【作者】 郑丹；

【导师】 杨玉晨；

【作者基本信息】 东北师范大学 ， 英语语言文学， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 语篇是一个有着结构层次的关系系统。小句常常与毗邻小句建立起某种小句关系，进而形成更大的意义单位。小句关系本质上是指篇章中的各种语义关系。虽然Winter，Hoey，Halliday&Hasan，Mann&Thompson，邢福义、屈承熹、黄国文等都从不同的角度出发，不同程度地对小句关系进行过描写和阐释，但是现有的小句关系研究仍存在以下几个方面的局限性，特别是英汉小句研究还存在着许多不同平衡性。第一，英语的小句研究较为系统，且已经超越了句子层面，而进入篇章层面；而汉语的小句研究各家言论比较零散，且主要集中于复句层面的研究。第二，英语界的学者仅从整体上对小句关系的类别和表现形式等进行描述，但是就具体的小句关系，如转折关系、因果关系或并列关系等的相关研究还很少；汉语界虽然对转折关系进行过探讨，但系统的描写以及就其语用功能和语篇功能的研究还很少见。基于英汉小句关系研究的相关理论，以学术期刊论文为材料，本文对比研究转折关系的表现形式及其语用和篇章构建功能。对比修辞学理论、语篇模式研究理论、语用预设理论以及传统语言哲学中的语言与思维关系理论等为本文提供了理论支撑。对比修辞学的基础是篇章语言学，同时其本身就是一种话语分析法、话语分析或篇章分析，是研究作为话语整体组成部分的句与句之间的联系。所谓语篇模式，指的是通过各种小句关系组合形成的，并在长期的语言使用过程中以相对固定的结构模式积淀下来的语篇组织框架和策略，是语言交际中人们相互遵守和期待的语言共识。语篇模式是高层次的语义结构，是基本小句关系特有的语言语境，是对小句关系研究的延伸。预设是语言学,特别是语用学研究的重要话题。Strawson指出，自然语句中任何有意义的语句都能推导出一个背景假设（预设），该预设可表现为另一个语句。预设是自然语言中的一种特殊推理关系。以预设理论为支撑，通过对学术论文中转折关系预设的研究，能够较好地解释转折关系的形成机制等问题。语言与思维关系紧密：语言是精神生机勃勃的产物，语言现象能够反映人的思维；思维模式也必然在其载体——语言上有所体现。在语篇交际与互动过程中，语篇生成者有着自己的交际目的，并选择相应的语篇模式来服务其交际目的，以实现有效交际。因此，对转折关系的研究可以在某种程度上探究人类认知的一般规律。本文采取语料库研究方法，并将定量分析与定性研究相结合。我们自建了一个包含60篇英汉学术期刊论文在内的小型语料库。首先，标记出全部转折关系，并利用计算机统计出各类转折关系的使用频次和分布情况等；然后采取定性分析的方法描述各类型转折关系的表现形式、语义特征和语篇功能。本文的研究主要有以下几个方面的发现。第一，从分布上看，60篇英汉学术论文中共有转折关系3050处，其中英语中的数量略多于汉语中的数量。英汉论文中每篇平均出现转折句50句左右，按段落计算，每篇学术论文平均每段至少有1处转折关系。可见，转折关系是英汉语言中都普遍存在的一种语言现象。第二，从表现形式上看，英汉转折关系都有显性和隐性两种表现方式。显性的转折关系指的是借助转折关联词语以及句法结构体现的语句；而隐性的转折关系则须要结合语境，从语义出发进行判断。在英汉学术论文中，显性转折关系多于隐性转折关系。但比较而言，英语中显性与隐性的比例为6.2:1，汉语的比例为1.6:1。可见，汉语学术论文中的隐性转折关系远远多于英语。汉语中大量隐性转折关系的存在体现了汉语语法的灵活性。第三，从类型上看，转折关系可以分为相反型、对比型、修正型、删除型、让步型和假转型六种。对比关系在英汉学术论文中的出现最多，占全部转折关系的39.4%；而假转关系是最少的，仅占0.5%。其余四类数量上不具备显著性差异，分别为修正型、让步型、相反型和删除型。英语中，各类型的转折关系均是显性数量多于隐性，且二者具有显著性差异。而汉语中，隐性的对比关系和修正关系的数量多于其显性转折关系。第四，从语义结构上看，英汉转折关系具有较多的相似性。相反关系可以分为两类：一是先承认或肯定一个命题，然后否定或否定与之有关的另外一个命题；反之亦然。二是实际情况与人们的估计或预期不符，或者事情的发展超过人们的估计和预期。对比关系根据比较对象也分为两种：一种是以不同事物作为比较对象，一种是以同一事物作为比较对象。修正关系根据否定范围，则分为语义否定和语用否定两种。删除关系指的是提到的某种情境因被认为是无关紧要的而予以消除，即语气或话题的转换。这类转折关系大多连接的是两个不同的句子或者篇章中的不同段落。让步关系则由两种语义关系相加构成，一种是让步，一种是转折。假转关系因分句间存在逆结果关系而形成转折的意思，可以分为因果性、条件性、选择性、需求性和祈使性假转关系等。第五，就预设而言，不同的研究者对其概念和认识不同。预设分为语义预设和语用预设，本文主要以预设触发语的语义结构为研究对象。英汉几种类型转折关系的预设也具有较大共性。比如英汉典型相反关系的语义结构为：（p→q）∧（p→￢q），其中“￢q”是预设， q是语意焦点。转折关联词为预设触发语，预设了“￢q”，并引导含有新信息的句子。让步关系分为直言和假言让步句两大类，后者又包含实言虚让句和假言虚让句两小类。直言让步句和实言虚让句的预设与相反关系的预设相同，为“￢q”；而假言虚让句逻辑形式表述为：（p→q）∧（￢p→Gq）（Gq表示“更加q”），预设为“￢p”。但总体上说，在英汉让步关系中，让步词为预设触发语，而转折词引导语意焦点所在语句。假转关系可以描述为“p1（p2），否则q”，“p2”为预设。在假转句中，p2有时是显现的，有时须要读者自己补全。假转句的语意焦点一般在p1上；不过在选择性假转句中，语意焦点则须要根据具体情况而定。第六，从功能上看，转折关系总是与毗邻小句形成各种意义上的联系，再形成更大的意义单位——段落和篇章，从而实现语言交际的目的。经过分析，英汉转折关系在句群、段落和语篇中所表达的篇章功能基本是一致的，也就是说，英汉语言使用者对于转折关系的认识具有相似性。转折关系篇章建构的研究，能够反映语篇的动态性本质。研究中我们还发现，转折关系是建构“问题-反应”模式的最基本小句关系，是表现“问题”意识的主要手段。本文的研究具有理论和实践双重意义。在理论方面，首先是将句法研究与语篇研究有机地结合起来。小句关系是语篇建构的中枢，是我们理解句子或者句群的认知过程，是语言研究的重心。研究转折关系的篇章构建功能，将小句关系研究与语篇模式研究有机地联系起来。其次，将预设理论应用于转折关系的研究。尽管有学者对转折关系的预设有过研究，但仅属于理论上的探讨。本文通过对真实语料的分析进一步探究了转折关系的形成机制，并将语意焦点和信息结构等内容纳入研究范围，这是对预设研究的发展和深入。再次，将语篇模式与思维模式研究相结合，探讨了语言与思维的关系问题。最后，以语料库为依托，将定量研究与定性分析相结合，避免了完全依靠内省式语料的主观性，增强了研究结果的效度和信度。在实践方面，通过对转折关系的研究，我们认识到转折关系对于学术语篇建构起到至关重要的作用。总的看来，转折关系在英汉学术语篇宏观建构层面（语篇层面）差异并不明显，但是在微观层面（句际间）却存在很大差异，即英语语篇较多使用显性转折关系，汉语语篇相对较多地使用隐性转折关系。这种小句关系构建趋势在某种程度上可能也反映了其他小句关系在英汉语篇构建中的差异。这一发现也给英语写作教学提供一个启示。也就是说，在学生掌握了英语的基本句子构建的基础上，应注重帮助学生分析句际关系的意义和构建方式，注重连接词的有效使用，撰写符合英文思维习惯的句子和语篇。更多还原

