（外国语言学及应用语言学专业论文）日常话语中语用曲解现象新研究.pdf

湖 北 工 业 大 学 硕 士 学 位 论 文 i 摘摘 要要 本文命名为日常话语中语用曲解现象新研究 ，其“新”主要体现四个方面。 其一，作者在批判性阅读前人关于曲解现象的研究文献过程中，深感过去术语之 不统一、争议之处颇多，从而重新界定了这一言语现象，首次提出“语用曲解” 这一术语，并详尽地论述了其必要性和实用性。其二，作者在综合分析 halliday 的语域理论和 verschueren 的顺应理论的基础上，提出了“语域顺应”的新概念。 第三，本文突破过去对语用曲解这一普遍交际策略的功能论说，在语域理论和顺 应理论框架内，阐释了语用曲解使用的限制条件，并指出，通过语域顺应，能对 功能失当语用曲解进行修补。第四，本文深入地探讨了产生曲解的心理因素，挖 掘了生成语用曲解的心理机制。这三点正是本文的独创之处，也是本文的主体内 容。 首先，本文认为过去关于语用曲解这一语言交际现象研究的相关术语，如假 装的理解失败(fisher, 1987)、 有计划的误解(weigand,1999)、 非标准误解(dascal, 1999)、有意的误解(tzanne, 2000)等等，都难以区别曲解现象与误解的差别。至 于影响深远的“刻意曲解”(deliberate misinterpretation)这一术语，作者认 为， “曲解”作为交际策略，无疑是刻意性的，无需再加上“刻意”二字。同时， 在英译上，作者放弃“misinterpretation” ，是因为根据辞典（如朗文高级英语 辞典）其意大致为“无意的错误理解” ，相当于误解，而“twist”则是“为了有 利于自己而改变他人话语的本意” ，是有意识性的言语行为。而且，曲解作为一种 有用的交际策略，当然是语用的。因此，作者借用格莱斯（grice）等人论述隐喻 时提出的“pragmatic twist”来翻译“语用曲解” ，并对其进行了重新界定。当 然，这一术语是否经得起时间的考验，我们拭目以待。 其次，作者综合分析了语域理论和顺应理论，发现它们有诸多共同的理论基 础。顺应理论的“社会场景”和“物理世界”恰好对应语域理论的“语场” ；顺应 理论的“社交关系”对应于语域理论的“语旨” ； “语言信道”对应于语域理论里 的“语式” 。在此基础上，作者提出了“语域顺应”的概念，作为修补不合适的语 用曲解的理论基础。 再次，作者在分析大量语料后发现，许多语用曲解并不像过去研究者论述的 那样能够顺利达到其交际目的。语用曲解的功能受到语域的制约，即，受到语场、 语旨和语式的制约。同时，作者还指出，通过“语域顺应”，针对不合适的语用 湖 北 工 业 大 学 硕 士 学 位 论 文 ii 曲解，可以从言语和非言语两个方面进行修补。 最后，作者认为过去的研究重点集中在语用曲解的话语因素，运行机制和语 用功能上。但是话语因素只是给曲解提供了可能性，运行机制也只是阐释了说话 人怎样曲解他人话语，语用功能论述了曲解的效果。以上这些论述都没有涉及到 语用曲解产生的必然性。而“科学的成因解释理论应该揭示其必然性，而不仅 仅是指出其可能性。 ” （宗世海，2000）作者深入地挖掘了语用曲解的心理根源， 结合马斯洛的“需求层次理论” ，揭示了产生语用曲解的心理机制，包括四个方面： 交际双方的认知基础、话语因素、说话人的心理根源和曲解的心理历程，这四个 方面缺一不可，其相互结合必然导致语用曲解，同时其语用功能的实现又反过来 印证说话人的策略能力。 从结构组织上看，本文共分六部分，其中第 4 和第 5 部分为主体部分。需要 说明的是，本研究不在于对语用曲解进行系统、全面的阐释，而旨在解决过去研 究的不足，填补过去研究的空白，以帮助人们提高欣赏、研究和在交际中使用这 一语用策略的能力。 关键词关键词：语用曲解；制约条件；修补措施；心理机制 湖 北 工 业 大 学 硕 士 学 位 论 文 iii abstract the present study is titled “a new research on pragmatic twist in daily talk”. there are four “new” points in this study, that is, 1) the author, for the first time, proposes an innovative term “pragmatic twist” to name the phenomenon studied in this thesis; 2) on the basis of synthetically analyzing the theory of register and adaptation, the author propose the notion of “register adaptation”; 3) this thesis raises a challenge to the commonly-acknowledged functional theory and illustrate the remedial measures for those misuses of pragmatic twist; 4) the author makes a deep survey into the psychological factors and discloses the psychological mechanism behind the utilization of pragmatic twist. firstly, in order to avoid terminological vagueness, the author borrows the term “pragmatic twist” from grice (1989) et al to name the phenomenon previously termed “deliberate misinterpretation” and the like. five reasons for this innovative terminology are offered here. previous studies on this phenomenon havent reached a consensus on naming it. different researchers define it differently, such as: fake failure to understand (fisher, 1987), planned misunderstanding (weigand, 1999), non-standard misunderstanding (dascal, 1999), intentional misunderstanding (tzanne, 2000), deliberate misinterpretation (何自然 申智奇，2004), and so on. we need a unified terminology to denominate it. the term “pragmatic twist” distinguishes itself from the similar but different phenomenon misunderstanding. the term pragmatic twist evades the terminological tautology in the term “deliberate misinterpretation”. because “deliberate” is of consciousness and being a communicative strategy, “misinterpretation” is also highly motivated, the term deliberate misinterpretation is conceptually overlapped. the term of “misinterpretation” is abandoned because it is