现代语言学研究热点.doc_第1页
现代语言学研究热点.doc_第2页
现代语言学研究热点.doc_第3页
现代语言学研究热点.doc_第4页
现代语言学研究热点.doc_第5页
已阅读5页,还剩5页未读 继续免费阅读

下载本文档

版权说明:本文档由用户提供并上传,收益归属内容提供方,若内容存在侵权,请进行举报或认领

文档简介

Pragmatic Studies (语用学专题:现代语言学研究热点之一)I. Introduction1. 1. The origin起源C. Peirce(皮尔斯),C. Morris (莫里斯), American philosophers(30、40年代)30年代,在西方逻辑实证主义(pragmatism, W. James)的哲学流派中形成一股语言哲学思潮,自称实效(实用化)主义(pragmaticism)。哲学家把研究重心转移到人类使用的符号媒介上,进行富有哲学意义的语言研究,后发展成为符号学(semiotics)。C. Peirce首提;Morris提出三分说;Carnap支持和修正,将语用学的研究范围明确为“研究使用者和词语的关系”。Three divisions of semiotics 符号学三分支理论: syntactics/syntax符号关系学(句法学), semantics语义学, pragmatics语用学Significance of the divisions 语言学的哲学转向之后对“意义”的精确求索使自然语言捉襟见肘。语言哲学家发现了诸多不同的意义。哲学需要以语言为载体的精确的“意义”。人工语言能否取代自然语言?若不能取代,症结在哪里?1.2. Definitions定义Levinson (1983:6-27)Pragmatics is the study of those relations between language and context that are grammaticalized, or encoded in the structure of language. 语用学是对在一种语言中被语法化或编码的那些语言和语境之间的关系的研究。Pragmatics is the study of all those aspects of meaning not captured in a semantic theory. 语用学是对所有那些未能纳入语义理论的意义的研究。Pragmatics is the study of the ability of language users to pair sentences with the context in which they would be appropriate. 语用学是对语言使用者把句子和与之合适的语境相匹配的能力的研究。Pragmatics is the study of deixis (at least in part), implicature, presupposition, speech acts, and aspects of discourse structure. 语用学是对指示(至少是其中的一部分)、含意、预设(又作“前提”)、言语行为以及话语结构等方面的研究。D. Wilson (2001:1) Pragmatics is the study of the context-dependent aspects of utterance interpretation. 语用学是对依赖语境理解话语的研究。1.3. Main features or characteristics总结:Context 语境的思想The relations between language units and the context话语与语境的互动Users, and /or their abilityIntention目的性对人类有目的的行为所作的研究。(何兆熊1999:1)则广义的“有目的的行为学”,以Green所举救生员向溺水者投排球为例。1.4. Contents of pragmatics语用学的研究内容 指示语(indexical expressions):(1)John met Jack this morning. He didnt even say hello.言语行为理论(speech acts): (2)The king of France is bald.指出(2)仅是“表述句”(constatives)的范畴,而“施为句”(performatives)往往完成一种行为:(3)I hereby name the ship Queen Elizabeth.间接言语行为(indirect speech acts): (4)Can you type? (Intention: I request that you do me a favor by ) (5)Its stuffy here.会话含意理论(Conversational Implicature)及合作原则(the Cooperative Principle):(6) (a) Have you finished the reading lists and the summary writing?(b) Ive done the reading lists.(7) (a) Do you like my new hat? (b) Its colorful.(8) (a) Shall we? (b) I veto I-C-E-C-R-E-A-M-S.