【Abstract】 Discourse is a hierarchical system of clause relations. Generally, the clause in thesystem forms a kind of semantic relation with its adjacent clauses. Therefore, the clause isthe pivot of linguistic analysis. Although scholars such as Winter, Hoey, Halliday&Hasan,Mann&Thompson, Xing Fuyi, Qu Chengxi, Huang Guowen, and so on have describedand analyzed clause relations from different perspectives, there are still some problemswithin the field of clause relation study, particularly in terms of the status quo of researchin English and Chinese.First, the analysis has arrived at the textual level in English; while in Chinese, itremains at the stage of the syntactic exploration. Second, western scholars focus more onthe categorization and description of patterns of clause relations from themacro-perspective; while the Chinese scholars concentrate on the study of the formation ofclause relations, rather than their pragmatic or textual functions in discourse.Through analyzing the features and functions of adversative relations in constructingChinese and English academic journal articles, the current research aims to provide anoverview of how the adversative relation functions in the construction of Chinese andEnglish academic journal articles, particulary the distribution, the classification, therepresentation, the function, and the relation of adversative relation to the problem-raisingmove, as well as their similarities and distinctions in the two languages.The theoretical bases of the current research are contrastive rhetoric, text linguistics(discourse patterns in particular), pragmatic presupposition and language relativity.Acutally, contrastive rhetoric is based on text linguistics as well, and itself is the methodof text analysis. It analyzes the connections between sentences in a text. The discoursepattern is the proper linguistic context of clause relations. It is the combination ofsemantic relations in a text or part of a text. Individual segments of texts are combined toform logical structure of the whole and to form patterns with certain characteristics. Somediscourse patterns reoccur time and time again in text and become deeply ingrained aspart of our culture knowledge. Generally, people have a mutually expected textstructuring or linguistic consensus. To research the adversative relation in a particulargenre, such as academic writings, could provide context to understand and interpreteclause relations and their function in contructing texts. Presupposition is an importanttopic in linguistics, especially in Pragmatics. Strawson has pointed out that everyutterance has a presupposition. Although there is plenty of research on presupposition andits interpretation on adversative relations, systematic analysis is still needed. This study tries to make a clearer analysis on how adversative relations are constructed in light of thetheory of the presupposition, which might benefit a better understanding ofpresupposition theory and the working mechanism of the adversative relation. Languageand thought is closely related. Linguistic phenomenon is the carrier of human thoughts,and thoughts can necessarily reflect linguistic features. The analysis of adversativerelations will in some way explain the general principle of human cognition.Based on corpus, this research is both quantitative and qualitative in nature. First, weestablished a small-sized corpus which contains60articles from English and Chineseacademic journals. Then we labeled the adversative relations in the articles. Next, weclassified the relations into categories and counted their distributions and occurringfrequency of each type by the computer. And finally, on the basis of descriptions, we triedto find out the representations, semantic features and textual functions of the adversativerelations. The main findings are:First, although there are more adversative clauses in English academic journals, theadversative relation is a common linguistic phenomenon both in Chinese and Englishacademic articles; nearly every paragraph contains at least one type of adversative relation.Second, the adversative relations can be overtly or covertly presented in Chinese andEnglish academic journal articles. The overt