从语用学角度探讨英语幽默的形成和幽默文化特点.doc

A Pragmatics Approach to English Humor and its Cultural Features 从语用学角度探讨英语幽默的形成和幽默文化特点Dissertation Submitted toXian Normal Universityin partial fulfillment of the requirementfor the degree ofMaster of ArtsBy ZhangSunfurong (Foreign Linguistics and Applied Linguistics)Dissertation Supervisor: Professor Zhao ChunxiaNovember, 2005ContentsAbstractAcknowledgments Chapter 1 Introduction1.1 Significance of the Study1.2 Aim of the Study1.3 Method of the Study1.3.1 Analytic Framework 1.3.2 Steps of the Study1.3.3 Data Collection1.4 Structure of the StudyChapter 2 The Theoretical Basis on Context and Speech Act Theory2.1 The Definition and the Classification of Context2.2 Features of Context2.3 The functions of context2.4 The Establishment and Development of Speech Act Theory2.5 The Definition and the Classification of Speech Act Theory2.6 Features of Speech Act TheoryChapter 3 Pragmatics and humor3.1 Definition of humor3.2 Classification of humor3.3. Meaning, Context and Implicature 3.3.1 The relations between meaning in humor, context and implicature3.3.2 Meaning3.3.3 Context in humor3.3.4 Implicature3.4 Humor and Speech Act Theory3.4.1The Cooperative Principle3.4.1.1 How conversational implicature is generated in humor?3.4 The Politeness Maxim.Chapter 4 Analysis of the realization of English humor via pragmatics and speech act theory4.1 Violating Maxims of Conversation leading to humorous effect4.1.1 Maxims of Conversation4.1.2 Cooperative Principle4.1.3 Violating Cooperative Principle leading to Humorous Effect4.1.4 Politeness Principle4.1.5 Violating Politeness Principle leading to Humorous Effect4.2 Context4.2.1 Context4.2.2 Characteristics of Context4.3.3 Humor and ContextChapter 5 Cultural Context in understanding of English Humor.5.1 English Humor and its Culture barrier5.2 Culture features in Campus humor5.3 Culture features in family humor5.4 Culture features in religious humorChapter 6 ConclusionBibliographyNotes and QuotationsPublished PapersSurvey摘 要作为幽默的主要表现形式，幽默语言在我们的生活中很常见。它源于生活又高于生活，因此常会以生活中的会话形式出现。这就使它带有鲜明的语用特征。在关于语用学的各种书籍中，我们经常可以见到以会话形式的幽默为例的语用分析，可见幽默和语用学有着很密切的关系。优秀的幽默语言总是具有一种或几种语用特征。过去有一些分析幽默所产生的语用效果或所具有的语用特征的论文，但它们主要都是分析幽默语言对合作原则的某些准则的违反，在谈到幽默中所运用的修辞手段时也仅仅只提到反语，夸张，双关等修辞手法。不仅分析的对象很有局限性，而且内容多有重复。同样，在一些介绍幽默语言的书籍中也会提到其语用特征，但也都只是针对语用学某个方面来分析的。本文以会话形式的英语幽默为例，对幽默所具有的各种语用特征进行了较详细的分析研究。文章首先介绍了研究英语幽默的用意和目的，研究方法和数据收集，回顾了语用学的重要理论，包括会话原则，言语行为理论和语境学。虽然现在语用学界对合作原则提出了很多异议，但是合作原则提出了顺利实现会话目的的具体准则，使对对话的分析更有理论依据。所以相对而言，对于分析会话式幽默中的幽默效果是如何产生的，合作原则仍然不失为一种最有效的语用原则。此外，在以往对幽默的语用分析中，较少运用到语境学理论分析英语幽默。因此，本文对语用学的这几个理论进行系统的分析，通过具体分析发现这些理论并非独立的理论，而是密切联系，文章对它们的内在联系进行了分析。在人们的言语交际中，人们能顺利地进行交流，是因为他们自觉或不自觉地遵守这些原则。因此，合作原则是会话的前提，如果违背了这些原则，话语有时就会产生一种言外之意，幽默性语言就是其中一种表现形式。言语行为理论是对合作原则的进一步深化。言语行为理论由J. Austin(1962)提出，并由J. Searle进一步完善。他们认为，人们在说话时，不仅是在交流信息，同时，也是在完成某种行为，交际双方必须同时具备语言能力和语用能力，方能有效地发出和接受信息，保证这种交际顺利进行。如果两种能力有一种，特别是语用能力欠缺时，对话语理解就会有误会，信息传递也会随之受阻或走样。许多幽默就是由于信息交流不顺畅而产生的。言语行为理论揭示了人们在对话中是有其具体的意图或目的的。因此它是会话原则的深化。语言交流不是静止的，而是一个处于动态的，不断发展的过程。除了语言知识和生成正确话语的能力，成功的语言交流还需要有在一定时间，地点，场合说出相应恰当话语的能力，两者的结合体现了一个人的交际能力（Hymes，1968）。这种能力是语境学研究的重点。语境参与言语行为并在其中发挥重要作用。语境作为言语行为赖以生存的物质和社会环境，是言语行为的参与因素，成为言语行为中必不可少的构成因素。离开言语行为，语境要素失去其存在的价值和意义；离开语境要素，言语行为无法体现其行为的本质属性。因此，语境是言语行为的组成部分，语境的功能只有在言语行为中才能得到体现。其次，文章介绍了幽默的定义，起源，分类，以及研究幽默的相关理论，并对幽默的特点及其在我们日常生活中的功能进行了分析，接着重点运用上述语用学的重要理论结合英语幽默语言特别是会话式幽默产生的根源。在运用语用学理论阐述和分析幽默的同时，文章还详细列举了英语幽默中所运用的各种修辞手法，如夸张，双关，暗喻等，并对由此产生的幽默效果进行分析。最后，文章延伸了语境学中的文化语境，结合问卷调查，对英语幽默中存在的文化语境进行了归类和分析。 关键词： 英语幽默；语用学；合作原则；言语理论行为；语境；文化语境论文类型：应用研究AbstractAs a language phenomenon, humor plays an important role in English culture. In daily communication, humor ameliorates human relations, improves the communicative atmosphere, but also is endowed with the symbol of personal, wit, glamour and education. Based on conclusion about traditional humor theories, this paper intends to employ from the angle of pragmatics, applying many theories like Cooperative Principle, Speech act theory and Context to analyze the realization of English humor in many specific examples. The article discusses the phenomenon of violating Cooperative Principle and Politeness Maxim leading to humorous effect and the influence of Context on the realization of humor. This paper is characterized with the combination of the three main theories, that is, Cooperative Principle, Speech Act Theory, and Context. By analyzing