(9) (a) 咱们的老板真小气,加班才给这点儿钱!(b) 今天的天气不错。II. Entailment and Presupposition衍推和预设2.1. The relationship of entailment衍推关系当且仅当A为真时B也为真,B为假时A也为假,A衍推B。(1) Its been an amazing year for Crystal Palace over the past 12 months.(2) So you are a house wife and a mother. Do you have any children?(3) A 我有一匹白马。B 我有一匹马。(4) A 她有三个孩子。B 她有孩子。(5) A 小张和小王结婚了。B小张结婚了。2.2. Noncancellability不可消除性衍推是一种逻辑语义的内部关系。l 我有一匹白马,但我没有一匹马。l 她有三个孩子,但她没有孩子。l Annie baked a cake, but she didnt bake anything. One-way vs. Two-way entailment单向与双向衍推(6) I saw that it was raining, but I didnt see that it was raining.(7) 他写了一封信给我,但他没有写给我一封信。(8) Its a dog1, but it isnt a dog2.(9) 小张结婚了,但小张没有和小王结婚。单向衍推特征:A衍推B但B并不必然衍推A。 (11) A Baby bear cried. B Baby bear wept.(12) A Mama Bear is in front of Papa Bear. B Papa Bear in behind Mama Bear.(13) A He is an orphan. B He has no father or mother.双向衍推又称互为衍推(mutual entailment),可以被认为是一种语义重复。2.4. 衍推的多元性一话语可以有多个衍推意义:The painter broke the window. E1: Someone broke the window. E2: The painter did something to the window. E3: The painter broke something.2.5. 衍推关系的语用意义:(14) M: Tom! You ate all the cookies! T: No mum, I ate some of the cookies. (利用单向衍推表达意图)(15) Tom: Whats your stepmother like? Bob: Well shes a woman and she married my father.(利用双向衍推表达意图)(16) She is a mother, but she doesnt have any children.(利用悖论表达用意) 2.6. The relationship of presupposition预设关系当且仅当A为真时B也为真, A为假时B也为真,A预设B。(17) A Johns wife is ill. Johns wife isnt ill. B John has a wife.(18) A 张三后悔搞语言学。张三不后悔搞语言学。B 张三搞语言学。(19) A 是他偷了我的钱包。 B 当时你又没回头,你怎么能认定是我?(20) A She sat in her sofa. B She had a sofa.2.6.1 Cancellability可消除性(21) 离婚之前张三死了。(不预设“张三后来离婚了”。)比较“离婚之前张三哭了。”(常规知识消除。)(22) 要出卖你的是/不是张三。(有人要出卖你。) 要出卖你的不是张三,也不是李四。其实谁也不想出卖你。(上下文消除。)2.6.2. Projection problem投射问题(简单句扩大为复杂句,预设有时保留,有时消失。)(23) If Greene goes gambling, his wife will not be happy. (Greene has a wife.)(24) If Greene gets married, his wife will not be happy. (Greene doesnt have a wife.)2.6.3. Presupposition triggers预设触发动词:(25) John managed to open the door. (John tried to open the door.)(26) John didnt manage to pass his exams. Indeed he didnt even try.(消除)(27) 小王忘记了关门。(小王应该关门)(28) I happened to meet her in the park. (I didnt plan to meet her in the park.)(29) He stopped smoking. (He had been smoking.)限定或修饰词语:(30) He is coming back to China. (He is not in China.)(31) 他又来了。(他来过。)短语或分句:(32) 他若不紧张,成绩会更好。(他紧张。)