【作者】 高娜；

【导师】 王菊泉；

【作者基本信息】 上海海事大学 ， 外国语言学及应用语言学， 2007， 硕士

【摘要】 重复,作为一种构词方法和修辞手段,它同时又是语篇衔接手段中的一种词汇衔接方式,对语篇的整体连贯起着不容忽视的作用。然而,无论是从深度上还是广度上,有关重复所进行的研究都还不够。比如从语篇角度将重复手段单独作为研究对象来重点论述的不多,对从汉语的重复出发在英语中找其综合表现这方面做一对比分析研究的就更少了。基于此点,本文首先对衔接性重复的概念做出界定和分类,并根据重复现象中先行词词类的不同,大致将其分为名词性重复,动词性重复,小句性重复以及形容词性/副词性重复。其次本文从重复的语篇(句内和跨句)衔接功能入手,以老舍先生的《二马》及其英译本的前三章作为语料,从汉语出发,尽可能详尽地罗列出了汉语的重复形式在英语的种种对应情况,并进行了归类总结。此外,对汉语使用重复而英语使用多种变换形式的条件进行了分析和解释,并探索出一定规律。对衔接性重复所涉及的具体问题的关注角度不同,论述的重点也就不同,例如还可以探讨句内与跨句重复,结构性与非结构性重复,以及共指性与非共指性重复。根据以上三种角度各自的特殊性和规律性,本文特别谈到了句内重复,结构性重复及非共指性重复。说到“非共指性重复”,它属于衔接性重复中特殊形式的一种,在汉语中极为常见。笔者将其分为五个方面,并都进行了汉英对比分析。对于结构性重复,文章从修辞和非修辞两个角度进行了探讨分析。对于句内重复,本文也进行了汉英对比并做出总结。经过对比研究可以发现,汉语中的重复在英语中通常有以下几种形式的对应表达:重复,照应,替代,省略,以及变换。而在大多数情况之下,汉英之间的对应状况还可进行更细致的分析。而多数表现形式之下还可进行更细致的分类。重复的运用除了受语言本质特点及特定表达方式的影响,还要受照应项目的可及性及某些衔接原则的制约,而且与语篇或句子本身的语用、修辞目的及语篇语体不无关系。与此同时,语篇中的回指词是否选用重复形式与先行词的词性,先行词与回指词的所指一致性,以及它们所构成的衔接纽带的类型或彼此间的距离远近也有着很大联系。值得一提的是,本文在综合韩氏夫妇与张德禄对衔接纽带距离划分的成果的基础上,根据重复词与先行词之间的距离以及它们之间是否有相关指称项两个因素,对衔接纽带重新进行了划分;同时将纽带类型与重复的本质特点相结合,将重复分为直接重复,中程重复,远程重复,以及中介重复,并且探讨了这些类型的重复的使用条件与场合。更多还原

【Abstract】 Repetition can be both a rhetorical device and a lexical means for textual cohesion. It plays a very important role in textual coherence. Up to now, however, few studies have been exclusively made on repetition in terms of its cohesive function, still less research has been found that deals with repetition as a cohesive device in English and Chinese on a contrastive basis.This thesis first gives a definition for, and makes a classification of, cohesive repetition. Depending on the word class of the antecedent involved in repetition, cohesive repetition can be divided into nominal repetition, verbal repetition, clausal repetition and adjectival/adverbial repetition. Then by using the first three chapters of Lao She’s Mr. Ma and Son and its English version as data, and approaching the problem from the perspective of the cohesive function of repetition, the thesis tries to sum up from the data all the major cases in which cohesive repetition is used in the Chinese original and how it is realized in the English translation, aiming to show in what contexts Chinese favors cohesive repetition while English prefers some other means to realize cohesion.If classified from some other perspectives, cohesive repetition can also distinguish between intra-sentential and supra-sentential repetition, structural and non-structural repetition, and co-referential and non-co-referential repetition. In view of the different characteristics of these perspectives, this thesis lays special emphasis on intra-sentential repetition, structural repetition and non-co-referential repetition. Regarding non-co-referential repetition, which is a special type of cohesive repetition, and which is very common in Chinese, a contrastive analysis is made between Chinese and English from 5 different angles. For structural repetition, the discussion is made from both rhetorical and non-rhetorical perspectives. As for intra-sentential repetition, a detailed discussion is made in particular on its use in Chinese and a contrastive study has also been conducted between Chinese and English.Our study shows that where cohesive repetition is used in Chinese, English may have it realized in the following forms: repetition, reference, substitution, ellipsis, and revision, and that in most cases, a more detailed analysis of the correspondence between the Chinese form and its English realizations is possible. Apart from linguistic heterogeneity and ways of expression peculiar to a given language, the application of cohesive repetition in a language is subject to many other factors such as the word class of the antecedent, the type of cohesive tie between the antecedent and the anaphoric item, the pragmatic functions of such cohesive ties, and the referents of the antecedent and the anaphoric item making up a repetition. Besides, its use will also be governed by some cohesive principles and anaphoric accessibility, by the style of the writer, and so on.It deserves to be mentioned here that by combining the findings of Halliday and Hasan (1976) and those of Zhang Delu (2003) on cohesive ties, the author proposes a new criterion for the classification of cohesive ties, taking into consideration the actual distance between the antecedent and the anaphoric item, and whether there are any relevant referring items in the interrupting sentence (s) between them; furthermore, by applying the criterion to its classification, the author divides repetition into 4 kinds, namely, immediate repetition, mediary repetition, remote repetition and mediated repetition, and explores the different cases in which they are used.更多还原