以后的进一步研究提出建议。
本研究以情景喜剧为语料分析对象,是对言语幽默认知过程的尝试性研究。本文旨在促进言语幽默的欣赏,并对幽默研究有所贡献。
Humor, as a distinctive way of human communication, has long received attention from a variety of disciplines, such as philosophy, aesthetics, anthropology, sociology, psychology, etc. Recent years have seen humor study in the domain of linguistics as language is a natural carrier of humor. However, it seems that the study of language itself cannot adequately account for how humor is produced and how it is appreciated by the addressee, which are the essential questions of pragmatics. With these questions, the current research attempts to unfold the cognitive process involved in humor production and interpretation. Sperber & Wilson's Relevance theory is adopted as the theoretic foundation for the general design of the research.
Relevance theory, as a general theory for human cognition and communication, provides a new perspective on utterance understanding. According to RT, the process of humor understanding, like other forms of communication, is essentially a process searching for relevance. And it is this process which the communicator can predict and manipulate to some extent that provides good ground for humor. Through a case study of the American sitcom Friends and a detailed analysis of the sample humor in a qualitative approach, the cognitive process of verbal humor may be depicted. The thesis also probes into the failure of humor in cross-cultural settings. The notion of cognitive environment and mutual manifestness is found to be a good explanation for this problem.
The thesis consists of five chapters. Chapter one outlines the background of the study, its theoretic foundation and its research purpose. Chapter two reviews the previous studies on humor, which lays a good ground for the present study. Chapter three describes the design of the research: its general approach and the method of data collection. Chapter four serves as the major focus of the study, which discusses the cognitive process of verbal humor from three aspects: humor production, humor interpretation and the failure in humor appreciation. The last chapter summarizes the major findings and limitations of the study with suggestions for further study in this area.
Overall, this study is a tentative exploration of the cognitive process of verbal humor. It hopes to make some contribution to the study of humor and facilitate humor communication.
引文
Attardo, S. (1993). Violations of Conversational Maxims and Cooperation: the Case of Jokes. Journal of Pragmatics, 19, 537-558.
Attardo, S. (1994). Linguistic Theories of Humor. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Attardo, S. (1996). Humor Theory beyond Jokes: The Treatment of Humorous Texts at Large. In J. Hulstijn and A. Nijholt (eds.) (1996), Automatic Interpretation and Generation of Verbal Humor. Enschede, NL: University of Twente.
Attardo, S. (1997). The semantic foundations of cognitive theories of humor. HUMOR. International Journal of Humor Research. 10:4. 395-420.
Attardo, S. (2003). Introduction: the pragmatics of humor. Journal of Pragmatics, 35,1287-1294.
Attardo, S. & Raskin, V. (1991). Script Theory Revis(it)ed: Joke Similarity and Joke Representational Model. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research 4, 293-347.
Berger, A. A. (1993). An Anatomy of Humor. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Blakemore, D. (1987). Semantic Constraints on Relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.
Blakemore, D. (1992). Understanding Utterances. Oxford: Blackwell.
Carston, R. & Powell, G. (2005). Relevance Theory-New Directions and Developments. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 17, 279-299.
Chiaro, D. (1992). The language of Jokes: Analyzing Verbal Play. London/New York: Routledge.
Coulson, S. (2001). Semantic Leaps: Frame-Shifting and Conceptual Blending in Meaning Construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Curco, C. (1996). The implicit expression of attitudes, mutual manifestness and verbal humor. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 8, 89-99.
Curco, C. (1998). Indirect echoes and verbal humor in Rouchota V. & A. Jucker (eds.), Current Issues in Relevance Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamin's Publishing Company.
Davies, C. E. (2003). How English-learners joke with native speakers: an international sociolinguistic perspective on humor as collaborative discourse across cultures. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1361-1385.
Dolitsky, M. (1983). Humor and the unsaid. Journal of Pragmatics, 7, 39-48.
Freud, S. (1976). Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious. New York: Penguin.
Grice, H. P. (1975) Logic and Conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.) Syntax and Semantics, New York: Academic Press.
Hanks et al. (Eds.). (1986). Collin's Dictionary of the English Language, second edition. London/Glasgow: Collins.
Hay, J. (1995). Functions of Humor in the Conversations of Man and Women. Journal of Pragmatics, 32 (2003), 709-742.
Koestler, A. (1993). Humor and Wit. Encyclopedia Britannica. Vol.20. Ed. Robert McHenry. Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc.
Levine, J. (1969). Motivation in Humor. New York: Atherton Press.
McGhee, P. E. (1979). Humor: Its Origin and Development. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
Mey, J. L. (1991). Pragmatic garden and their magic. Poetics, 20, 233-245.
Morreall, J. (1983). Taking laughter seriously. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Nash, W. (1985). The Language of Humor. London/New York: Longman Group Ltd.
Norrick, N. R. (1993). Conversational Joking: Humor in Everyday Talk. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Norrick, N. R. (2003). Issue in Conversational Joking. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1333-1359.
