话语理解的功能顺应策略
|
摘要
耶夫·维索尔伦(Jef Verschueren)的语用综观论(a pragmatic perspective on language)认为应该从认知、社会和文化的整体功能角度解释语言的使用,而且认为语言使用其实就是在不同意识程度下为了顺应语境和语言结构而不断做出选择的动态过程。这种不同于英美“语用分项说”的语用综观论为全面研究、解释各种语言现象提供了一个统一连贯的理论框架。
根据语用综观论视角下的语言顺应理论(linguistic adaptability theory),本文着重对话语理解(utterance interpretation)的过程,即意义生成(meaning generation),进行了相关语用分析,描述了在话语理解过程中各种语言选择、顺应活动是如何作为一种有效的语用策略协助实现意义的建构与生成,并试图建立一种能够较好阐释话语理解处理过程的意义推导模式,既能较为全面地解释话语意义生成中所涉及到的各种不同的意义成分(meaning sources of utterance),又能准确阐释他们之间相互作用、生成意义的动态运算法则(algorithm)。
基于对有关话语理解理论的简要回顾,本文指出理论融合的必要性和紧迫性,并试图参照徐盛桓的“基于心理模型的含意常规推理模式”和Jaszczolt提出的“(意义)合并表征(compositional merger representation)"的概念,从认知语用学的宏观视角将其统一于语言顺应论的框架之下,建立一个连贯统一的理论框架,以期在解释话语意义生成的构成成份的同时,又能形象阐释其互相作用以实现话语理解的运算法则。根据Jaszczolt的“合并表征”理论,话语理解涉及到词义和句子结构的组合(combination of word meaning and sentence structure),有意识的语用推力(conscious pragmatic inference),以及显著的社会文化和认知解释或默认解释(social-cultural default and cognitive default),这种对于话语意义建构成份的纵观视角既不同于形式主义语言观那种把话语理解等同于句子理解,过分强调抽象的语义成份之间被动的程序化的组合关系而无视释话人、语境等因素的影响,同时,也不同于早期人们对话语意义的简单二元切分,而是把意义生成纳入语言学、认知及心理学等多学科视域融合的大框架内。但正如Jaszczolt指出的那样,该合并表征的概念因缺乏一个能够解释各意义构成成份之间语用处理过程的运算法则,而亟待进一步完善。因此,本研究拟借鉴徐盛桓提出的语用推理模式,尝试建立一种新型的基于心理模型的以顺应论为导向的意义推理框架,充分融合这两种理论的特点,既要解释话语理解的语用处理过程,又要揭示各意义构成成份之间的动态作用。
根据维索尔伦的语言顺应论,本文指出选择和顺应作为一种有效的语用策略,在话语理解的过程中能够帮助释话人在不同的意识程度下,依据不同的语境、认知等因素,不断“选择”合适的意义成份,以“顺应”语境和语言结构,最终达成话语理解。在这个语用过程中,意向(intention)并不是决定话语意义的唯一因素,实际上,其他的认知、社会和文化因素一起都影响着意义的生成和理解。简言之,这一全新的关于话语理解过程的语用处理模式,既能比较全面地考量制约话语意义生成的各种不同因素或成份,如词义和句子意义的合并、默认解释以及语用推理等,同时也能利用选择与顺应这一有效语用策略将它们之间的相互作用统领于该模式框架之中,因而在强调话语意义生成的动态行和复杂性的同时,也突显了语言的认知、社会与文化功能,无疑有益于更加全面、系统地解释话语理解的本质和内涵。
此外,为了更好地阐释话语理解的语用处理过程,论证该理论框架的解释力和适用性,本文主要采用了定性的研究方法,既有理论介绍又有实例分析,并从电影、电视、文学作品、日常对话等方面充分搜集相关语料,对其进行详细的语用分析,以期增强本研究的在各种交际实践中的指导意义。
The present research is a cognitive-pragmatic analysis of utterance interpretation, which sets its theoretical basis on Verschueren's linguistic adaptability theory within a general functional perspective on language that defines language use as a pragmatic processing of a continuous making of linguistic choices while taking into consideration the cognitive, social, and cultural functioning of language at the levels of salience for the adaptation to the contextual correlates and the structural objects.
