从视点的角度分析时空话语标记语和情态话语标记语的语篇连贯功能
|
摘要
话语标记语在日常生活中无处不在,是人们语言沟通和交流的重要工具,在语篇的建构和解读中具有很高的价值。对话语标记语的研究,语言学家多从句法-语用视角、语法-语用视角、语篇连贯视角和认知语用的视角进行分析。前三种研究视角尽管都考虑到了部分语用因素,但其注意力分别集中在如何创造连贯和它们所标志的话语单位之间存在何种关系这两个问题上;后一种研究视角多是在关联理论的框架内进行,而关联理论的交际观中并未对何种程度的关联才是最佳关联进行客观界定,在实际操作中很难把握。由此可见,对话语标记语在话语产生和理解中是如何实现语篇连贯功能的这一问题,语言学界还没有一个很好的解决方案。本文尝试以话语连贯作为切入点,以视点理论为支撑,从一个新的视角对话语标记语的语篇连贯功能进行分析。因为时空话语标记语和情态话语标记语相对典型,更具说服力,本文将以这两类话语标记语为例进行展开。
一个连贯的语篇必然有着连贯的视点,而话语标记语则是视点连贯的重要标示和实现途径之一。时空视点的连贯通过时间和空间话语标记语实现,体现了一个整体和连贯的时间和空间感。时间话语标记语用来确定时间顺序,空间话语标记语用来指示空间位置及移动。空间视点和时间视点结合起来建构一个连贯有序的时空。叙事视点和观念视点的连贯则通过情态话语标记语来体现。叙事视点的连贯主要从叙事视角的一致性来体现,部分情态话语标记通过反映由谁来说或者是从谁的角度说来标示叙事视点视角的一致性。特定的观念视点对应特定的视点中心人物,视点中心人物的价值观念和信仰体系则通过情态话语标记语来标示和突显,这种对应性体现出观念视点的连贯。
视点的连贯是语篇连贯的重要前提。连贯的视点有以下几个方面的特征:层级性、关联性、顺序性和一致性。这几类特征并不是孤立的而是相互兼容,其中层级性和顺序性更能突显视点连贯,是连贯视点的充分必要条件。时空话语标记语和情态话语标记语通过体现语篇视点的有序性和层级性来促进语篇连贯。一方面,时空话语标记语和情态话语标记语能够体现语篇的有序性来促进语篇连贯,这两类话语标记语能预示和限制语篇的后续内容,规制视点框移动的方向。同时,时空话语标记语和情态话语标记语能够促进视点框之间的衔接,使话语在表层连接上实现平稳过渡。时空话语标记语和情态话语标记语的预示、限制和衔接功能是实现语篇有序性的重要途径。另一方面,时空话语标记语和情态话语标记语能够体现语篇的层级性来促进语篇连贯,在视点的框架下,语篇是由小句视点框、超句视点框、句群视点框和语段视点框组成,这就形成了视点的层级架构。而各个视点框之间不是孤立的,连贯的语篇往往是在一个中心信息的统筹下,按照一定的顺序形成一个具有内在逻辑的统一的整体。时空话语标记语和情态话语标记语则通过体现语篇的内在关联和层级架构来促进语篇连贯。
通过以上的分析,笔者认为:时空话语标记语和情态话语标记语通过标示和突显视点实现视点连贯而最终实现语篇连贯。
Discourse markers (DMs), so pervasively used in daily language, are the important tools for human being to communicate or express their thoughts, opinions and feelings,and play a significant role in text construction and decipherment. However, researches on DMs, though rich and fruitful, are far from being homogenous and complete. We identify four distinctive pragmatic perspectives on DMs, namely: semantic-pragmatic perspective, grammatical-pragmatic perspective, discourse coherence perspective and cognitive-pragmatic perspective. In the process of exampling the four perspectives, we find that the former three ones do take into consideration some pragmatic factors, but their attention is mainly concentrated respectively on how DMs are used to create coherence or what relationships they signal between discourse units; the later one is mainly based on relevance-theoretic framework. It is concluded that these researches do give an impressive account for the role of DMs in utterance interpretation, but fail to scientifically offer the degree of optimal relevance. In brief, none of them can account for the problems what functions DMs exert in realizing coherence and how DMs facilitate to realize coherence. The present study chooses spatio-temporal DMs and modal DMs to do a further research on their function to the realization of textual coherence from a brand-new perspective on the support of PV (point of view) theory, because these two kinds of DMs are more relatively typical and persuasive than other kinds of DMs.