Palmer, J. (1994). Taking Humour Seriously. London/New York: Routledge.
Pepicello W. J. & Weisberg, R. W. (1983). Linguistics and Humor. In P.E. McGhee & J.H. Goldstein (Eds.), Handbook of Humor Research, New York: Springer Verlag.
Rancher, M. (1980). How to Play Games with Words: Speech Act Jokes Journal of Literary Semantics,9,20-29.
Raskin,V.(1985).Semantic Mechanism of Humor.Holland:D.Reidel Publishing Company.
Ritchie,G.(1999).Developing the Incongruity Resolution Theory.In Proceedings of the 9~(th)Symposium on Creative Language:Humor&Stories.Edinburg.
Ritchie,G.(2004).The Linguistic Analysis of Jokes.London:Routledge.
Sauvignon,S.(2006).Communicative language teaching for the twenty-first century.In M.Celce-Murcia(Ed.),Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language.Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Sperber,D.,& Wilson,D.(1986/1995/2001).Relevance:Communication and cognition.Oxford:Blackwell.
Staley,R.& Derks,P.(1995).Structural Incongruity and Humor Appreciation.Humor,8,97-134.
Suls,J.M.(1972).A two-stage model for the appreciation of jokes and cartoons.In J.H.Goldstein & P.E.McGhee(Eds.),The psychology of humor.New York:Academic Press.
Wilson,D.(1994).Relevance and understanding.In G.Brown,K.Malmkjar,A.Pollitt & J.Williams(Eds.),Language and Understanding.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Wilson,D.,& Sperber,D.(2002).Relevance Theory.UCL Working Papers in Linguistics,14,249-287.
Yus,F.(1998).A decade of relevance theory.Journal of Pragmatics,30,305-345.
Yus,F.(2003).Humor and the search for relevance.Journal of Pragmatics,35,1295-1331.
蔡辉,尹星,2005,西方幽默理论研究综述,《外语研究》第1期。
陈春华,1999,会话幽默的语用分析,《解放军外国语学院学报》第1期。
何文忠,2003,论话语交际中的幽默原则,《外语教学》第4期。
何兆熊,1999,《新编语用学概要》,上海:上海外语教育出版社。
何自然,冉永平,1998,关联理论一认知语用学基础,《现代外语》第3期。
何自然,冉永平,2001,《语用与认知一关联理论研究》,北京:外语教学与研究出版社。
何自然,吴亚欣,2004,关联理论是一种‘因错而对'的理论吗一关联理论是非谈,《现代外语》第1期。
胡范铸,1987,《幽默语言学》,上海:上海社会科学院出版社。
蒋勇,2003,从隐性空间复合论看幽默理解时的语义跃迁,《山东外语教学》第1期。
刘福长,1987,从“合作原则”看英语幽默的产生,《现代外语》第2期。
刘乃实,熊学亮,2003,浅析言语幽默的维护面子功能,《外语教学》第6期。
刘乃实,2005,关联理论视角中的幽默乖讹与消解,《解放军外国语学院学报》第1期。
吕光旦,1988,英语幽默的语用分析,《外国语》第1期。
涂靖,2003,幽默的关联理论阐释,《四川外语学院学报》第5期。
王文斌,林波,2003,英语幽默言语的认知语用探究一兼论RT与CB 的互补性,《外国语》第4期。
王勇,2001,由关联理论看幽默言语,《外语教学》第1期。
徐立新,2003,《幽默语篇研究》,开封:河南大学出版社。
徐庆利,王福祥,2002,关联理论对幽默话语及其翻译的诠释力,《外语教学》第5期。
Attardo, S. (1994). Linguistic Theories of Humor. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Attardo, S. (1996). Humor Theory beyond Jokes: The Treatment of Humorous Texts at Large. In J. Hulstijn and A. Nijholt (eds.) (1996), Automatic Interpretation and Generation of Verbal Humor. Enschede, NL: University of Twente.
Attardo, S. (1997). The semantic foundations of cognitive theories of humor. HUMOR. International Journal of Humor Research. 10:4. 395-420.
Attardo, S. (2003). Introduction: the pragmatics of humor. Journal of Pragmatics, 35,1287-1294.
Attardo, S. & Raskin, V. (1991). Script Theory Revis(it)ed: Joke Similarity and Joke Representational Model. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research 4, 293-347.
Berger, A. A. (1993). An Anatomy of Humor. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Blakemore, D. (1987). Semantic Constraints on Relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.
Blakemore, D. (1992). Understanding Utterances. Oxford: Blackwell.
Carston, R. & Powell, G. (2005). Relevance Theory-New Directions and Developments. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 17, 279-299.
Chiaro, D. (1992). The language of Jokes: Analyzing Verbal Play. London/New York: Routledge.
Coulson, S. (2001). Semantic Leaps: Frame-Shifting and Conceptual Blending in Meaning Construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Curco, C. (1996). The implicit expression of attitudes, mutual manifestness and verbal humor. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 8, 89-99.