featured of unintentionality, but “twist” is a conscious act. the phenomenon discussed in this thesis is obviously a pragmatic one, and it is studied in the framework of pragmatics, therefore, this thesis nominates it in the combination of twist in pragmatics, i.e. pragmatic twist. secondly, the author synthetically analyzes hallidays register theory and verschuerens theory of adaptation, and finds that the two theories share a lot of 湖 北 工 业 大 学 硕 士 学 位 论 文 iv common ground, with the “social settings” and “physical world” in adaptation theory corresponding to “the field of discourse”; the “social relationship” in the adaptation theory to “the tenor of discourse”; the “linguistic channel” to “the mode of discourse”. on this basis, the author proposes the new notion of “register adaptation”, which serves as the theoretical foundation of repairing the misuses of pragmatic twist. thirdly, this thesis breaks through the conventional researching framework and undertakes a new and original perspective to challenge the universally acknowledged functioning of this communicative phenomenon. it is found out that register theory imposes a lof of restrictions on the fulfillment of pragmatic twist functions, that is, a speaker must pay attention to the field, tenor and mode of discourse, which are three dimensions of register theory. at the same time, while using pragmatic twist which doesnt comply with the register, a speaker is able to repair his communicative strategy by utterance negotiation and “register adaptation”. these remedies fall into two groups: verbal measures and nonverbal measures. fourthly, this study fills a vacancy of the psychological mechanism of pragmatic twist, which is hardly touched upon in the past literature. the psychological mechanism of pragmatic twist includes four factors: cognitive basis of both parties in a communication, multiple interpretations of an utterance (loopholes to pragmatic twist), the speakers psychological roots and the speakers psychological process during pragmatic twist, none of which is dispensable with each other, and integration of which will trigger pragmatic twist inevitably. meanwhile, the communicative effects of pragmatic twist in turn verify the speakers strategic competence. this thesis doesnt aim at a holistic and systematic analysis of pragmatic twist strategy, only to center on the deficiency and vacancy of early researches on the similar phenomenon, viz. restrictions of the utilization of pragmatic twist and its psychological mechanism, which will improve peoples ability to appreciate, study and utilize this pragmatic strategy in their daily talk. key words: pragmatic twist; restrictions; remedial measures; psychological mechanism 学位论文原创性声明和使用授权说明 原创性声明原创性声明 本人郑重声明：所呈交的学位论文，是本人在导师指导下，独立进行研究工 作所取得的研究成果。除文中已经标明引用的内容外，本论文不包含任何其他个 人或集体已经发表或撰写过的研究成果。对本文的研究做出贡献的个人和集体， 均已在文中以明确方式标明。本声明的法律结果由本人承担。 学位论文作者签名： 日期： 年 月 日 学位论文版权使用授权书学位论文版权使用授权书 本学位论文作者完全了解学校有关保留、使用学位论文的规定，即：学校有 权保留并向国家有关部门或机构送交论文的复印件和电子版， 允许论文被查阅和 借阅。 本人授权湖北工业大学可以将本学位论文的全部或部分内容编入有关数据 库进行检索，可以采用影印、缩印或扫描等复制手段保存和汇编本学位论文。 学位论文作者签名： 指导教师签名： 日期： 年 月 日 日期： 年 月 日 湖 北 工 业 大 学 硕 士 学 位 论 文 1 1 introduction to start with, a brief explanation of what “pragmatic twist” in this thesis refers to is needed. the following example will shed light on it. ex. 1 北奇石动简，国学中看博士论难云： “孔子弟子七十二人。 ”动 简因问曰： “达者七十二人，几人著冠？”博士曰： “经文未传， ”动简 曰： “先生读书，岂合不解。弟子著冠者三十人，未著冠者四十二人。 ” 博士曰： “何以知之？”动简曰： “ 论语云： 冠者五六人 ，五六三 十也； 童子六七人 ， 六七四十二也。 ” 岂非七十二人乎？” 坐者大悦， 博士无言以对。 （无名氏启颜录 ；转引自缪树晟 2000） in this example, with the aim to banter those doctors who have a superficial knowledge about the analects of confucius, the sagacious shidongjian deliberately employ mathematical multiplication to twist the original meaning of “五六” and “六七”, which are nothing but approximate numbers. this shaft of wit shows shidongjians tactfulness and sense of humor. this communicative strategy is named “deliberate misinterpretation” by he ziran （何自然） and shen zhiqi （申智奇） (2004) and their proponents, but is defined anew as “pragmatic twist” here. further illustration of the redefinition is coming later. pragmatic twist, a universal phenomenon in daily talk, literary works, comic dialogues, etc., is so time-honored that its hard to trace the origin. ex. 1 retrospects to 1500 years ago, for example. in the western culture, splendid examples can be seen in shakespeares play. ex.2 (portia in the merchant of venice disguises herself to be a lawyer, and declares that the court allows shylock to have a pound of flesh to be cut off from nearest to antonios heart. the following is the splendid remarks of portia.) wait! there is something else. antonio has promised to give you a pound of his flesh. but he has not promised to give you any of his blood. if you let one drop of his blood fall, you will lose all your land and all your money. as the saying goes, “bone of the bone and flesh of the flesh”. “a pound of flesh” undoubtedly contains blood in it, while it is not endorsed in the agreement. the outwardly perverted depiction of portia is out of expectation, but as the same time is logical and reasonable, meting out punishment to the merciless profiteer and vindicating 湖 北 工 业 大 学 硕 士 学 位 论 文 2 the justice. the above two examples are masterly ones among numerous pragmatic twist exploitations, which can be dubbed as a “resplendent pearl” in the profound human language culture. however, the linguistic researches on pragmatic twist just date back to decades ago, or even only cover a short phase of several years. 1.1 delimitation of pragmatic twist pragmatic twist, the pervasive tact interspersing daily talks, used to be mistaken for misunderstanding, receiving no specific researches. researchers only scratched the surface while studying the phenomenon of misunderstanding before 2004, and didnt reach a consensus on naming this phenomenon, which was defined differently, such as: fake failure to understand (fisher, 1987), planned misunderstanding (weigand, 1999), non-standard misunderstanding (dascal, 1999), intentional misunderstanding (tzanne, 2000), deliberate misinterpretation (何自然 申智奇，2004), and so on. since there are several versions of this linguistic phenomenon, why dont i adopt one of them (especially the widely accepted terminology of “deliberate misinterpretation”)? several reasons are to be offered here. needless to say, the publishing of pragmatic analysis of deliberate misinterpretation by he ziran and his doctoral student shen zhiqi (2004) arouses enormous passion and broad interest in this popularized communicative strategy. in the explosion of researches that has since ensued, their proponents goes in compliance with the “tautological” and “contentious” terminology of “deliberate misinterpretation” (“刻 意曲解” as the chinese rendition) broached by he and shen ( he refers to he ziran (何 自然)；shen refers to shen zhiqi (申智奇), the same below.) , which was defined as: in verbal communication, the second speaker (s2) deliberately exploits the specific context or ambiguous factors and indeterminacy