(33) The boys, who wanted to play football, were disappointed when it rained.(They wanted to play footballs.)(It rained.)2.7. 预设关系的语用意义Pragmatic presupposition语用预设 预设更经常地是一种说话人所确立的前提,因此语用意义可能大于语义意义。(34) John accused Mary of beating her husband. (It was bad for Mary to beat her h.)(是说话人的预设,不是客观标准.)(35) 张三叫李四“老冒”,李四还以颜色。(张三侮辱李四。)(涉及当事人的态度。)(36) A 老刘抽烟很凶。 B 说不定他没听说过“肺癌”这个词。(吸烟致癌)(双方的共有知识。)III. Conversational Implicature会话含意理论(1) 3.1 William James LecturesGiven by Paul Grice in 1967. 从语言哲学的角度发现的问题:以conjunction为例. 1)不能随便连接,2)顺序不是没有讲究:(1) 2x2=4 and it is impossible to analyze further the concept of intention. (absurd)(2) Peter married Annie and Annie had a babyAnnie had a baby and Peter married Annie.于是提出合作原则 The Co-operative Principle:Make your conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged.(根据你的交谈目的或方向进展状况的要求对会话作出贡献。)3.2 The Maxim of Quantity量准则1) Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current purposes of the exchange). (话语信息要满足交谈目的对量的要求。)(说话要足量。)2) Do not make your contribution more informative than is required. (不要使自己的话语给出比要求更多的信息。)(但也别多说。)(3) 我有三个孩子。老大20岁,去年考了大学。老二16岁,却有了当兵的念头。(老三呢?)(4) Do you have any relative in Jinan?Yeah, I have an aunt who has two dogs, four cats and twelve hens.3.3 The Maxim of Quality质准则Try to make your contribution one that is true.(尽量使你的话语真实。)1) Do not say what you believe to be false.(不要说你认为不真实的话。)2) Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.(不要说你认为缺乏足够证据的话。)(5) Do you like my new hat?No, it doesnt suit you.(6) Is he going to die? I hate to say “yes”, but yes.3.4 The Maxim of Relation关系准则Be relevant. 要有关联(要相关)。(7) A: You look pleased. B: Ive managed to pass the exam.(8) A: We are going to the movies. B: Sorry, I cant.3.5 The Maxim of Manner方式准则Be perspicuous. 要清楚明白。1) Avoid obscurity of expression. 避免晦涩。2) Avoid ambiguity. 避免歧义。3) Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity sic). 简练(避免罗嗦)。4) Be orderly. 要条理。(9) He is brave. He is brave like a lion. He is as brave as a lion. He is a lion.3.6 Grices interest:Conversational Implicature 格氏的情趣:会话含意不在遵守,而在不遵守,称为“flouting”(蔑视):(10) Where is Mary? Shes not well. (quantity)(11) 你下午用车子吗? 你用好了。(量)(12) How are you? Im dead.应该遵守合作原则他在蔑视合作原则他在故意违反合作原则他其实是在另一个层次上与我合作更高的合作层次是“含义/含意”。于是出现会话含意理论。(13) 看电影去吗?最近总演暴力片。(14) Where is my milk? The cat looks happy.