A coherence text must have coherent PV, while DMs is one of the important markers to realize coherence in PV. The coherence in spatial and temporal PV is realized through a sense of orderly dimension of time and space by using spatial and temporal DMs. Spatial DMs indicate the movement and location in space. Temporal DMs indicate the time sequence. Spatial and temporal PV combined together help to establish a coordination of space and time. In narrative PV, coherence is achieved through keeping the consistency of narrative viewpoint. Some modal DMs indicate the consistency of narrative-view angle through reflecting a certain character or narrator’s viewpoint. In ideological PV, coherence is achieved through the representation of a consistent ideology, that is, a consistent set of value system of the narrator or the characters. Different people may have different ideology systems, therefore, a certain ideology must be matched to a certain person. The corresponding relation reflects coherent ideological PV.
Coherent PV, the basis of text coherence, has four features: hierarchy, relevance, orderliness and consistency all of which are interdependent. Among these four features, orderliness and hierarchy are the necessary and sufficient conditions of text coherence, because they can reflect coherent PV well. Spatio-temporal DMs and modal DMs facilitate the textual coherence by reflecting the orderliness and hierarchy of text. Spatio-temporal DMs and modal DMs, which facilitate text coherence by reflecting orderliness of text, can not only presuppose or restrict the following content of the text, but also determine the direction of the shift of PV framework. At the same time, they can facilitate the coherence within PV framework, which makes sure that discourse can make a peaceful transition on the surface connection. The functions of spatio-temporal DMs and modal DMs such as cohesion, constraint and presupposition are the important ways to realize the orderliness of text. Additionally, spatio-temporal DMs and modal DMs facilitate text coherence by reflecting the hierarchy of text. In the framework of PV, a text is made up of sentence PV framework, suprasentential PV framework, the framework of sentence group, and paragraph PV framework, which form the hierarchical structure of PV. And the elements within the frameworks are not isolated but closely connected with each other. A coherent text is always dominated by its central information, and then forms a unified whole with logic structure. Lastly, Spatio-temporal DMs and modal DMs realize the text coherence in reflecting text’s inherent connection and hierarchical structure.
All the analysis leads to a conclusion that spatio-temporal DMs and modal DMs realize their function of text coherence by indicating and prominently marking coherent PV.
一个连贯的语篇必然有着连贯的视点,而话语标记语则是视点连贯的重要标示和实现途径之一。时空视点的连贯通过时间和空间话语标记语实现,体现了一个整体和连贯的时间和空间感。时间话语标记语用来确定时间顺序,空间话语标记语用来指示空间位置及移动。空间视点和时间视点结合起来建构一个连贯有序的时空。叙事视点和观念视点的连贯则通过情态话语标记语来体现。叙事视点的连贯主要从叙事视角的一致性来体现,部分情态话语标记通过反映由谁来说或者是从谁的角度说来标示叙事视点视角的一致性。特定的观念视点对应特定的视点中心人物,视点中心人物的价值观念和信仰体系则通过情态话语标记语来标示和突显,这种对应性体现出观念视点的连贯。
视点的连贯是语篇连贯的重要前提。连贯的视点有以下几个方面的特征:层级性、关联性、顺序性和一致性。这几类特征并不是孤立的而是相互兼容,其中层级性和顺序性更能突显视点连贯,是连贯视点的充分必要条件。时空话语标记语和情态话语标记语通过体现语篇视点的有序性和层级性来促进语篇连贯。一方面,时空话语标记语和情态话语标记语能够体现语篇的有序性来促进语篇连贯,这两类话语标记语能预示和限制语篇的后续内容,规制视点框移动的方向。同时,时空话语标记语和情态话语标记语能够促进视点框之间的衔接,使话语在表层连接上实现平稳过渡。时空话语标记语和情态话语标记语的预示、限制和衔接功能是实现语篇有序性的重要途径。另一方面,时空话语标记语和情态话语标记语能够体现语篇的层级性来促进语篇连贯,在视点的框架下,语篇是由小句视点框、超句视点框、句群视点框和语段视点框组成,这就形成了视点的层级架构。而各个视点框之间不是孤立的,连贯的语篇往往是在一个中心信息的统筹下,按照一定的顺序形成一个具有内在逻辑的统一的整体。时空话语标记语和情态话语标记语则通过体现语篇的内在关联和层级架构来促进语篇连贯。
通过以上的分析,笔者认为:时空话语标记语和情态话语标记语通过标示和突显视点实现视点连贯而最终实现语篇连贯。
Discourse markers (DMs), so pervasively used in daily language, are the important tools for human being to communicate or express their thoughts, opinions and feelings,and play a significant role in text construction and decipherment. However, researches on DMs, though rich and fruitful, are far from being homogenous and complete. We identify four distinctive pragmatic perspectives on DMs, namely: semantic-pragmatic perspective, grammatical-pragmatic perspective, discourse coherence perspective and cognitive-pragmatic perspective. In the process of exampling the four perspectives, we find that the former three ones do take into consideration some pragmatic factors, but their attention is mainly concentrated respectively on how DMs are used to create coherence or what relationships they signal between discourse units; the later one is mainly based on relevance-theoretic framework. It is concluded that these researches do give an impressive account for the role of DMs in utterance interpretation, but fail to scientifically offer the degree of optimal relevance. In brief, none of them can account for the problems what functions DMs exert in realizing coherence and how DMs facilitate to realize coherence. The present study chooses spatio-temporal DMs and modal DMs to do a further research on their function to the realization of textual coherence from a brand-new perspective on the support of PV (point of view) theory, because these two kinds of DMs are more relatively typical and persuasive than other kinds of DMs.
