【作者】 施仁娟；

【导师】 张建民；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 对外汉语教学， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 话语标记是近来语用学研究的热点之一。国内话语标记研究,主要从本体和教学两方面展开。本体研究或阐述话语标记的连贯作用,或探讨某一小类话语标记的特征,或描述某一个话语标记的语用功能及其语法化过程,缺乏对话语标记的整体认知。教学研究主要是将英语学习者话语标记习得与母语者进行对比,或者用教学实验证明话语标记习得对学习者语言技能发展具有促进作用,仍将话语标记的习得看作是语言表达手段的丰富,且没有说明话语标记为何能促进学习者语言技能的发展。对外汉语教学界对留学生话语标记习得的重要性缺乏应有的认识,相关的研究仍处于起步阶段。本文从培养留学生元话语能力的角度出发来研究话语标记,力求本体研究成果能为教学服务。本文首先从言语交际双方的元认知交互出发,提出元认知交互能力就是元话语能力,元认知交互是元话语产生的认知机制,元话语可通过语法化成为话语标记。然后根据“话语标记是具有程序功能的元话语”和“话语标记是经过语法化的元话语”两个观点,对话语标记的研究范围、定义、特征进行了界定,将话语标记与其他几个类似术语相区别,并以语法化程度为标准,把话语标记分为明示型和默会型两类。接着本文具体分析了不同话语标记在辖域数量、辖域方向、辖域语义指向上的差别,探究了话语标记与话轮、话题的关系,考察了话语标记与辖域所在语句的紧密程度,并以“话说回来”为例,具体演示了受话人如何通过寻找辖域、分析辖域之间的语义关系来利用话语标记帮助自己理解话语。最后本文在考察话语标记教学现状的基础上,对今后的话语标记教学提出了建议。本文的主要研究成果有：一、从认知心理学角度探讨了“话语标记是如何产生的”这一问题。我们认为,言语交际中发话人的元认知会对话语进行组织、监控和调整,当发话人想把元认知的结果告知受话人时,元认知交互就产生了。元认知交互的语言表现之一就是具有程序功能的元话语,元话语可经过语法化成为话语标记。二、从“话语标记是经过语法化的、具有程序功能的元话语”出发,重新界定了话语标记的范围、定义和特征,并根据语法化程度的高低,将话语标记分为明示型和默会型两类。这种分类法有利于开展话语标记的教学。三、以辖域为抓手,对汉语话语标记从多个角度进行了分析。话语标记的程序功能通过受话人对辖域的寻找和辖域语义间关系的分析而实现,从辖域入手分析话语标记,有利于受话人归纳话语标记的语篇结构和语用功能,从而利用话语标记帮助自己理解话语。四、提出要加强对默会型话语标记的教学,建议使用隐性教学法以促进学生课堂外的话语标记习得,并设计了教学流程。具体来说,本文共分六章,内容安排如下：第一章开门见山地提出,本文将话语标记的理解和使用看作是元话语能力的具体表现,对外汉语教学应在中高级阶段培养留学生的元话语能力。在总结国内外话语标记研究现状的基础上,指出了国内研究的不足和今后的研究方向。同时还介绍了本文的研究内容,研究方法和语料来源。第二章从认知到元认知再到元话语能力,提出了元认知交互能力就是元话语能力,元话语能力可表现为元话语或话语标记的使用和理解。分析了元话语是如何体现元认知的以及元话语是如何演变为话语标记的。这一章回答了“话语标记是如何产生的”这一问题。第三章从话语标记的本质属性(程序功能)出发,界定了话语标记的范围、定义和特征,辨析了话语标记和其他几个术语的异同。按照语法化程度的高低,将话语标记分为明示型和默会型两种。这一章回答了“什么是话语标记,如何判断话语标记”这一问题。第四章具体分析了汉语话语标记辖域的数量和方向,辖域的语义指向,辖域与话轮、话题的关系,话语标记与辖域所在语句的松紧程度等,举例说明受话人如何通过寻找辖域、分析辖域间的语义关系来利用话语标记帮助理解话语,回答了“话语标记是如何发挥程序功能的”这一问题。第五章将本体研究与对外汉语教学实践相结合,先考察了话语标记教学现状,然后提出可在听力理解中培养留学生利用话语标记引导功能的能力,使用隐性教学法加强对默会型话语标记的教学。第六章是结语部分,总结了本文的研究成果,指出了创新点和不足之处,并确立了今后研究的方向。更多还原

【Abstract】 Discourse markers have been one of the research interests in pragmatics in recent years. Domestic studies on discourse markers mainly focused on ontological studies and teaching studies. The former elaborated the coherence function of discourse markers, or laid emphasis on features of certain subcategory of discourse markers, or described the pragmatic functions and the grammaticalization process of one discourse marker without considering the overall perceptions of them. Teaching studies mainly focused on the contrast of the acquisition of discourse markers between Chinese students who learn English and English native speakers, or testified the effect on the improvement of language skills by learning discourse markers, regarding the acquisition of discourse markers as a way to enrich language expression. These studies didn’t explain why the acquisition of discourse makers can promote the development of language skills. The importance of learning discourse markers by foreign students hasn’t been realized in the field of Teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language, and relative studies are still at an early stage.This dissertation studied discourse markers in developing the meta-discourse competence of foreign students in China, trying to cater ontological studies for practice. We firstly contended that the interactive capability of metacognition was exactly meta-discourse competence, based on the interaction of metacognition in communication between the speaker and the listener. We held the view that interaction of meatcognition was the cognitive mechanism of metadiscourse, and metadiscourse can turn into discourse markers through grammaticalization. Then the study defined the scope, definition, features of discourse markers based on the ideas that discourse markers are metadisourse with procedural functions and discourse markers are aregrammaticalized metadiscourse. We distinguished other similar terms and discourse markers, and divided discourse markers into explicit and tacit ones according to the degree of their grammaticalization. The dissertation also studied the differences between discourse markers in numbers, directions, semantic orientations of their scope, explored the relationship between discourse markers, turn-takings and topics, and tried to find out different degree of compactness between discourse markers and the sentences in which their scopes existed. We demonstrated how a listener helped himself understanding the discourse with discourse markers by finding out the