（外国语言学及应用语言学专业论文）顺应论视角下的话语标记语功能研究.pdf

descriptive chinese abstract i 摘 要 话语标记语是一类词汇表达式，其形式包括连词、副词、介词短语及其他句法范畴。这类词汇标示着前后话语间的关系，把它们从其所依附的话语中去掉既不影响该话语的语法正确性也不影响其命题内容，但却影响其语用得体性。话语标记语作为一种普遍的语言现象出现在大多数语言中，因此，本研究有着重要的理论价值和实践意义。 verschueren 提出的语言顺应理论为我们从认知，社会以及文化的视角对话语标记语的功能进行研究提供了依据。该理论可以较为全面地解释话语标记语使用的原因及其在话语生成中的作用。在顺应论的基础上，学者们从不同角度对话语标记语进行了进一步研究。然而这些研究只涉及了话语标记语的某些方面，未能全面运用语言顺应理论对其进行系统研究。 本研究以语言顺应论为理论框架，试图对话语标记语在交际中的功能进行系统而详细的分析。话语标记语的使用过程实质上是一个语言顺应的过程。语言使用者通过话语标记语这一语言策略来实现其既定的交际目的。话语标记语的使用包括三个基本概念：变异性、商讨性和顺应性。话语标记语使用的变异性主要体现在词汇层面；其商讨性表明话语标记语的使用是一个动态的过程, 语言使用者在交际过程中对话语标记语的选择并非严格按照形式- 功能间的固定关系进行，而是在具有高度灵活性的原则和策略的基础上完成的。就话语标记语使用的顺应性而言，语言使用者选择特定话语标记语的意图在于实现特定的交际目的。 交际者一旦进入交际过程， 头脑中必然存在某种交际目的。为了实现这些交际目的，交际者必须采用一定的交际策略，话语标记语的使用正是其中的一种重要策略。 语言使用者在交际中选用话语标记语以达到的顺应目标可概括为三个方面，即语言语境、社会规约和心理动机。其中对语言语境的顺应属于语言内部原因，而对社会规约和心理动机的顺应则归于语言外部原因。在描述顺应目标的基础上，本文对话语标记语使用过程中所实现的各种功能进行了详细的分析。 在对交际过程中话语标记语使用的顺应过程进行分析后，本文进而探讨了交际者在使用话语标记语过程中所体现出的元语用意识。对元语用意识在话语标记语使用中功能的探讨进一步证实了 verschueren 的观点：元语用意识及其标示语对语言使用过程中意descriptive chinese abstract ii义的生成和商讨都具有重要的作用。 通过分析话语标记语在顺应过程中实现的各种功能，我们不难发现，话语标记语的使用不仅仅是一种语言现象，而是更多地体现为一种重要的交际策略，在特定的情形下可成为语言使用者实现其交际目标的有效手段。 关键词： 顺应；话语标记语；语言选择；元语用意识 english abstract iii abstract discourse markers are a group of lexical expressions drawn from the classes of conjunctions, adverbials, prepositional phrases and other syntactic categories, which, signal a relationship between the utterance they introduce and the preceding utterance, when taken away, do not affect the semantic meaning or propositional content of the utterances to which they are attached but do affect the pragmatic appropriateness. the use of discourse markers is a universal language phenomenon that can be found in most languages. therefore, the present research on it is of theoretical and practical importance. verschuerens linguistic adaptation theory has the potential to provide a fruitful explanation for why discourse markers are used and how they function in utterance production from a cognitive, social and cultural perspective. based on verschuerens theory of linguistic adaptation, a few scholars give further explanation to discourse markers from different angles. however, their study only touch on some aspects of discourse markers, and fail to make a comprehensive account for discourse markers within the overall theory of linguistic adaptation. the present study adopts the linguistic adaptation theory as the framework, tentatively providing a detailed and systematic analysis to the functions of discourse markers in communication. the use of discourse markers is in fact an adapting process and a linguistic strategy that can be exploited by the language users to achieve their specific communicative goals. therefore, this study encompasses three constituents: the variability, the negotiability and the adaptability of the use of discourse markers. the variability of the use of discourse markers is manifested mainly on the lexical level. the negotiability of the use of discourse markers demonstrates that the use of discourse markers is a dynamic process and all the choices are made according to highly flexible principles instead of fixed form- function relationship. as to the adaptability of the use of discourse markers, we hold that the real reason why communicators choose one specific discourse marker in communication instead of the others lies in the intention of approaching their specific communicative goals. once communicators are engaged in communication, they must bear certain purposes in mind. to english abstract iv realize these goals, they have to adopt certain linguistic strategies, with the use of discourse markers as an important one. the objects to which the communicators use of discourse markers adapts can be divided into three categories: linguistic context, social conventions and psychological motivations. the first one belongs to language- internal reasons, while the other two are attributed to language- external reasons. furthermore, various pragmatic functions that the communicators strategic use of discourse markers perform in the adapting process are analyzed in detail. having analyzed the adapting process of the use of discourse markers in communication, we move on to the discussion of metapragmatic awareness, which is shown in our analysis to play an important role in guiding, regulating and supervising the whole dynamic process of the communicators use of discourse markers. the analysis of the functioning of metapragmatic awareness in the use of discourse markers strengthens verschuerens view that metapragmatic awareness and its linguistic manifestations contribute crucial to the generation and negotiation of meaning. through analyzing the functions of discourse markers in the adapting process, we may come to the conclusion that the use of discourse markers is an important communicative strategy rather than a mere linguistic phenomenon. it can be exploited under certain conditions as an effective way for the language users to approach their communicative goals. key words: adaptation; discourse marker; linguistic choice- making; metapragmatic awareness 湘 潭 大 学 学位论文原创性声明 本人郑重声明：所呈交的论文是本人在导师的指导下独立进行研究所取得的研究成果。