With the critical comments on the formalism approach to language that views utterance interpretation as simply equal to sentence understanding and emphasizes the syntagmatic relations of abstract semantic components as well as the earlier binary division of utterance meaning into what is said and what is implied and the like, this thesis tends to take a more eclectic approach to utterance meaning with the fusion of linguistic, psychological and cognitive perspectives. While adopting the notion of meaning merger representation proposed by K. M. Jaszczolt which identifies four sources of utterance meaning as (ⅰ) word meaning and sentence structure, (ⅱ) default interpretation mainly including cognitive default and social-cultural default, and (ⅲ) conscious pragmatic inference, this thesis points out its obvious lack of an algorithm that can capture the dynamic interaction of these meaning sources in utterance interpretation. Furthermore, by making reference to the implicatures stereotypical reasoning model proposed by S. H. Xu which graphically displays the mental model-based pragmatic processing of utterance interpretation while failing to identify specific meaning sources, this thesis attempts to construct such a new algorithm to disclose the dynamic interaction of utterance-meaning sources, aiming at bridging the two approaches within the framework of the adaptability theory so as to explore the pragmatic processing of utterance interpretation from the cognitive pragmatic perspective.
Therefore, an adaptability-oriented pragmatic processing model of utterance interpretation is tentatively developed and proposed for the present research. Within the framework of adaptability theory, utterance interpretation is actually considered to be both a process and result of dynamically continuous making of linguistic choices, exactly meaning sources in the present research, with the varying degrees of salience for the adaptation into the contextual correlates and structural objects. It is maintained that this process goes under the guidance of intentionality together with the cognitive, social and cultural factors simultaneously, working down to undergo default interpretation for truth-conditional contents and conscious pragmatic inference for implicatures till the satisfactory utterance interpretation. Obviously it is the linguistic adaptability, to be exact linguistic choice-making that works as a major pragmatic strategy to facilitate the interpreter to effect utterance interpretation.
The present research in this thesis is mainly a qualitative pragmatic analysis on the basis of the rich and widely representative data that are collected from the daily exchanges, the movies, the literary works and other relevant academic works. It is hoped that the present research is able to provide a general framework for the explication of utterance interpretation from the perspective of the interpreter, revealing the internal algorithm of complex meaning generation of the utterance under the adaptability theory of pragmatics.
根据语用综观论视角下的语言顺应理论(linguistic adaptability theory),本文着重对话语理解(utterance interpretation)的过程,即意义生成(meaning generation),进行了相关语用分析,描述了在话语理解过程中各种语言选择、顺应活动是如何作为一种有效的语用策略协助实现意义的建构与生成,并试图建立一种能够较好阐释话语理解处理过程的意义推导模式,既能较为全面地解释话语意义生成中所涉及到的各种不同的意义成分(meaning sources of utterance),又能准确阐释他们之间相互作用、生成意义的动态运算法则(algorithm)。
基于对有关话语理解理论的简要回顾,本文指出理论融合的必要性和紧迫性,并试图参照徐盛桓的“基于心理模型的含意常规推理模式”和Jaszczolt提出的“(意义)合并表征(compositional merger representation)"的概念,从认知语用学的宏观视角将其统一于语言顺应论的框架之下,建立一个连贯统一的理论框架,以期在解释话语意义生成的构成成份的同时,又能形象阐释其互相作用以实现话语理解的运算法则。根据Jaszczolt的“合并表征”理论,话语理解涉及到词义和句子结构的组合(combination of word meaning and sentence structure),有意识的语用推力(conscious pragmatic inference),以及显著的社会文化和认知解释或默认解释(social-cultural default and cognitive default),这种对于话语意义建构成份的纵观视角既不同于形式主义语言观那种把话语理解等同于句子理解,过分强调抽象的语义成份之间被动的程序化的组合关系而无视释话人、语境等因素的影响,同时,也不同于早期人们对话语意义的简单二元切分,而是把意义生成纳入语言学、认知及心理学等多学科视域融合的大框架内。但正如Jaszczolt指出的那样,该合并表征的概念因缺乏一个能够解释各意义构成成份之间语用处理过程的运算法则,而亟待进一步完善。因此,本研究拟借鉴徐盛桓提出的语用推理模式,尝试建立一种新型的基于心理模型的以顺应论为导向的意义推理框架,充分融合这两种理论的特点,既要解释话语理解的语用处理过程,又要揭示各意义构成成份之间的动态作用。
根据维索尔伦的语言顺应论,本文指出选择和顺应作为一种有效的语用策略,在话语理解的过程中能够帮助释话人在不同的意识程度下,依据不同的语境、认知等因素,不断“选择”合适的意义成份,以“顺应”语境和语言结构,最终达成话语理解。在这个语用过程中,意向(intention)并不是决定话语意义的唯一因素,实际上,其他的认知、社会和文化因素一起都影响着意义的生成和理解。简言之,这一全新的关于话语理解过程的语用处理模式,既能比较全面地考量制约话语意义生成的各种不同因素或成份,如词义和句子意义的合并、默认解释以及语用推理等,同时也能利用选择与顺应这一有效语用策略将它们之间的相互作用统领于该模式框架之中,因而在强调话语意义生成的动态行和复杂性的同时,也突显了语言的认知、社会与文化功能,无疑有益于更加全面、系统地解释话语理解的本质和内涵。