of the first speaker (s1)s utterance and choose the interpretation diverging from s1s intended meaning so as to achieve certain communicative effects. （shen zhiqi, 2004: 41-42） two aspects of controversy about the term “deliberate misinterpretation” require discussing, i.e. the term itself and its delimitation. firstly, being “tautological” means that the term combines a redundant “deliberate” (刻意) and “misinterpretation” （曲解） together without due consideration. this notion of “曲解”, as a strategy of communication, albeit falling into a dichotomy between intentionality and unintentionality, bears the salient feature of consciousness of the speaker. (see 方传余 王蒙， 2007) being unintentional, “misinterpretation” amounts 湖 北 工 业 大 学 硕 士 学 位 论 文 3 to misunderstanding from my perspective, as shown in the following examples. 床前明月光，疑疑是地上霜。(李白静夜思) 日出江花红胜胜火，春来江水绿如蓝。(白居易忆江南) (参程瑞君, 1994) the chinese character “疑” in may be mistaken for “怀疑” （doubt/suspect） by most of the readers of this thesis. here are some versions of translation:1 i descry bright moonlight in front of my bed, i suspect it to be frost on the floor. (by 徐忠杰) abed, i see a silver light, i wonder if its frost aground. （by 许渊冲) so bright a gleam on the foot of my bed- could there have been a frost already? (by tr. witter bynner) however, careful consideration of the poem embroils the readers into confusion: with the foregoing line of the verse spelling out that it is moonlight before the bed, why does the poet have a “suspicion” whether it is frost or not? as a poetic masterpiece throughout the ages, it wont admit of such contradiction. actually, “疑” here is an indicator of simile, which means “like”, “resemblance”, as in the version of tr. herbert a. giles: i wake, and moonbeams play around my bed, glittering like hoar-frost to my wandering eyes. meanwhile, the boldfaced character “胜” in is usually falsely interpreted as “胜 过、 超过” (more than, excel, surpass); and “红胜火” as “比火更红” （much redder than fire）. in fact, fire is not the richest red color. therefore, it makes no sense to use this metaphor. reference work shows that “胜” means “犹如、如同” (just like, as if). the understanding of and represents unintentional “曲解” resulting from ignorance or superficial study. on the other hand, pragmatic twist, probed into in this thesis, is a conscious communicative strategy to fulfill the speakers certain need. linguistic researches on deliberate misinterpretation of the recent decade also postulate that a speaker employs it to satisfy his successful communication. and its virtually a truism that (pragmatic) strategy is intention-oriented, so “deliberate” is redundant in the term, because there is an overlap between “刻意” and the consciousness of “曲解” as a pragmatic strategy. therefore, i forsake the contrived term of “deliberate misinterpretation”, and adopt “pragmatic twist” instead. secondly, being “contentious” means that he and shens deliberate misinterpretation is narrowly restricted in the sphere that “deliberate misinterpretation occurs when s2 correctly understands the intended meaning that s1 expresses via an 1 see twist/zhongying/2433.html 湖 北 工 业 大 学 硕 士 学 位 论 文 4 utterance, yet the second speaker subsequently produces an utterance which is in some way purposefully employed to present the mismatch between the natural meaning and the non-natural meaning in the utterance of the first speaker to satisfy certain communicative needs of his own (s2)”, while data in literature go far beyond this restriction (s2 takes advantage of the certain context or uncertainty and ambiguity in the utterance of s1 and deliberately distorts the original discourse intention of s1), even including the examples in shen zhiqis own doctoral dissertation. see an example on page 114 of her dissertation: ex. 3 (赤壁大战前，诸葛亮出使东吴，在还没见到孙权之前，先舌战 群儒，有这样一段对话。) 