除了文中特别加以标注引用的内容外，本论文不包含任何其它个人或集体已经发表或撰写的成果作品。对本文的研究做出重要贡献的个人和集体，均已在文中以明确方式标明。本人完全意识到本声明的法律后果由本人承担。 作者签名： 日期： 年 月 日 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，同意学校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。本人授权湘潭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。 涉密论文按学校规定处理。 作者签名： 日期： 年 月 日 导师签名： 日期： 年 月 日 introduction 1 introduction 0.1 definition of discourse marker most languages in the world have a range of words or lexical expressions, which do not belong to any of the major syntactic categories, which do not indicate objects, events or properties, and whose meanings do not seem to affect the propositional content of utterances in which they occur (wilson, 2000:206). such words or expressions are known as discourse markers. though there is a great of terminological diversity among the study of discourse markers, most of the researchers arrive at the agreement of the general properties of discourse markers. discourse markers do not affect the truth conditions of an utterance and do not add anything to the propositional content of an utterance. they are related to the speech situation but not to the situation talked about, and so on. the expressions in italics in the following sequences are examples of discourse markers: (1) a: i like him. b: so, you think youll ask him out then? (2) a: harry is hurrying. b: but when do you think he will really get here? (3) john cant go. and mary cant go either. (4) i think it will fly. anyway, lets give it a chance. (fraser, 1999:932) brinton (1996:33- 35) gives a detailed study of discourse markers. according to his study, we can consequently list the basic features of discourse markers as follows: phonological and lexical features: (a) they are short and phonologically reduced. (b) they form a separate tone group. introduction 2 (c) they are marginal forms and hence difficult to place within a traditional word class. syntactic features: (a) they occur outside the syntactic structure or they are only loosely attached to it. (b) they are optional. semantic feature: they have little or no propositional meaning. functional feature: they are multifunctional, operating on several linguistic levels simultaneously. due to divergent theoretical preoccupations and research goals, there is no consensus of the definition of discourse marker. in the present study, it is defined as a group of lexical expressions drawn from the classes of conjunctions, adverbials, prepositional phrases and other syntactic categories, which, signal a relationship between the utterance they introduce and the preceding utterance, when taken away, do not affect the semantic meaning or propositional content of the utterances to which they are attached but do affect the pragmatic appropriateness. 0.2 significance of the present research as a universal linguistic phenomenon, the important role that discourse markers play in communication justifies the present research with both theoretical and practical significance. theoretically, the present study accounts for why discourse markers are adopted in conversation and how they function in communication, and it may thus shed light on the development of discourse or conversation analysis, which studies the sequential structure and coherence of conversations so as to establish what properties are used in a systematic way when people linguistically interact (crystal, 1985: 75). practically, the present study is of immediate significance in two aspects. on the one hand, discourse markers are so pervasively used in daily language that the proper use and interpretation of them consist of a considerable part of pragmatic or communicative competence. therefore, due attention should be paid to them in foreign language teaching and introduction 3learning. on the other hand, the study of discourse markers may provide us with some knowledge on how the use of discourse markers facilitates linguistic communication, so as to help us fulfill various communicative needs skillfully. 