此外,为了更好地阐释话语理解的语用处理过程,论证该理论框架的解释力和适用性,本文主要采用了定性的研究方法,既有理论介绍又有实例分析,并从电影、电视、文学作品、日常对话等方面充分搜集相关语料,对其进行详细的语用分析,以期增强本研究的在各种交际实践中的指导意义。
The present research is a cognitive-pragmatic analysis of utterance interpretation, which sets its theoretical basis on Verschueren's linguistic adaptability theory within a general functional perspective on language that defines language use as a pragmatic processing of a continuous making of linguistic choices while taking into consideration the cognitive, social, and cultural functioning of language at the levels of salience for the adaptation to the contextual correlates and the structural objects.
With the critical comments on the formalism approach to language that views utterance interpretation as simply equal to sentence understanding and emphasizes the syntagmatic relations of abstract semantic components as well as the earlier binary division of utterance meaning into what is said and what is implied and the like, this thesis tends to take a more eclectic approach to utterance meaning with the fusion of linguistic, psychological and cognitive perspectives. While adopting the notion of meaning merger representation proposed by K. M. Jaszczolt which identifies four sources of utterance meaning as (ⅰ) word meaning and sentence structure, (ⅱ) default interpretation mainly including cognitive default and social-cultural default, and (ⅲ) conscious pragmatic inference, this thesis points out its obvious lack of an algorithm that can capture the dynamic interaction of these meaning sources in utterance interpretation. Furthermore, by making reference to the implicatures stereotypical reasoning model proposed by S. H. Xu which graphically displays the mental model-based pragmatic processing of utterance interpretation while failing to identify specific meaning sources, this thesis attempts to construct such a new algorithm to disclose the dynamic interaction of utterance-meaning sources, aiming at bridging the two approaches within the framework of the adaptability theory so as to explore the pragmatic processing of utterance interpretation from the cognitive pragmatic perspective.
Therefore, an adaptability-oriented pragmatic processing model of utterance interpretation is tentatively developed and proposed for the present research. Within the framework of adaptability theory, utterance interpretation is actually considered to be both a process and result of dynamically continuous making of linguistic choices, exactly meaning sources in the present research, with the varying degrees of salience for the adaptation into the contextual correlates and structural objects. It is maintained that this process goes under the guidance of intentionality together with the cognitive, social and cultural factors simultaneously, working down to undergo default interpretation for truth-conditional contents and conscious pragmatic inference for implicatures till the satisfactory utterance interpretation. Obviously it is the linguistic adaptability, to be exact linguistic choice-making that works as a major pragmatic strategy to facilitate the interpreter to effect utterance interpretation.
The present research in this thesis is mainly a qualitative pragmatic analysis on the basis of the rich and widely representative data that are collected from the daily exchanges, the movies, the literary works and other relevant academic works. It is hoped that the present research is able to provide a general framework for the explication of utterance interpretation from the perspective of the interpreter, revealing the internal algorithm of complex meaning generation of the utterance under the adaptability theory of pragmatics.
引文
Bach, K. (1984). Default reasoning:Jumping to conclusions and knowing when to think twice. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly,65,37-58.
Bach, K. (1994). Conversational impliciture. Mind and Language,9,124-162.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays (Vern W. McGee Trans.). Texas:University of Texas Press.
Bezuidenhout, A. L. & Morris, R. K. (2004). Implicature, relevance, and default pragmatic inference. In D. Sperber & I. Noveck (eds.), Experimental Pragmatics (pp.257-282). Palgrave Press.