问:天有姓乎? 答:有。 问:何姓? 答:姓刘。 问:何谓也? 答:天子姓刘，故天姓刘。 shen analyzes that, by violating the law of identity, zhuge liang shifts the topic of “the surname of the heaven” to “the surname of the son of the heaven” , and draws the conclusion that “the son of the heaven” (the emperor liu bei) is surnamed liu, so is the heaven. from where i stand, zhuge liang just diverges from the tart question, creating new meaning of “天子”, but doesnt “misinterpret” his opponents remarks, as they dont mention “天子” at all. if what i put forth here is not tenable enough, the following example will hold water. ex. 4 国画大师张大千与京剧大师梅兰芳有一次一同赴宴。席间，张 大千首先举杯向梅兰芳敬酒道:“梅先生，你是君子，我是小人，我先 敬你一杯” 。梅兰芳与众人均莫名其妙。张大千接着解释道:“你唱戏， 动口；我画画，动手。君子动口，小人动手。 ”引得在座宾客无不开怀 大笑. (参李金彪， 2000) zhang daqian, a great master of traditional chinese painting, brilliantly twists the chinese famous saying “君子动口不动手”（a man of honor reasons things out, not to resort to force）to create a humorous atmosphere, which is obviously a one-man show, not intended mismatch between zhangs and mei lanfangs utterance. with the above illustration, i come to the delimitation of the pragmatic strategy discussed here, in which i adopt the term of “pragmatic twist” to avoid issues like redundancy or tautology. furthermore, the data collected for the elaboration on 湖 北 工 业 大 学 硕 士 学 位 论 文 5 pragmatic twist cover the vivid, authentic verbal conversations from real life, including distorting the remarks of another utterer and pragmatic twist started by a speaker all alone. the latter can be illustrated by this example: ex. 5 while looking out of the window, someone calls out “一辆保时捷 （a porsche） ”to tantalize those auto fans. all other roommates run to the window only to find a no. 10 cleaning car, literally “保 10 洁”. obviously, this example is not “misinterpretation” of the other speaker. here is another question to be answered. why do i abandon “misinterpretation” for the english equivalence of “曲解” and adopt the term “twist”? seeing from any dictionary, “misinterpret” means “to not understand the correct meaning of something that someone says or does, or to explain something wrongly to other people”. that is to say, “misinterpretation” somewhat amounts to “misunderstanding”, which is a unconscious phenomenon, whereas “twist” means “to change the true or intended meaning of a statement, especially in order to get some advantage for yourself”. 2 as a communicative strategy, the phenomenon discussed here is undoubtedly a conscious one. notably, i am not alone to coin the term “pragmatic twist”. while illustrating metaphor, grice (1989), searle (1979), sperber and wilson (1985/6) put forth the “pragmatic twist theory”, which holds that “when we indulge in metaphor, we use words and phrases with their standard literal meanings to say one thing, yet we are taken to meantaken as intending to conveysomething else. to put it another way, a sentence means one thing, while using it we mean something elsewhere both things are straightforwardly propositional in character.”3 “pragmatic twist” in grice et als term means “practical change” actually. but here, i extend the term to be a twist or distortion of the original meaning of a fixed phrase or the u