Curco, C. (1998). Indirect echoes and verbal humor in Rouchota V. & A. Jucker (eds.), Current Issues in Relevance Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamin's Publishing Company.
Davies, C. E. (2003). How English-learners joke with native speakers: an international sociolinguistic perspective on humor as collaborative discourse across cultures. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1361-1385.
Dolitsky, M. (1983). Humor and the unsaid. Journal of Pragmatics, 7, 39-48.
Freud, S. (1976). Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious. New York: Penguin.
Grice, H. P. (1975) Logic and Conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.) Syntax and Semantics, New York: Academic Press.
Hanks et al. (Eds.). (1986). Collin's Dictionary of the English Language, second edition. London/Glasgow: Collins.
Hay, J. (1995). Functions of Humor in the Conversations of Man and Women. Journal of Pragmatics, 32 (2003), 709-742.
Koestler, A. (1993). Humor and Wit. Encyclopedia Britannica. Vol.20. Ed. Robert McHenry. Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc.
Levine, J. (1969). Motivation in Humor. New York: Atherton Press.
McGhee, P. E. (1979). Humor: Its Origin and Development. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
Mey, J. L. (1991). Pragmatic garden and their magic. Poetics, 20, 233-245.
Morreall, J. (1983). Taking laughter seriously. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Nash, W. (1985). The Language of Humor. London/New York: Longman Group Ltd.
Norrick, N. R. (1993). Conversational Joking: Humor in Everyday Talk. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Norrick, N. R. (2003). Issue in Conversational Joking. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1333-1359.
Palmer, J. (1994). Taking Humour Seriously. London/New York: Routledge.
Pepicello W. J. & Weisberg, R. W. (1983). Linguistics and Humor. In P.E. McGhee & J.H. Goldstein (Eds.), Handbook of Humor Research, New York: Springer Verlag.
Rancher, M. (1980). How to Play Games with Words: Speech Act Jokes Journal of Literary Semantics,9,20-29.
Raskin,V.(1985).Semantic Mechanism of Humor.Holland:D.Reidel Publishing Company.
Ritchie,G.(1999).Developing the Incongruity Resolution Theory.In Proceedings of the 9~(th)Symposium on Creative Language:Humor&Stories.Edinburg.
Ritchie,G.(2004).The Linguistic Analysis of Jokes.London:Routledge.
Sauvignon,S.(2006).Communicative language teaching for the twenty-first century.In M.Celce-Murcia(Ed.),Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language.Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Sperber,D.,& Wilson,D.(1986/1995/2001).Relevance:Communication and cognition.Oxford:Blackwell.
Staley,R.& Derks,P.(1995).Structural Incongruity and Humor Appreciation.Humor,8,97-134.
Suls,J.M.(1972).A two-stage model for the appreciation of jokes and cartoons.In J.H.Goldstein & P.E.McGhee(Eds.),The psychology of humor.New York:Academic Press.
Wilson,D.(1994).Relevance and understanding.In G.Brown,K.Malmkjar,A.Pollitt & J.Williams(Eds.),Language and Understanding.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Wilson,D.,& Sperber,D.(2002).Relevance Theory.UCL Working Papers in Linguistics,14,249-287.
Yus,F.(1998).A decade of relevance theory.Journal of Pragmatics,30,305-345.
Yus,F.(2003).Humor and the search for relevance.Journal of Pragmatics,35,1295-1331.
蔡辉,尹星,2005,西方幽默理论研究综述,《外语研究》第1期。
陈春华,1999,会话幽默的语用分析,《解放军外国语学院学报》第1期。
何文忠,2003,论话语交际中的幽默原则,《外语教学》第4期。
何兆熊,1999,《新编语用学概要》,上海:上海外语教育出版社。
何自然,冉永平,1998,关联理论一认知语用学基础,《现代外语》第3期。
何自然,冉永平,2001,《语用与认知一关联理论研究》,北京:外语教学与研究出版社。
何自然,吴亚欣,2004,关联理论是一种‘因错而对'的理论吗一关联理论是非谈,《现代外语》第1期。
胡范铸,1987,《幽默语言学》,上海:上海社会科学院出版社。
蒋勇,2003,从隐性空间复合论看幽默理解时的语义跃迁,《山东外语教学》第1期。
刘福长,1987,从“合作原则”看英语幽默的产生,《现代外语》第2期。
刘乃实,熊学亮,2003,浅析言语幽默的维护面子功能,《外语教学》第6期。
刘乃实,2005,关联理论视角中的幽默乖讹与消解,《解放军外国语学院学报》第1期。
吕光旦,1988,英语幽默的语用分析,《外国语》第1期。
涂靖,2003,幽默的关联理论阐释,《四川外语学院学报》第5期。
王文斌,林波,2003,英语幽默言语的认知语用探究一兼论RT与CB 的互补性,《外国语》第4期。
王勇,2001,由关联理论看幽默言语,《外语教学》第1期。
徐立新,2003,《幽默语篇研究》,开封:河南大学出版社。
徐庆利,王福祥,2002,关联理论对幽默话语及其翻译的诠释力,《外语教学》第5期。