these theories, the author found that there is a close relationship among them. The Cooperative Principle contains the rules that people should obey in order to communicate with each other smoothly. The Speech Act Theory furthers the study of the conversation by pointing out that conversation doesnt just mean words but mean action. So it reveals the implied meaning beneath the words. Context, including the situational context and cultural context, is the major element in Speech Act Theory. Context would lose its value and meaning without Speech Acts. Meanwhile, Speech Acts will not realized or identified without the understanding of Context. Therefore, Context is indispensable to the Speech Act, at the same time, the function of the context is conveyed only in Speech Act.Through various examples of English humor in conversations, this thesis thoroughly studies the pragmatic features in humor. First, the thesis makes a general introduction on the aim and methodology of the study. Then, it looks back the major theories in Pragmatics, and further the study on the connection among them. After that, the thesis discusses the theories on humor and its origin with examples. Based on them, it concludes that it is necessary and scientific to analyze humor especially conversational humor from the pragmatic view. Then it comes to the most important section, which analyzes various English humorous conversations by using the analytical tools of pragmtics.Although many studies focus on humor, they concentrate on analyzing humor from the perspective of Cooperative Principle. The author of this thesis believes that English humor should be analyzed by the combination of the theory of Context, which is too important to be neglected. By using these theories together, it is possible that the realization of the humor is fully illustrated.At the same time, this thesis furthers the study on cultural context in English humor. As a rule, the lack of understanding of the cultural context usually is the major obstacle to understand English humor. The author made a small-sized survey on views of cultural background among the sophomores in JiaoTong University, and proved that t the value system and religion are the major hindrance to understanding English humor. Thus the these discusses mainly about the value system and religion reflected in the examples This thesis, by analyzing English humor from the perspective of Cooperative Principles, Speech Act Theory and Context, systematically illustrates how English humor achieves its humorous effect. At the same time, by analyzing its cultural context, especially the value system and religion, it tries to break down the cultural barrier for English learners.Keywords: English Humor, Pragmatics, Cooperative Principle, Speech Act Theory, Context, Cultural contextChapter 1 Introduction1.1 Aim of the study This thesis attempts to analyze English humor with different aspects of Pragmatics. Through the thorough analysis, it helps to gain an understanding of how humorous effects are achieved. Besides using the past traditional Cooperative Principle and Speech Act Theory, this study illustrates English humor from the perspective of Context, which becomes the focus of many linguistics. Meanwhile, after the analysis on the realization of humorous effects, it concentrates on the subdivision of context-cultural context, and discusses the major cultural context showed in the classified English humor.1.2 Significance of the study This study will help English learners gain an understanding of how humor makes people laugh and think, with a systematic and thorough analytic tool. At the same time, it may help English teachers use English humor in their class and focus on introducing cultural-loaded information to their students.1.3 Methodology of the study 1.3.1 Theoretical tools for analysis Pragmatics, created by the American philosopher Charles Morris (1938), is considered as “the study of those relations between language and context that are grammaticalized, or encoded in the structure of a language.”