A coherence text must have coherent PV, while DMs is one of the important markers to realize coherence in PV. The coherence in spatial and temporal PV is realized through a sense of orderly dimension of time and space by using spatial and temporal DMs. Spatial DMs indicate the movement and location in space. Temporal DMs indicate the time sequence. Spatial and temporal PV combined together help to establish a coordination of space and time. In narrative PV, coherence is achieved through keeping the consistency of narrative viewpoint. Some modal DMs indicate the consistency of narrative-view angle through reflecting a certain character or narrator’s viewpoint. In ideological PV, coherence is achieved through the representation of a consistent ideology, that is, a consistent set of value system of the narrator or the characters. Different people may have different ideology systems, therefore, a certain ideology must be matched to a certain person. The corresponding relation reflects coherent ideological PV.
Coherent PV, the basis of text coherence, has four features: hierarchy, relevance, orderliness and consistency all of which are interdependent. Among these four features, orderliness and hierarchy are the necessary and sufficient conditions of text coherence, because they can reflect coherent PV well. Spatio-temporal DMs and modal DMs facilitate the textual coherence by reflecting the orderliness and hierarchy of text. Spatio-temporal DMs and modal DMs, which facilitate text coherence by reflecting orderliness of text, can not only presuppose or restrict the following content of the text, but also determine the direction of the shift of PV framework. At the same time, they can facilitate the coherence within PV framework, which makes sure that discourse can make a peaceful transition on the surface connection. The functions of spatio-temporal DMs and modal DMs such as cohesion, constraint and presupposition are the important ways to realize the orderliness of text. Additionally, spatio-temporal DMs and modal DMs facilitate text coherence by reflecting the hierarchy of text. In the framework of PV, a text is made up of sentence PV framework, suprasentential PV framework, the framework of sentence group, and paragraph PV framework, which form the hierarchical structure of PV. And the elements within the frameworks are not isolated but closely connected with each other. A coherent text is always dominated by its central information, and then forms a unified whole with logic structure. Lastly, Spatio-temporal DMs and modal DMs realize the text coherence in reflecting text’s inherent connection and hierarchical structure.
All the analysis leads to a conclusion that spatio-temporal DMs and modal DMs realize their function of text coherence by indicating and prominently marking coherent PV.
引文
Andersen, G. (1998). The pragmatic marker like from a relevance-theoretic perspective. In Jucker, A.H and Y.Ziv (Eds), Discourse markers: Description and theory. Amsterdam: John Beniamins.
Blackmore, D. (1992). Understanding utterances. Oxford: Blackewell.
Bronte, C. (1991). Jane Eyre. New York: Oxford University Press.
Brown, G & Yule, G. (1983/2000). Discourse analysis. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Carroll, l. (2005). Alice adventure in wonderland. London: Folio Society.
Ehrlich, S. (1990). Point of view: A linguistic analysis of literary style. New York: Rutledge.
Fowler, R. (1986). Linguistic criticism. New York: Oxford University Press.
Fraser, B. (1990). An approach to discourse markers. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 383-395.
Fraser, B. (1996). Pragmatic markers. Pragmatics, (6), 167-190.
Fraser, B. (1999). What are discourse markers? Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 931-952.
Halliday, M. A. K & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994/2000). An introduction to functional grammar (2ed ed.). Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London : Longman.
Leech, G and Short, M. (1981). Style in fiction. London: Longman.
Lenk, U. (1998a). Discourse markers and global coherence in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 245-257.
Lenk, U. (1998b). Marking discourse coherence: Functions of discourse markers in spoken English. Tübingen: Narr.
Levinson, S.C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: CUP.
Quirk, R. et al. (1972/1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
Redeker, G. (1990). Ideational and pragmatic markers of discourse structure. Journal ofPragmatics, 14, 367-381.
