期末论文要求.doc

研究生英语2011-2012学年第二学期期末论文要求题目Contrastive Analysis on Intercultural Business Communication between China and America 中英文摘要：各不少于150词中英文关键词：各三至五个正文：英文3000字At least 5 Contrasts out of the followings1 Past Orientation vs. Future Orientation2. Individualism vs. Collectivism3. Large Power Distance vs. Small Power Distance4. Strong Uncertainty Avoidance vs Weak Uncertainty Avoidance5. High Context Culture vs Low Context Culture6. Monochronic Time Culture vs Polychronic Time Culture7. Indirect Communication vs Direct Communication 8. Process Orientation vs Outcome OrientationTimes New Roman 小四号字1.5行距有四部分组成第一部分:Introduction第二部分: Literature Review第三部分: Discussion第四部分: ConclusionReferences: 不少于十篇，英文至少三篇J期刊，2009（2）10-14M 专著 北京：外语教学与研究出版社 2010 D 论文 南京财经大学参考文献 中外文参考文献不混排，先外文后中文，按作者姓氏(中文姓氏按其拼音)字母序排。参考文献序号用1、2、3 表示，序号之后依次为作者姓名、文献题名、书刊名、版次、 文献类别标识、出版地、出版者、出版年月(或期数)及起止页码。外文书刊名以斜体书写，实词首字母大写：外文论文篇名以正体书写，仅篇名首字母大写。文献类别标识分别为：专著M,论文集C，论文集内文章A，报纸文章N，期刊文章J，未出版之会议论文P，博士论文D硕士论文MA，报告R，其他z。网上参考文献应注明相关网址。例：1 British Association for Applied LinguisticsRecommendations on good practice in applied linguistics. http: /uk/indexHtml, l 994.2 GU, Y. Politeness phenomena in modern Chinese J. Journal of Pragmatics, 1990 (14): 237-2573 Halliday, M. A .K. Explorations in the Functions of Language M. London：Edward Arnold，1973.4 Lakoff, G. Cognitive semantics A. In Eco, U. , et a1. (eds). Meaning and Mental Representation C. Bloomington: University of Indiana Press, 1988.5 黄子东评介Pinker的语言本能J现代外语，1998 (1)：93-1076 连淑能英汉对比研究 M北京：高等教育出版社，19932. Literature Review2.1. Theories of Politeness.At the same time as supporting renewed interest in Grices Cooperative Principles (1975), the issue of politeness has become one of the most active areas of research in language use. One of the leading theories of politeness was developed by Brown and Levinson (1987), who argue that there are two forms of politeness: positive politeness and negative politeness. Positive politeness strategies are attempts by a speaker to treat the listener as a friend or as someone to be included in discourse.Leech (1983) sees cultural rules at work in expressions of politeness and attempts to categorize in more detail some of the underlying intent behind these forms by articulating a set of rules or Politeness Maxims at work in polite dialogue.While these maxims do not seem to contradict each other in principle, failure to recognize these maxims as they are expressed in particular utterances can lead to what Thomas (1983) calls “cross-cultural pragmatic failure” (p. 92). Thomas indicates that pragmatic failure can occur at two levels: failure to understand which proposition the speaker has expressed and failure to understand the pragmatic force of the speakers utterance. Gu (1990) can be regarded as a pioneer work in the study of Chinese politeness2.2 Research Areas on compliments The term “compliment” has been defined in literature as positive expression or evaluation, which is directed either implicitly or explicitly to someone for something valued positively by the speaker and the hearer, and even the whole speech community (Holmes, 1986; Ye, 1995).2.2.1 Compliment topicsStudies of the speech act of complimenting in different languages reveal that most of compliments fall into only a few general topics (Ye, 1995).These topics are appearance / possessions and performance / ability / skills, etc.Wolfson (1983:90) points out that in American English, there are generally two topics, those having to do with appearance and those which comment on abilityIn Yes (1995) Chinese data, 80.9% of the respondents paid compliments on performance while only 44% on appearance. This suggests that a change in appearance may not be deemed as worthy of complimenting as an achievement in performance in Chinese. All this indicates that more detailed study and analysis of complimenting in different cultures are needed as to “which aspects of appearance and which particular possessions are appropriate for comment. Acceptable topics of compliments certainly vary cross-culturally.” (Holmes 1986:497)2.2.2 Compliment formulasResearch studies show that compliments are “remarkably formulaic speech acts” (Holmes and Brown 1987:529). Based on almost 700 naturally occurring compliments in America, Manes and Wolfson (1980; cited in Rose & Kwai-fun, 2001) found for the first time that this speech act was highly formulaic in American English at the syntactic, semantic, and lexical levels and 97% of the compliments fell into the following nine categories. 2.2.3 Compliment responsesStudies of the speech event of complimenting examine not only what and how to pay compliments. They also look at how to respond to compliments appropriately in a given situation. Compliment responses, beginning with the pioneering work of Pomerantz, have also been the object of considerable research. Miles (1994; cited in Rose & Kwai-fun, 2001) provided a useful synthesis of existing categories for compliment responsesFarghal and Al-Khatib (2001) categorized compliments responses into simple response (i.e. responses featuring one illocution, e.g. thanking, offering, denying, and responses which are exclusively non-verbal) and complex responses (i.e. responses featuring two illocutions, e.g., thanking + offering and doubting + denying)Chens (1993) comparison and analysis of American and Chinese compliment responses show a marked difference between Chinese compliment strategies and America