Caron, J. (1992). Introduction to psycholinguistics. Toronto:University of Toronto Press.
Carroll, D. W. (2000). Psychology of language. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Carston, R. (1988). Implicature, explicature, and truth-theoretic semantics. In R. Kempson (ed.), Mental representations:The interface between language and reality (pp.155-81). Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Carston, R. (1998). Pragmatics and the explicit/implicit distinction. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis. University of London.
Carston, R. (2002). Thoughts and utterances:The pragmatics of explicit communication. Oxford:Blackwell.
Carston, R. (2004). [Review of Stephen C. Levinson Presumptive meanings:The theory of generalized conversational implicature]. Journal of Linguistics,40,181-186.
Chen, X. R.[陈新仁],2001,论话语理解中的语义充实,语用与认知：关联理论研究(何自然、冉永平主编).北京：外语教学与研究出版社。
Espinal, M. T. (1996). On the contribution of lexical meaning to utterance interpretation. Links & Letters,3,29-38.
Gui,S.C.[桂诗春],2001,新编心理语言学.上海：上海外语教育出版社。
Grice, P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (eds.) Syntax and semantics 3:Speech acts (pp.41-58). New York:Academic Press. Reprinted in P. Grice (1989),22-40.
He,Z.R.,&Ran,Y.P.[何自然]等人,1998,关联理论—认知语用学基础.现代外语(3)：92-107。
Hu,X.[胡霞],2004,略论认知语境的基本特征.语言文字应用(3)：91-97。
Huang, Y. (2009). Pragmatics. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Hurford, J. R., Heasley, B., & Smith, M. B. (2007). Semantics:A coursebook. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Horn, L. R. (1984). Toward a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference:Q-based and R-based implicature. In D. Schiffrin (ed.), Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics, Washington, D.C.:Georgetown University Press.
Horn, L. R. (2004). Implicature. In:L. R. Horn and G. Ward (eds), The handbook of pragmatics (pp.3-28). Oxford:Blackwell.
Ido, R. (2003). Incomplete utterance and relevance. Journal of Social and Information Studies,10,25-38.
Jaszczolt, K. M. (1999). Discourse, beliefs, and intentions:Semantic defaults and propositional attitude ascription. Oxford:Elsevier Science.
Jaszczolt, K. M. (2005). Default semantics:Foundations of a compositional theory of acts of communication. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Jaszczolt, K. M. (2006a). Defaults in semantics and pragmatics. Retrieved November 2, 2009, from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Website:http://plato. stanford. edu/contents.html.
Jaszczolt, K. M. (2006b). Meaning merger:Pragmatics inference, defaults, and compositionality. Intercultural Pragmatics,32,195-212.
Jaszczolt, K. M. (2009a). Intentionality. In L. Cummings (ed.), The routledge pragmatics encyclopedia (pp.256-257). London:Routledge.
Jaszczolt, K. M. (2009b). Varieties of defaults. Belgrade English Language and Literature Studies,1,35-68.
Jaszczolt, K. M. (2010). Defaults in utterance interpretation. In L. Cummings (ed.), The routledge pragmatics encyclopedia (pp.123-124). London:Routledge.
Jiang, X. H. (2008). Understanding metonymy:A cognitive pragmatic perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies.
Kellerman, A. (1992). International telecommunication as international movements: The case of Israel. Telecommunications Policy,16.
Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London:Longman.
Levinson, S. C. (2000). Presumptive meanings:The theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge:MIT Press.
Liao, Q. Y. (2005). C-R-A model:A tripartite account of verbal communication. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Shanghai International Studies University.
Liao,Q.Y.[廖巧云],2006,合作·关联·顺应模式再探.外语教学(3)：2-6。
Liu, S. L.[刘森林],2004,语用策略与标准会话隐含义.外语学刊(3)：46-50。
Liu, Z. G., & Wu, Z. G.[刘正光]等人,2000,选择—顺应—评Verschueren《理解语用学》的理论基础.外语学刊(4)：84-90。
Lu,L.[鲁苓],2004,语言·言语·交往.北京：社会科学文献出版社。
Lu,L.[鲁苓],2006,语用学的界面-Verschueren综观论的一个基本问题.外语与外语教学(4)：7-9。
Lu,L.[鲁苓],2007,语言学发展的新路向—从“语言资源”的语言学到“语言使用”的语言学.海南大学学报(人文社会科学版)(5)：579-582。
Lu,L.[鲁苓],2009,论语用学理论的演化路径.中国外语(1)：31-34。
Matthews, P. H. (2007). The concise Oxford dictionary of linguistics (2nd edition). Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Mwihaki, A. (2004). Meaning as use:A functional view of semantics and pragmatics. Swahili Forum,11,127-139.