Redeker, G. (1991). Linguistic markers of discourse structure. Linguistics, 29, 1139-1172.
Risselada, R. & Spooren, W. (1998). Introduction: Discourse markers and coherence relations. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 131-133.
Rouchota, V. (1996). Discourse connectives: What do they link? Linguistics, 8, 199-212.
Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge: CUP.
Schiffrin, D. (1994). Approaches to discourse. Oxford: Blackwell.
Schoenstein, R. (1975). Looking for the rusty lining. The New Yorker. 3 Feb.
Simpson, P. (1993) Language, ideology and point of view. New York: Routledge.
Short, M. (1999). Understanding texts: Point of view. In Gillian Brown et al(Ed.). Language
and understanding. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (1986/2001). Relevance: Communication and cognition (2ed ed). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Van Dijk. (1977). Text and context. London: Longman.
Van Dijk. (1979). Pragmatic connectives. Journal of Pragmatics, (3), 447-456.
Van Dijk &Kinstsch, W. (1983) Strategies of discourse comprehension. Orlando, Florida: Academic Press Inc.
Verschueren, J. (1998). Understanding pragmatics. Oxford: CUP.
Ran Yongping. (2000). The pragmatics of discourse markers in conversation. PH.D. dissertation, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies. China.
戴炜栋. (1997).英语常用衔接词例释词典.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
福勒. (1991).语言学与小说.重庆:重庆出版社.
郭纯洁. (2003).语篇连贯性的认知基础.现代外语, (1), 13-21.
何自然,莫爱屏. (2002).话语标记语与语用照应.广东外语外贸大学学报, (1), 1-6.
何自然,冉永平. (1999).话语联系语的语用制约性.外语教学与研究, (3),1-8.
黄大网. (2001).话语标记研究综述.福建外语, (1), 5-11.
黄国文. (1988).语篇分析概要.长沙:湖南教育出版社.
李荫华. (1999).大学英语(修订本).上海:上海外语教育出版社.
李观仪. (1994).新编英语教程6.上海:上海教育出版社.
李勇忠. (2003).信息短路下的话语标记.外语学刊, (3), 21-25.
李森林,李佐文. (2002).论语篇语用连贯的再现.天津外国语学院学报, (2), 1-8.
廖秋忠. (1986).现代汉语篇章中的连接成分.中国语文, (6), 413-427.
廖秋忠. (1987).篇章中的管界问题.中国语文, (4), 256-261.
刘秋成. (2008).话语标记语及其语篇连贯功能的认知语用分析.牡丹江教育学院学报, (1), 41-46.
刘莹. (2002).视点及其连贯.湖南大学硕士学士论文.
梅德明. (2000).高级口译教程.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
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. (2003).话语标记语Well语用功能.外国语, (3), 58-64.
冉永平,莫爱屏,王寅. (2006).认知语用学-言语交际的认知研究.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
王正元. (2006).语篇视点的认知分析.四川外语学院学报, (2), 112-116.
熊沐清,陈意德. (2000).观念视点与叙述语篇理解.外语与外语教学, (6), 15-18.
熊沐清. (2001).论语篇视点.外语教学与研究, 33 (1), 21-27.
熊沐清,刘霞敏. (1999).从连贯的条件看几种连贯理论.外国语, (3), 22-28.
徐宏亮. (2004). Ok的社会语言学研究.外国语言文学, (2), 35-39.
闫涛. (2002).话语标记语及其语篇功能.齐齐哈尔大学学报(哲学社会科学版), (11), 78-81.
殷习芳,刘明东. (2006).语篇连贯性研究综述.湖南第一师范学报, 6 (3).
曾肯干,陈道芳. (1990).英语泛读教程.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
张德禄. (2000).论语篇连贯.外语教学与研究, 32 (2),103-109.
张汉熙. (1995).高级英语修订本第一册.北京:外语教学与研究出版社.
张莉. (2004).全新版大学英语综合教程3.上海:华东大学出版社.
Blackmore, D. (1992). Understanding utterances. Oxford: Blackewell.
Bronte, C. (1991). Jane Eyre. New York: Oxford University Press.
Brown, G & Yule, G. (1983/2000). Discourse analysis. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Carroll, l. (2005). Alice adventure in wonderland. London: Folio Society.
Ehrlich, S. (1990). Point of view: A linguistic analysis of literary style. New York: Rutledge.
Fowler, R. (1986). Linguistic criticism. New York: Oxford University Press.
Fraser, B. (1990). An approach to discourse markers. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 383-395.
Fraser, B. (1996). Pragmatic markers. Pragmatics, (6), 167-190.