(Levinson,1983) The research of pragmatics in Morris time was done as a part of Semeotics. During the 1950s and 1960s, pragmatics had developed a lot in the philosophic field. And the achievements of the development were owed to British philosopher J. Austin, American philosopher J. Searle and Grice. They separately put forward three important pragmatic theories: “Speech Acts”(Austin), “Indirect Speech Acts”(Searle) and “Cooperative Principles”(Grice). As time goes by, the concept of context was set up by B. Malinowski, a Polish professor of anthropology at the London School of Economics from 1927. He believed that utterances and situation are bound up with each other and the context of situation is indispensable for the understanding of words.1.3.2 Steps of the studyThe thesis aims at analyzing how English humor makes people laugh form the perspective of pragmatics with three interwoven theories: Cooperative Principle, Speech Act Theory and Context. First, the author presents the analytic framework based on the pragmatics approach. Second, the author collects the data-examples of English humor for analysis. The data collected are form two sources, the reason for doing which will receive detailed explanation in the following part. Third, the data will be categorized into three parts. The first part are humorous conversations form DongLi（1992），Collection of English Humor，The second part is from Ma lan, (1996) Western HumorAanalysis. And the third is from Zhang fan,(2003) Collection of American Humorous stories.1.3.3 Data CollectionThe examples of English humor chosen for analysis in this paper are classified into 4 groups, including Campus humor, Family humor, Religion humor and others. These English humorous conversations consist of British and American humor. The thesis will classify them, using the theoretical tool of pragmatics. Chapter 2 The Theoretical Basis on Pragmatics2. A Brief Introduction to the Definition and Function of Pragmatics2.1 Definition Pragmatics, as the study of the way humans use their language in communication, bases itself on a study of those premises and determines how they affect, and effectualize, human language use. Hence: Pragmatics studies the use of language in human communication as determined by the conditions of society.(Jacob L.Mey) Verschueren has characterized pragmatics as “a general cognitive, social, and cultural perspective on linguistic phenomena in relation to their usage in forms of behavior”(Verschueren 1999:7). According to Verschueren, “pragmatics does not constitute an additional ccomponent of a theory of language, but it offers a different perspective”. In contrast, a perspectivist view emphasizes the pragmatic aspects of all parts of linguistics, including psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, and other “hyphenated” area. All this is nicely summarized by Ostman as follows: “if the unit of analysis in semantics simply is meaning: the meanings of words, phrases, larger constructions, and so onthen the “unit” of analysis for pragmatics could be said to be the functioning of language”(1988b:28). In his Pragmatics Levinson gave a detailed definition of pragmatics, and he gave near ten possible definition, among which some were considered reasonable:(1) Pragmatics is the study of all those aspects of meaning not captured in a semantic theory. (2) Pragmatics is the study of the relations between language and context that are basic to an account of language understanding. (3) Pragmatics is the study of the ability of language users to pair sentences with the contexts in which they would be appropriate.2.1.1 Other definitions(1) Pragmatics is the study of linguistic acts and the contexts in which they are performed. (Stalnaker, 1972:383)(2) Pragmatics is a theory which seeks to characterize how speakers use the sentences of a language to produce successful communication.(Kempson, 1975:84)(3) Pragmatics is the study of language use and linguistic communication.(Akmajian,1979:267)(4) Pragmatics can be defined as the study of how utterances have meanings in situations.(Leech, 1983:x)There is no definite definition about Pragmatics, however, there is a common feature in the above definitions, which is the emphasis on the study of meaning. In fact, the process of language communication is a process in which language is used to mean something. In fact, most of the words have their own innate meaning, which is the foundation of communication, but in some certain communicative circumstances and context these words have special meaning. 