(15) A: My boyfriend lives in Beijing. B: My boyfriend lives in Shanghai. +I also have boyfriend. My b is also in big city. (16) I veto I-C-E-C-R-E-A-M-S.3.7 The significance of the Gricean theory意义1) 进一步明确信码(符义)的双重性:绝对不足vs.相对自足;2) 提出语用是“原则” 控制的(principle-governed),语义句法是“规则”控制(rule-governed)的思想;3) 尝试从哲学的“质、量、关系、方式”四范畴建立语用原则、描写语言实践,打开了语言学家的思路;4) 语言理解是推理性质的。IV. Conversational Implicature会话含意理论(2)4.1 Grices paradox格氏的似是而非1) 应该合作可以不合作结果还是合作(合作原则的普遍性、应用性、和解释的充分性等存在问题。2) 围绕预设的争执是会话含意还是规约含意?可消除vs.不可消除,不可分离vs.可分离,可推导vs.不可推导:一般情况下不可消除,特殊情况下可以消除:(1)* 张三的妻子病了,但张三没有结婚。(2)* John stopped taking medicine, but he didnt take medicine.(不可消除。)(3) 老王没回头看小偷,他知道根本就没什么小偷。(可以消除。)不可分离又可以分离:(4) 张三已停止/中止/暂停/不再服药。(预设:“张三服过药”,不可分离。)(5) a. 要出卖你的不是张三。(预设:“有人要出卖你”。)b. 张三不想出卖你。(不预设“有人要出卖你”,可以分离。与“but” 规约的分离比较:She is poor and honest. “but”的规约含意不再保留。)推导但不需要合作原则推导。理论体系因此而不彻底。4.2 Horns proposal何恩的修补提出两对立原则(two antithetical principles):the Quantity-principle and the Relation-principle量原则和关系原则。量原则是下限(lower-bounding)语用原则:Make your contribution sufficient: Say as much as you can (given R).提供足够的信息:能说多少就说多少(以关系原则为条件)。解释为:a speaker, in saying p, conversationally implicates that for all he knows at most p.(当发话说出P,受话推出最多是P 。)关系原则是上限(upper-bounding)语用原则:Make your contribution necessary: Say no more than you must (given Q).提供必要的信息:能不说的就尽量不说(以量原则为条件)。解释为:s speaker, in saying p, conversationally implicates that for all he knows more than p. (当发话说出P,受话推出不止是P 。)下限(Q)用来推导上限含意,推导出来的量含意具有否定性,为此提出Horns Scale(何恩等级),比如: , 等:(6) Beth sometimes goes to the movies. + She doesnt often go to the movies.(7) 五班的一些同学去过青岛崂山。+ 并非所有的五班同学去过青岛崂山。(8) I slept in a car yesterday. + The car is not “mine”.发话说出弱项W,受话推出与W相关的强项S不成立的结论。上限(R)用来推导下限含意,推导出来的量含意具有肯定性:(9) I broke a finger yesterday. + The finger is “mine”.(10) I like you. (A girl said bashfully to a boy.)+I love you.发话说出弱项W,假定受话可以推出强项S(即更多的意思),所以没用强项S(没把更多的意思说出来)。Horn提出何恩语用劳动分工(Hornian division of pragmatic labor):The use of marked expression when a corresponding unmarked alternative expression is available tends to be interpreted as conveying a marked message.当无标记表达成为一个选择而使用了有标记的表达时,话语倾向于作有标记理解,如:(11) a. Pass me the salt. 拿点盐来。 b. Could you please possibly mass me the salt?您能否把咸盐给我拿过来?首先遵循R-原则使用无标记语,但无标记语无法表达要传递的信息时则循Q-原则使用有标记语:(12) Can you drive? 按 R 原则推导“请求”含意。(13) Do you have the ability to drive? Are you able to drive? 按Q-原则得出“疑问”。