Patterson, D. M. (2006). Wittgenstein on understanding and interpretation (Comments on the work of Thomas Morawetz). Philosophical Investigations,29,129-139.
Potts, C. (2009). Formal pragmatics. In L. Cummings (ed.), The routledge encyclopedia of pragmatics.
Predelli, S. (1998). Utterance, interpretation and the logic of indexicals. Mind and Language,13(3),400-414
Radden, G. & Kovecses, Z. (1999). Toward a theory of metonymy. In K. U. Panther & G Radden (eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp.17-60). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia:John Benjamins.
Ran,Y.P.[冉永平],2004,言语交际的顺应—关联性分析.外语学刊(2)：28-33。
Recanati, F. (1989). The pragmatics of what is said. Mind and Language,4,97-120.
Recanati, F. (2003). Embedded implicatures. Philosophical Perspectives,17,299-332.
Recanati, F. (2004). Literal meaning. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Shen, Y. Y.[沈悦英],2005,认知语境与交际中的话语理解.湘潭大学学报(哲学社会科学版)(5)：160-163。
Shu,D.F.[束定芳],2008,认知语义学.上海：上海外语教育出版社。
Simpson, P. (1997). Language through literature:An introduction. London and New York:Routledge.
Smith, N. & Wilson, D. (1992). Introduction to the special issue on relevance theory. Lingua,87,1-10.
Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (2001). Relevance:Communication and cognition. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Sun,J.S.[孙吉胜],2008,语言、意义与国际政治—伊拉克战争解析.上海：上海人民出版社。
Sun,J.[孙炬],2007,维索尔伦顺应论的语言哲学观.山东大学学报(哲学社会科学版)(6)：51-55。
Sun,W.Z.[孙维张],1996,论言语的理解.吉林大学社会科学学报(3)：21-32。
Verschueren, J. (2000). Understanding pragmatics. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Verschueren, J. & Brisard, F. (2003). Adaptability. In Jef Verschueren (ed.), Handbook of Pragmatics:2002 Installments, John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Wang, D. C.[王德春]等人,2000,神经语言学.上海：上海外语教育出版社。
Xu,S.H.[徐盛桓],2002,常规关系与认知化—再论常规关系.外国语(1)：6-16。
Xu,S.H.[徐盛桓],2003a,常规关系与语句解读研究—语用推理形式化的初步探究.现代外语(2)：111-119。
Xu,S.H.[徐盛桓],2003b,常规关系与句式结构研究—以汉语不及物动词带宾语句式为例.外国语(2)：8-16。
Xu,S.H.[徐盛桓],2006a,“成都小吃团”的认知解读.外国语(2)：18-24
Xu,S.H.[徐盛桓],2006b,常规推理与“格赖斯循环”的消解.外语教学与研究(3)：163-170。
Xu,S.H.[徐盛桓],2006c,话语理解的意向性解释.中国外语(4):33-42。
Xu,S.H.[徐盛桓],2007,基于模型的语用推理.外国语(3)：2-9。
Xu, Z. H. (2002). A Pragma-cognitive approach to metaphor understanding. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies.
Yang, C. H.[杨春红],2005,反语的语用理解.西华大学学报(哲学社会科学版)(6)：88-92。
Yang, P.[杨萍],2001,关联—顺应模式.外国语(6)：21-28。
Yin,P.A.[尹丕安],2007,顺应—关联连续体下的语境及语义动态性分析.语言教学与研究(2)：72-78。
Zhang, Y. F.[张亚非],1992,话语理解理论：背景与现状.南京师大学报(社会科学版)(2)：94-99。
Zhu, M. S.[朱曼殊],1990,心理语言学.上海：华东师范大学出版社。
Bach, K. (1994). Conversational impliciture. Mind and Language,9,124-162.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays (Vern W. McGee Trans.). Texas:University of Texas Press.