2.2 Function of Pragmatics The use of the term “functioning” can be dated back to the mid-thirties, when the German psychologist Karl Bhler described his famous functional triangle of Ausdruck, Appell and Darstellung (roughly, expression (speech) appeal and representation)as characteristic of language (1934:29) and in the sixties, Roman Jakobson elaborated on the Bhlerian model by adding three more functions: code, channel and poetic quality(1960:350ff) Underlying these models of human language is a common sense of the importance of the user in the communicative process. Messages are not just signals, but as a means of social togetherness. The successful interaction should be based both on the linguistic level and on the hidden levels of societal equality or inequality, of prejudice and class feeling, education and culture. 2 .3Theories on Context The environment in which language is used is referred to as the context. What is to be discussed here is the context formed by non-linguistic factors. In this section three aspects of context are reviewed : context of situation and context of culture, factors that constitute context, and research orientations of context.2.3.1 Definition of ContextAccording to the Oxford English Dictionary the term context usually has two primary meanings: (A) the words around a word, phrase, statement, etc often used to help explain the meaning; (B) the general conditions (circumstances) in which an event, action, etc takes place.(C) The context of something consists of the ideas, situations, events, or information that relate to it and make it possible to understand it fully.(D) If something is seen in context or if it is put into context, it is considered with all the factors that are related to it rather than just being considered on its own, so that it can be properly understood. (Conllins Cobuild English Language Dictionary)(E) If a remark, statement, etc is taken or quoted out of context, it is only considered on its own and circumstances in which it was said are ignored. It, therefore, seems to mean something different from the meaning that was intended.Therefore, context is interpreted in a rather broad sense: any circumstances in which communication occurs through people use of natural language.2.3.2 Classification of Context 何兆熊 1987年第5期 语用，意义和语境上海外国语学院学报 Knowledge of the language which is used Knowledge of language Understanding the co-text of the languageCommunicators status Situational context Relationship between communicators Communicatorsmentality and cultivationcontext History and politics Social customs Cultural context Religious beliefs Region Forms of address2.3.2.1 Co-text According to the Concise Oxford dictionary of linguistics (Oxford University Press, 1997) co-text refers to the relevant text or discourse of which a sentence, etc is part or whatever longer text is relevant to some specific inquiry.2.3.2.2 Context of situation & Context of culture In 1923, the anthropologist Malinowski coined the term “context of situation”: Exactly as in the reality of spoken or written languages, a word without linguistic context is a mere figment and stands for nothing by itself, so in the reality of a spoken living tongue, the utterance has no meaning except in the context of situation.(Malinowski 1923, 2000:75) In the 1940s Firth contended that utterance was closely interwoven with non-linguistic factors in human interaction so it was necessary to generalize the various abstract factors in the context of situation. In 1964, based on Firths theory of linguistics, Halliday set forth the concept of “register” which was defined by him as the configuration of semantic resources that the member of a culture typically associates with a situation type (Halliday, 2001:111) According to Halliday, the semiotic structure of a situation type is formed out of the three socio-semiotic variables of field, tenor and mode. The field of discourse is the ongoing social activity involved in politics, science and technology, and daily life, etc. The tenor is the set of role relationships among the relevant participants. The mode is the rhetorical channel selected, which is essentially the function that is assigned to language in the total structure of the situation; it includes the medium(spoken or written) (Halliday, 2001:110). Field, tenor and mode are not simply components of the speech