4.3 Levinson effort列文森的修补Levinson 的三原则:The Quantity-Principle量原则:Speakers maxim: Do not provide a statement that is informationally weaker than your knowledge of the world allows, unless providing a stronger statement would contravene the I-Principle.发话准则:在你的知识范围允许的情况下不要说信息量不足的话,除非提供足量信息违反I-原则(信息原则)。Recipients corollary: Take it that the speaker made the strongest statement consistent with what he or she knows.受话推论:相信说话人提供的足量信息与他所知道的相一致。因此,发话说出W,受话推论说话人知道S不成立(14);发话说出W,W不衍推嵌入句Q(embedded sentence即宾语从句)但若说出S却衍推Q,则推论发话不知Q是否成立(15):(14) Some of my best friends are professors. + Not all of my best friends are professors.(15) Mary believes there is life on Mars. + Mary doesnt know there is life on Mars.The Infirmativeness-Principle信息原则:Speakers maxim: The Maxim of Minimization. Say as little as necessary. That is, produce the minimal linguistic information sufficient to achieve your communicational ends (bearing the O-Principle in mind).发话准则:最低限量准则。尽量少说。即以最低限量的语言信息达到交际目的(牢记O-原则)。Recipients corollary: The Maxim of Enrichment. Amplify the informational content of the speakers utterance, by finding the most specific interpretation, up to what you judge to be the speakers intended point. 受话推论:最大扩充准则。以寻找最为贴切的解释来扩充话语的信息内容,直到受话判定发话的交际意图为止。(16) John turned the key and the door opened. + and then the door opened, and thereby caused the door to open, in order to make the door open.(17) Bill has a car. The window doesnt close. + Bills car has a window.The Manner-Principle方式原则:Speakers maxim: Do not use a prolix, obscure or marked expression without reason.发话准则:不要无故使用冗长、隐晦或有标记的语言。Recipients corollary: If the speaker used a prolix or marked expression M, he did not mean the same as he would have had he used the unmarked expression-specifically, he was trying to avoid the stereotypical associations and I-implicatures of the unmarked expression.受话推论:如果发话使用了冗长或有标记的语言M,那么他不是表达与无标记语相同的意思具体说来,发话在尽量避免无标记语带来的常规性联想和做出I含意的推断。(18) 这个建议并非完全不可取。(请体会并与“这个建议可取”比较。)(19) Annie: Was the dessert any good? Mike: Annie, cherry pie is cherry pie. 4.3 小结: 1)消除怪圈: 新说解决了“应该合作可以不合作结果还是合作”的怪圈问题。2) 基本解决了“预设”问题,认为:交际的内容=字面意义+含意,“预设”就可以看作规约性与非规约性相互作用的结果,进而语义学和语用学既相互对立,又相互作用:(3)1 老王没回头(看小偷)。(语用补充:“他知道根本就没什么小偷。”)(I原则)(3)2 老王看也没有回头看一眼,他知道根本就没什么小偷。(语义补充)(Q原则)(3)3 老王没有回头看小偷。(语义自足,未消除。)(还是I原则)V. Speech Act Theory言语行为理论5.1 J.L. Austin and His Harvard Lectures 奥斯汀及其哈佛大学演讲1955年,Austin在哈佛大学作系列演讲,五年后不幸逝世。