0.3 objectives of the present research the general aim of this thesis is to provide a detailed and systematic analysis of the functions of discourse markers in linguistic communication from the perspective of verschuerens linguistic adaptation theory. the present study involves not only the linguistic and structural analysis of discourse markers but also the dynamic, meaningful functioning of it. it will also focus on the social and cognitive factors functioning in the specific instance of discourse markers and analyze how metapragmatic awareness is reflected in the use of discourse marker in linguistic communication. this adaptation analysis of discourse marker will unveil the fact that the use of discourse markers in linguistic communication is due to the language- internal reason, i.e. adaptation to linguistic context and language- external reasons, i.e. adaptation to social conventions and psychological motivations, and integrate the full complexities (linguistic, social, cognitive elements) involved in the use of discourse markers. to be brief, we want to make clearer why people use discourse markers in communication, what linguistic features the use of discourse markers in communication possesses, and what functions it can perform to help language users achieve communicative goals. through analyzing the functions of discourse markers in the adapting process, we want to prove that the use of discourse markers is an important communicative strategy rather than a mere linguistic phenomenon. it can be exploited under certain conditions as an effective way for the language users to approach their communicative goals. 0.4 framework of the thesis the present thesis consists of six parts. the first part gives an introduction of the thesis. it introduces the definition of discourse introduction 4marker and outlines the significance of the present research, objectives of the present research, as well as the framework of the whole thesis. chapter one presents a sketch of verschuerens linguistic adaptation theory and its past integration with the study of discourse markers. in addition, brief comments are made on the past studies. chapter two analyzes variability, negotiability and adaptability of the use of discourse markers, aiming to prove that discourse markers appear as a result of linguistic choice- making. chapter three investigates the functions of discourse markers from the perspective of linguistic adaptation theory. the dynamics and functionality of the use of discourse markers are explained by analyzing the linguistic, social and cognitive factors involved in the process of adaptation. chapter four discusses how metapragmatic awareness is reflected in the use of discourse markers. the last part is the conclusion of the thesis. it summarizes the major findings of the study, and points out the remaining problems as well as topics for further discussion. chapter1 adaptation theory and its past integration with the study of discourse markers 5 chapter 1 adaptation theory and its past integration with the study of discourse markers 1.1 verschuerens linguistic adaptation theory the theory of linguistic adaptation first appears in pragmatics as a theory of linguistic adaptation (verschueren, 1987), the working document of the international pragmatics association (ipra), and is later presented in verschuerens new book understanding pragmatics (1999) in a modified and comparatively mature version. the theory proposes that making adaptation is the key to organisms survival in their process of maintaining the dynamic balance between the environment and themselves. in terms of language using, human being makes negotiable linguistic choices from a variable range of possibilities in such a way as to approach points of satisfaction for communicative needs (verschueren, 1999: 61) and in the long run contribute to the survival of human beings. 