Bezuidenhout, A. L. & Morris, R. K. (2004). Implicature, relevance, and default pragmatic inference. In D. Sperber & I. Noveck (eds.), Experimental Pragmatics (pp.257-282). Palgrave Press.
Caron, J. (1992). Introduction to psycholinguistics. Toronto:University of Toronto Press.
Carroll, D. W. (2000). Psychology of language. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Carston, R. (1988). Implicature, explicature, and truth-theoretic semantics. In R. Kempson (ed.), Mental representations:The interface between language and reality (pp.155-81). Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Carston, R. (1998). Pragmatics and the explicit/implicit distinction. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis. University of London.
Carston, R. (2002). Thoughts and utterances:The pragmatics of explicit communication. Oxford:Blackwell.
Carston, R. (2004). [Review of Stephen C. Levinson Presumptive meanings:The theory of generalized conversational implicature]. Journal of Linguistics,40,181-186.
Chen, X. R.[陈新仁],2001,论话语理解中的语义充实,语用与认知：关联理论研究(何自然、冉永平主编).北京：外语教学与研究出版社。
Espinal, M. T. (1996). On the contribution of lexical meaning to utterance interpretation. Links & Letters,3,29-38.
Gui,S.C.[桂诗春],2001,新编心理语言学.上海：上海外语教育出版社。
Grice, P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (eds.) Syntax and semantics 3:Speech acts (pp.41-58). New York:Academic Press. Reprinted in P. Grice (1989),22-40.
He,Z.R.,&Ran,Y.P.[何自然]等人,1998,关联理论—认知语用学基础.现代外语(3)：92-107。
Hu,X.[胡霞],2004,略论认知语境的基本特征.语言文字应用(3)：91-97。
Huang, Y. (2009). Pragmatics. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Hurford, J. R., Heasley, B., & Smith, M. B. (2007). Semantics:A coursebook. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Horn, L. R. (1984). Toward a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference:Q-based and R-based implicature. In D. Schiffrin (ed.), Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics, Washington, D.C.:Georgetown University Press.
Horn, L. R. (2004). Implicature. In:L. R. Horn and G. Ward (eds), The handbook of pragmatics (pp.3-28). Oxford:Blackwell.
Ido, R. (2003). Incomplete utterance and relevance. Journal of Social and Information Studies,10,25-38.
Jaszczolt, K. M. (1999). Discourse, beliefs, and intentions:Semantic defaults and propositional attitude ascription. Oxford:Elsevier Science.
Jaszczolt, K. M. (2005). Default semantics:Foundations of a compositional theory of acts of communication. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Jaszczolt, K. M. (2006a). Defaults in semantics and pragmatics. Retrieved November 2, 2009, from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Website:http://plato. stanford. edu/contents.html.
Jaszczolt, K. M. (2006b). Meaning merger:Pragmatics inference, defaults, and compositionality. Intercultural Pragmatics,32,195-212.
Jaszczolt, K. M. (2009a). Intentionality. In L. Cummings (ed.), The routledge pragmatics encyclopedia (pp.256-257). London:Routledge.
Jaszczolt, K. M. (2009b). Varieties of defaults. Belgrade English Language and Literature Studies,1,35-68.
Jaszczolt, K. M. (2010). Defaults in utterance interpretation. In L. Cummings (ed.), The routledge pragmatics encyclopedia (pp.123-124). London:Routledge.
Jiang, X. H. (2008). Understanding metonymy:A cognitive pragmatic perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies.
Kellerman, A. (1992). International telecommunication as international movements: The case of Israel. Telecommunications Policy,16.
Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London:Longman.
Levinson, S. C. (2000). Presumptive meanings:The theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge:MIT Press.
Liao, Q. Y. (2005). C-R-A model:A tripartite account of verbal communication. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Shanghai International Studies University.