他的学生Urmson根据听课笔记整理成十二个讲座,取名How To Do Things With Words论言有所为于62年发表,言语行为理论正式成型。Austin的一段陈述:“The phenomenon to be discussed is very widespread and obvious, and it cannot fail to have been already noticed, at least here and there by others. Yet I have not found attention paid to it specifically.”Austin说的是什么现象呢?请设想你要实施以下三个行为:(a) 向某人道贺。 (Congratulate someone.)(b) 使某人的注意力投向电视机。 (Call someones attention to the television set.)(c) 不让某人进入房间。(Forbid someone to enter a room.)有几种方法?你更可能(更多地)使用哪种方法?以 (a) 为例,至少可以:1)说“恭喜恭喜”;2)拍拍他的后背;3)向他竖起大拇指。于是初步划分“表述”(constative)和“施为”(performative)。表述句说明事实,可以真假值鉴别,如:(1) 我昨天下午三点至五点看了一场电影。施为句实施行为,因此传统的信仰如“Actions speak louder than words”,“Easier said than done”等受到置疑话语和行为有时起的作用是一样的:(2) 我警告你你的头发上有个大蜘蛛。(警告)进一步观察发现,表述句也可以实施行为,它与施为句的区别在于后者在实施一个行为的同时描写了这个行为的类型:Performative Constative 我保证我会去的。 我会去的。我承认我犯了错误。 我犯了错误。I apologize. Im sorry.我命令你坐下。 你必须坐下。因此,施为句不见得用施为动词。(3) 你个白痴。(侮辱) (4) 我身上有炸药。(威胁)(5) Someone has eaten all the ice-cream.(控告或抱怨) (6) I need the salt.(请求)不仅传统意义上的陈述句,而且疑问句和祈使句也可以作行为分析:(7) a. You can pass me the milk. b. I could use the milk. c. Why dont you pass me the milk? d. Have you got the milk? e. Get me the milk. f. Send the milk down here. (均为请求。)5.2. 显性和隐性典型的施为句是显性的,说话人说出的话语本身就实施了行为。显性施为句具有以下特点:1)“允许”、“道歉”、“感谢”、“指责”、“认可”、“祝贺”等都是说话本身就做了事情;2)主语为第一人称;3)现在时态;主动语态。如:(8) 我承认我错了。(I admit I was wrong.) 他承认他错了。X 我想我错了。(I think I was wrong.)X 我知道我错了。(I know I was wrong.)X 隐性施为句里没有表示实施行为的动词,如:(1) 我昨天下午三点至五点看了一场电影。(与“我声明/宣称”比较。)(9) I will be there. (与“I promise you I will be there”比较。)(10) 关上窗户。(与“我命令你关上窗户”比较。)隐性施为句的行为有时不清晰,需借助语境辨别。如(9)也可以是“预告”或“宣告”,(10)也可能是请求,这改变了Austin“表述”和“施为”划分初衷。5.3. locution,illocution,perlocution以言指事、行事、成事由于“表述”话语的陈述(statement)实际上也是一种隐性言语行为,比如“我昨天下午三点至五点看了一场电影”既可以是“声明进而推脱”类的言语行为,也可以是“抗议” 类的言语行为,Austin认为,典型的言语行为应分为三类:以言指事,以言行事,以言成事。以言指事是言内行为,大体与传统意义上的“意指”相同,即发出语音、说出单词、短语、句子等。从这个意义上讲,语句的语义内容即以言指事,如:(11) 丈夫对妻子: “给我点现金。” 以言指事:拿给我一些钱 其中我指丈夫。以言行事是言外行为,是通过说话这一动作所做的事情,如发出命令、威胁恫吓、问候致意、解雇、宣布开会等。这些都是通过言语完成的行为。可见以言行事寓于以言指事之中。如(11)的以言行事:丈夫实施了请求妻子给他钱的行为。以言成事指以言指事的实际后果,例如通过言语活动,我们使听话人去做某事或不做某事。以言指事结果可能与发话的期望不一致,因为它取决于受话的反应,如(11)的以言成事就可能是:丈夫说服妻子给他钱。 妻子拒绝给他钱。 等等。其中,以言行事与交际意图有关,因此是语言学特别是语用学感兴趣的部分。5.4. Searle contribution舍尔的发展Searle是Austin的学生。他对言语行为理论的发展可以总结为三点。5.4.1. Austin把言语行为理论看作是对孤立的话语的意义的研究,Searle则把这一理论提高为一种解释人类语言交际的理论。他认为,使用语言就象人类的其它社会活动一样是一种受规约制约的有意图的行为,比如下棋。