1.1.1 the nature of linguistic adaptation according to verschueren (1999: 55- 58), using language must consist of the continuous making of linguistic choices, consciously or unconsciously, for language- internal (i. e. structural) and/or language external reasons. this idea is proposed on the basis that language is characterized by variability, negotiability and adaptability. these three notions do not represent topics of investigation, but merely interrelated properties of the overall object of investigation for linguistic pragmatics, that is, the meaningful functioning of language. variability and negotiability respectively provide possibilities and principles for adaptability. and it is on the basis of variability and negotiability that adaptability enables human beings to make choices as to satisfy communicative needs. linguistic adaptation theory could be examined from four clear and inter- related angles assigned to pragmatic descriptions and explanations. these include contextual correlates of chapter1 adaptation theory and its past integration with the study of discourse markers 6adaptability, structural objects of adaptability, dynamics of adaptability, and the salience of the adaptation process. contextual correlates of adaptability include any ingredient of the communicative context with which communicative choices have to be interadaptable (verschueren 1999: 69), ranging from aspects of the physical surroundings to social relationships between speakers and listeners to interlocutors mental world. the structural objects of adaptability include all the possible levels of linguistic structure where linguistic choice- making takes place, as well as principles of structuring. the dynamics of adaptability concerns the actual functioning of adaptation process, i.e. the dynamic generation of meaning in communication. the salience of adaptation process is concerned with the fact that not all choices are made with equal degree of consciousness. some are highly motivated while some automatic, involving different ways of processing in the medium of adaptability: mind in society. this task just well indicates language use is not only a social phenomenon, but also involves cognitive factors. the four tasks are in perfect agreement with the social, cultural, and cognitive elements involved in the dynamic process of language use, each having different functional loads to carry and are related to each other as shown in figure 1.1 figure 1.1 the structure of a pragmatic theory (verschueren 1999: 67) 1.1.2 verschuerens account of discourse markers in the discussion about indicators of metapragmatic awareness, verschueren states that context structur dynamics salience locus processes status meaningful functioning chapter1 adaptation theory and its past integration with the study of discourse markers 7a wide range of indicators of metapragmatic awareness passes under the variable and often overlapping labels discourse markers, pragmatic markers, discourse particles or pragmatic particles (1999: 189). most of what verschueren deals with under these overlapping labels are discourse markers in line with the definition of the present study. however, verschueren does not make a systematic and integrated look at these phenomena. instead, he simply exemplifies or draws attention to a number of such indicators situated with reference to aspects of linguistic context and the structural objects of adaptability. the first group of discourse markers discussed by verschueren are what he refers to as sentence adverbs, such as the italicized expressions in (46a- e), which are all quoted with some adaptation from verschueren (ibid.). (5) a. admittedly/unfortunately/honestly, johns a lousy driver. b. probably/undoubtedly, humanity is planning its own extinction. c. reportedly, the royal family is in for more scandals. d. ive always had like- lots of nightmares. e. hes just- hes just crazy, the captain. according to verschueren, while like and just in (5d- e) indicate reflection on the wording process, the discourse markers in (5a- c) all specify the status of the following propositional content: (5a) does so in terms of attitudinal markers, (5b) in terms of epistemic properties, and (5c) by indicating a (vague) source of information. a second group of discourse markers verschueren deals with are what he labels as overt markers of suprasentential connections to surrounding elements of the linguistic context. for example: (6) a. it was already late. so, we went home. b. it was already late. but we stayed. c. it was already late. however, we dare not leave. d. we were the first to leave. after all, it was already late. e. by the way, johns a lousy driver. (7) a: do you want to leave already? chapter1 adaptation theory and its past integration with the study of discourse markers 8b: well, it will be dark soon. verschueren holds that the discourse markers in (6) and (7) indicate how an utterance fits in with surrounding discourse, they reve