Fraser, B. (1999). What are discourse markers? Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 931-952.
Halliday, M. A. K & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994/2000). An introduction to functional grammar (2ed ed.). Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London : Longman.
Leech, G and Short, M. (1981). Style in fiction. London: Longman.
Lenk, U. (1998a). Discourse markers and global coherence in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 245-257.
Lenk, U. (1998b). Marking discourse coherence: Functions of discourse markers in spoken English. Tübingen: Narr.
Levinson, S.C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: CUP.
Quirk, R. et al. (1972/1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
Redeker, G. (1990). Ideational and pragmatic markers of discourse structure. Journal ofPragmatics, 14, 367-381.
Redeker, G. (1991). Linguistic markers of discourse structure. Linguistics, 29, 1139-1172.
Risselada, R. & Spooren, W. (1998). Introduction: Discourse markers and coherence relations. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 131-133.
Rouchota, V. (1996). Discourse connectives: What do they link? Linguistics, 8, 199-212.
Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge: CUP.
Schiffrin, D. (1994). Approaches to discourse. Oxford: Blackwell.
Schoenstein, R. (1975). Looking for the rusty lining. The New Yorker. 3 Feb.
Simpson, P. (1993) Language, ideology and point of view. New York: Routledge.
Short, M. (1999). Understanding texts: Point of view. In Gillian Brown et al(Ed.). Language
and understanding. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (1986/2001). Relevance: Communication and cognition (2ed ed). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Van Dijk. (1977). Text and context. London: Longman.
Van Dijk. (1979). Pragmatic connectives. Journal of Pragmatics, (3), 447-456.
Van Dijk &Kinstsch, W. (1983) Strategies of discourse comprehension. Orlando, Florida: Academic Press Inc.
Verschueren, J. (1998). Understanding pragmatics. Oxford: CUP.
Ran Yongping. (2000). The pragmatics of discourse markers in conversation. PH.D. dissertation, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies. China.
戴炜栋. (1997).英语常用衔接词例释词典.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
福勒. (1991).语言学与小说.重庆:重庆出版社.
郭纯洁. (2003).语篇连贯性的认知基础.现代外语, (1), 13-21.
何自然,莫爱屏. (2002).话语标记语与语用照应.广东外语外贸大学学报, (1), 1-6.
何自然,冉永平. (1999).话语联系语的语用制约性.外语教学与研究, (3),1-8.
黄大网. (2001).话语标记研究综述.福建外语, (1), 5-11.
黄国文. (1988).语篇分析概要.长沙:湖南教育出版社.
李荫华. (1999).大学英语(修订本).上海:上海外语教育出版社.
李观仪. (1994).新编英语教程6.上海:上海教育出版社.
李勇忠. (2003).信息短路下的话语标记.外语学刊, (3), 21-25.
李森林,李佐文. (2002).论语篇语用连贯的再现.天津外国语学院学报, (2), 1-8.
廖秋忠. (1986).现代汉语篇章中的连接成分.中国语文, (6), 413-427.
廖秋忠. (1987).篇章中的管界问题.中国语文, (4), 256-261.
刘秋成. (2008).话语标记语及其语篇连贯功能的认知语用分析.牡丹江教育学院学报, (1), 41-46.
刘莹. (2002).视点及其连贯.湖南大学硕士学士论文.
梅德明. (2000).高级口译教程.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
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. (2003).话语标记语Well语用功能.外国语, (3), 58-64.
冉永平,莫爱屏,王寅. (2006).认知语用学-言语交际的认知研究.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
王正元. (2006).语篇视点的认知分析.四川外语学院学报, (2), 112-116.
熊沐清,陈意德. (2000).观念视点与叙述语篇理解.外语与外语教学, (6), 15-18.
熊沐清. (2001).论语篇视点.外语教学与研究, 33 (1), 21-27.
熊沐清,刘霞敏. (1999).从连贯的条件看几种连贯理论.外国语, (3), 22-28.
徐宏亮. (2004). Ok的社会语言学研究.外国语言文学, (2), 35-39.
闫涛. (2002).话语标记语及其语篇功能.齐齐哈尔大学学报(哲学社会科学版), (11), 78-81.
殷习芳,刘明东. (2006).语篇连贯性研究综述.湖南第一师范学报, 6 (3).
曾肯干,陈道芳. (1990).英语泛读教程.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
张德禄. (2000).论语篇连贯.外语教学与研究, 32 (2),103-109.
张汉熙. (1995).高级英语修订本第一册.北京:外语教学与研究出版社.
张莉. (2004).全新版大学英语综合教程3.上海:华东大学出版社.