Liao,Q.Y.[廖巧云],2006,合作·关联·顺应模式再探.外语教学(3)：2-6。
Liu, S. L.[刘森林],2004,语用策略与标准会话隐含义.外语学刊(3)：46-50。
Liu, Z. G., & Wu, Z. G.[刘正光]等人,2000,选择—顺应—评Verschueren《理解语用学》的理论基础.外语学刊(4)：84-90。
Lu,L.[鲁苓],2004,语言·言语·交往.北京：社会科学文献出版社。
Lu,L.[鲁苓],2006,语用学的界面-Verschueren综观论的一个基本问题.外语与外语教学(4)：7-9。
Lu,L.[鲁苓],2007,语言学发展的新路向—从“语言资源”的语言学到“语言使用”的语言学.海南大学学报(人文社会科学版)(5)：579-582。
Lu,L.[鲁苓],2009,论语用学理论的演化路径.中国外语(1)：31-34。
Matthews, P. H. (2007). The concise Oxford dictionary of linguistics (2nd edition). Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Mwihaki, A. (2004). Meaning as use:A functional view of semantics and pragmatics. Swahili Forum,11,127-139.
Patterson, D. M. (2006). Wittgenstein on understanding and interpretation (Comments on the work of Thomas Morawetz). Philosophical Investigations,29,129-139.
Potts, C. (2009). Formal pragmatics. In L. Cummings (ed.), The routledge encyclopedia of pragmatics.
Predelli, S. (1998). Utterance, interpretation and the logic of indexicals. Mind and Language,13(3),400-414
Radden, G. & Kovecses, Z. (1999). Toward a theory of metonymy. In K. U. Panther & G Radden (eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp.17-60). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia:John Benjamins.
Ran,Y.P.[冉永平],2004,言语交际的顺应—关联性分析.外语学刊(2)：28-33。
Recanati, F. (1989). The pragmatics of what is said. Mind and Language,4,97-120.
Recanati, F. (2003). Embedded implicatures. Philosophical Perspectives,17,299-332.
Recanati, F. (2004). Literal meaning. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Shen, Y. Y.[沈悦英],2005,认知语境与交际中的话语理解.湘潭大学学报(哲学社会科学版)(5)：160-163。
Shu,D.F.[束定芳],2008,认知语义学.上海：上海外语教育出版社。
Simpson, P. (1997). Language through literature:An introduction. London and New York:Routledge.
Smith, N. & Wilson, D. (1992). Introduction to the special issue on relevance theory. Lingua,87,1-10.
Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (2001). Relevance:Communication and cognition. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Sun,J.S.[孙吉胜],2008,语言、意义与国际政治—伊拉克战争解析.上海：上海人民出版社。
Sun,J.[孙炬],2007,维索尔伦顺应论的语言哲学观.山东大学学报(哲学社会科学版)(6)：51-55。
Sun,W.Z.[孙维张],1996,论言语的理解.吉林大学社会科学学报(3)：21-32。
Verschueren, J. (2000). Understanding pragmatics. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Verschueren, J. & Brisard, F. (2003). Adaptability. In Jef Verschueren (ed.), Handbook of Pragmatics:2002 Installments, John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Wang, D. C.[王德春]等人,2000,神经语言学.上海：上海外语教育出版社。
Xu,S.H.[徐盛桓],2002,常规关系与认知化—再论常规关系.外国语(1)：6-16。
Xu,S.H.[徐盛桓],2003a,常规关系与语句解读研究—语用推理形式化的初步探究.现代外语(2)：111-119。
Xu,S.H.[徐盛桓],2003b,常规关系与句式结构研究—以汉语不及物动词带宾语句式为例.外国语(2)：8-16。
Xu,S.H.[徐盛桓],2006a,“成都小吃团”的认知解读.外国语(2)：18-24
Xu,S.H.[徐盛桓],2006b,常规推理与“格赖斯循环”的消解.外语教学与研究(3)：163-170。
Xu,S.H.[徐盛桓],2006c,话语理解的意向性解释.中国外语(4):33-42。
Xu,S.H.[徐盛桓],2007,基于模型的语用推理.外国语(3)：2-9。
Xu, Z. H. (2002). A Pragma-cognitive approach to metaphor understanding. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies.
Yang, C. H.[杨春红],2005,反语的语用理解.西华大学学报(哲学社会科学版)(6)：88-92。
Yang, P.[杨萍],2001,关联—顺应模式.外国语(6)：21-28。
Yin,P.A.[尹丕安],2007,顺应—关联连续体下的语境及语义动态性分析.语言教学与研究(2)：72-78。
Zhang, Y. F.[张亚非],1992,话语理解理论：背景与现状.南京师大学报(社会科学版)(2)：94-99。
Zhu, M. S.[朱曼殊],1990,心理语言学.上海：华东师范大学出版社。