scopes and analyzing the semantic relationship between scopes with the example of "hua shuo hui lai". At last, the dissertation gave some suggestions on teaching discourse markers in future based on the inspection of current teaching situation of discourse markers.The major achievements of our research include:1. Answering the question How Are Discourse Markers Produced from the perspective of cognitive psychology. We hold the point that the speakers’ metacogintion will organize, monitor and adjust his discourse in communication and the interaction of metacognition happens when the speaker wants the listener to know the result of his metacogniton’s activities. Metadiscourses with procedural functions are one of the linguistic performances of metacognition activities, they can become discourse markers through grammaticalization.2. Re-defining the scope, definition and features of discourse markers based on the view that discourse markers are grammaticalized metadiscourse with procedural functions. Dividing discourse markers into two categories:explicit and tacit ones by the degree of their grammaticalization. The classification is useful for teaching and learning.3. Studying discourse markers from multiple dimensions through their scopes. The procedural function of discourse markers is realized by finding out the scopes and analyzing their relationships. Studying discourse markers through their scopes can help the listeners to generalize discourse markers’discourse structures and pragmatic functions, so that they can understand discourse with discourse markers.4. Suggesting putting emphasis on teaching tacit discourse markers by implicit-approach in class, and designing teaching procedure for it in order to improve students’ acquisition of discourse markers out of classroom.The dissertation consists of six chapters.Chapter one comes straight to the point that we consider the using and understanding of discourse markers are the manifestation of meta-discourse competence, and it is very important to train foreign students’meat-discourse competence at the middle and senior stages. Based on the summary of studies on discourse markers home and abroad, we pointed out the shortage of internal studies and research directions in the future. The research focus, the methodology and the source of corpus are introduced as well.Chapter two switches from cognition to metacognition and to meta-discourse competence and believes that meta-discourse competence can be performed by using and understanding metadiscourse or discourse markers, contending that interactive capability of metacognition is exactly meta-discourse competence. We studied how metadiscourse reflects metacognition and how metadiscourses turn into discourse markers. This chapter answered the question How Discourse Markers Are Produced?Chapter three defines the scope, definiton and features of discourse marker from their essential attribute and distinguishes the term "discourse markers" from other similar terms. We divide discourse markers into explicit and tacit ones according to their degree of grammaticalization. This chapter answered the question What Are Discourse Markers and How to Judge a Discourse Marker. Chapter four analyzes the number and directions of discourse markers’ scopes, the semantic orientations of scopes, the relationship between scopes, turn-takings and topics, and the different compactness between discourse markers and sentences in which their scopes exists. We also illustrate how a listener use discourse markers to help himself understanding discourse by finding out scopes and analyzing their relationships. This chapter answered the question How Discourse Markers’ Procedural Functions Work.Chapter five combines ontological studies with the teaching practice in Teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language. We inspect the present situation of discourse markers in Teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language first, then suggest training foreign students’ability of using the procedural functions of discourse markers especially in listening classes and applying implicit-approach to teaching tacit discourse markers.Chapter six summarizes the major achievements of our research, reveals the innovations and limitations of the dissertation, and sheds light on the orientation for further studies.更多还原