语言交际的最小单位不是人们通常所认为的是单词或句子等的语言单位,而是言语行为,因此,语言交集的过程是由一个接着一个的言语行为构成的,如:(12) A. Will you go tomorrow?(询问)B. Yes.(肯定)5.4.2. Indirect Speech Act间接言语行为理论间接言语行为是Searle首先注意到并提出来的。句子结构与言语行为一致时是直接言语行为;句子结构与言语行为不一致是间接言语行为,如:(14) Can you drive? (15) 带火了吗?两例的形式都是“询问”,但实施的言语行为却是“请求”。Searle的间接言语行为基于以下假设:a. 明显的施为用意可以根据施为动词辨认出来;b. 传统句法所讲的三种类型的句子功能“陈述”、“询问”和“命令”实际上就是这些句子的施为用意。c. 这些用意可以看作是字面用意,因此和间接的施为用意区别开来。d. 间接言语行为可以分为常规的和非常规的。以“有谁会唱歌?”为例分析。(发话意义和句子意义完全一致则是“询问”,若超越字面意义)则需语境等的支持,推理获得间接言语行为,如“命令”。常规性的间接言语行为:一向用于实施间接言语行为,发话和受话已察觉不出其字面上的施为用意,如,对英美文化背景的人而言,礼貌用语已成为一种间接言语行为:(15) I would appreciate if you could come. (16) I hope Im not in your way.非常规性的间接言语行为:确定于具体语境的间接言语行为,如:(17) A. 晚上一起去看电影好吗? B. 明天我有考试。 VI. Relevance Theory关联理论6.1. Coding vs. coding and inference in communication 信码模式与信码推理模式Grice的贡献在于他揭示出语言理解的另一方面:交际中的理解至少涉及推理和想象,是一种智力活动。编码赋予话语部分意义,语境假设以不同的方式对这部分意义进行补充和充实。依据Grice的推理模式,交际者在表达思想时所做的一切就是使受话认识到他要表达这一思想的意图。(如:掏出钥匙意味着要开门,用手指受话旁边的窗户意味着让受话关窗等。)6.2. Language as a means of cognition语言认知观先前的语言观基本是“交际观”。交际是人类最普遍的社会现象之一。交际是人与人之间交流信息、感情、思想、态度、观点等的一种行为,这些信息、感情、思想、态度、观点等交际内容通过语言进行交际,称为言语交际。语言学家一般认为语言是受语法制约的用于交际的表述系统,语言的基本功能是交际功能。Sperb & Wilson对这一观点提出质疑。认为语言作为“受语法制约的表述系统”的性质与“用于交际”的性质之间没有必然的联系。如象鼻有嗅觉功能和卷缠物体的功能,但二者间没有必然的、系统的联系,只是一种偶合。语言用于交际是一种表象,如同象鼻卷物,人类有许多非语言的交际手段。语言的基本功能不是交际功能,而是认知功能。认知是为了吸收信息,获得有关世界的知识,为此须存储和处理信息。语言是存储和处理信息的必须的工具,存储和处理信息是语言的基本功能。信息处理的核心过程是由已知信息推导出新信息,因此语言交际过程是建立前提进而推导结论的过程。交际是诸多认知活动之一。(只要是有目的、有意图的信息传递、吸取、存储、加工等都是认知活动,如听课、读书、看电视、与人聊天等。)6.3. Cognitive environment认知环境言语交际是一种有目的有意图的活动。发话的目的、意图之所以被受话识别,是因为二者享有某种程度的认知环境。认知环境是一概括性极强的概念,它包括:物理环境,如会话场合、会话对象、上下文、客观世界的状况等;心理因素,如记忆能力、认知结构、注意力状态等;文化历史因素,如信仰、文化背景、历史渊源等。交际双方不可能享有完全一致的背景知识,但彼此可以通过显现(manifest)和相互显现(mutual manifest)调整双方的认知环境。交际的结果不是获取新的知识,而是该变了自己的认知环境。交际就双方而言是一方明示显现,一方推理而后获得理解。Crice的推理模式以共有知识(如语境)为基础,得出有保证的正确理解;S&W的推理以显现和语境假设为基础,它不保证百分之百的正确理解,相反认为,交际失误反而是正常的。6.4. Ostensive - inferential communication明示-推理交际定义:发话通过发出一组对交际双方互相显现的刺激信号意欲向

温馨提示

  • 1. 本站所有资源如无特殊说明,都需要本地电脑安装OFFICE2007和PDF阅读器。图纸软件为CAD,CAXA,PROE,UG,SolidWorks等.压缩文件请下载最新的WinRAR软件解压。
  • 2. 本站的文档不包含任何第三方提供的附件图纸等,如果需要附件,请联系上传者。文件的所有权益归上传用户所有。
  • 3. 本站RAR压缩包中若带图纸,网页内容里面会有图纸预览,若没有图纸预览就没有图纸。
  • 4. 未经权益所有人同意不得将文件中的内容挪作商业或盈利用途。
  • 5. 人人文库网仅提供信息存储空间,仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理,对用户上传分享的文档内容本身不做任何修改或编辑,并不能对任何下载内容负责。
  • 6. 下载文件中如有侵权或不适当内容,请与我们联系,我们立即纠正。
  • 7. 本站不保证下载资源的准确性、安全性和完整性, 同时也不承担用户因使用这些下载资源对自己和他人造成任何形式的伤害或损失。

评论

0/150

提交评论