adversative clauses are represented throughdiscourse markers such as but, however,但是，and so on, or syntactic patterns such asnegative structure; whereas the covert ones are mainly inferred from the languageenvironment. Generally speaking, there are more overt adversative relations than the covertin total. However, for covert relations, there are more in Chinese than in English. Thismight reflect the flexibility of grammar and text structure of Chinese.Third, we divide the adversative relations into six categories. They are oppositverelations, contrastive relations, corrective relations, dismissive relations and hypotheticalrelations. Contrastive relations occur mostly in the articles, while hypothetical relations,the least. The differences between the other four are insignificant. In English, the ratiobetween overt and covert contrast relations is significant different; whereas in Chinese,covert contrastive and corrective relations are more than its overt ones.Fourth, according to the semantic structures, different kinds of adversative relationscould be divided into different types. For example, corrective relations can be divided intosemantic negation and pragmatic negation; concessions can be divided into categoricalconcessive clause and hypothetical concessive clause.Fifth, there are lots of similarities of adversative relations in Chinese and Englishacademic journals. For an oppositive relation, its presupposition is “￢q”, and focus is “q”.For the concessive relation, the presupposition might be “￢q” or “￢p” according todifferent types of concession. For the hypothetical relation, the presupposition is “p2”. Sixth, adversative relations are semantically related to each other, and as a result forma larger semantic unit. The functions of adversative clauses between sentences andparagraphs in Chinese and English articles are similar. The study on the functions and theconstruction progress of adversative clauses reflects the dynamic nature of language. Wehave discovered that the adversative relation is the basic clause relation for“Problem-Solution” pattern, and it is the main method for raising “Problems” in academicarticles both in Chinese and English.The significances of this study can be summarized from the theoretical and practicalperspectives. Theoretically, first of all, we combine syntactic study with textual analysis.Second, we apply presupposition theory into the analysis of adversative relation, whichfills the gap in the field of presupposition study. Third, through the study of adversativerelations, we try to explain the similarity and distinction in thought patterns betweenChinese and English. Language is not only a communicative tool, but also a reality itself.Finally, the combination of quantitative and qualitative research methods avoids theshortcomings of introspective analysis in traditional studies and ensures the validity andreliability of the research.Practically, the study proves the importance of adversative relation in the constructionof academic discourse both in English and Chinese. Generally, adversative relations onthe macro-level of discourse play more or less similar functions in English and Chineseacademic articles, but display differences in representing inter-sentential relations atmicro-levels. This finding might give some hints in the understanding of other types ofclause relations in English and Chinese discourse construction. The teaching of Englishwriting to students who are beyond the level of learning sentence construction, it issuggested, should be focused on the analysis of meaning relations between clauses andhelp students use appropriate techniques and connective words to connect clauses andform text comprehensible to English speakers.更多还原