【作者】 金莉娜；

【导师】 金永寿；

【作者基本信息】 延边大学 ， 亚非语言文学， 2011， 博士

【摘要】 传统语言学把句子视为最基本的语言单位之一,主要研究句子内部的结构及语法功能,可统称为句子语言学。尽管句子语言学取得了丰硕的成果,但是观察实际使用中的语言现象即可发现,句子语言学对现实中的许多语言现象束手无策。例如,指称、省略、超句连接成分、连贯话语的生成与理解等等,都无法在脱离语境的孤立句中得到满意的解释。不仅如此,人与人之间的语言交际并非通过孤立的句子实现,而是由多个连贯的句子组成的语篇来实现。因此,要真正认识作为交际工具的语言及其功能,就必须在句子语言学的基础上把研究领域拓展到语篇层面,对语篇进行全面、深入的研究。然而,目前的韩(朝)汉对比学界却很少关注语篇对比研究,有限的研究成果也大都集中在指称问题上,语篇结构的研究几乎是一个盲点。在西方语言学界,语篇的结构和语篇的功能是语篇语言学的中心议题,语篇结构既是语篇研究的出发点,也是语篇研究的归宿。那么,如何对比韩(朝)汉语篇结构,以什么项目作为切入点,应该采用怎样的对比框架?为此,本文以语篇分析理论和系统功能语言学理论为框架,综合运用话语分析、认知语言学、句法学、语义学、语用学、语体学、修辞学以及心理语言学、系统哲学、叙事学、新闻学等领域的相关理论和研究方法,依据功能为主形式为辅的原则,采用从共性基础到个性差异的对比思路,对韩(朝)汉语篇结构标记进行了全面、细致的对比研究。本文共分六章。第一章是绪论。主要介绍了本文的研究内容、西方语言学界和韩(朝)汉语言学界的相关研究概况、本文的选题价值、理论基础、研究方法、研究思路、论文框架以及语料来源和涉及的术语。第二章对比了韩(朝)汉语篇系统的总体特征。结合系统哲学的原理,归纳·了语篇系统的多元性、有序性、整体性、有限性等基本特征,指出韩(朝)汉语篇结构由句子、句群、段落及段落群等四级单位构成,其中,段落是核心构成单位。其次,指出韩(朝)汉语篇结构是由微观结构、中观结构及宏观结构统一形成的复合三元结构,结构关系通常由结构标记来体现。同时,对韩(朝)汉语篇结构标记下了定义,并根据功能特征把语篇结构标记分为概念意义结构标记、逻辑意义结构标记、人际意义结构标记等三种类型。第三章对比了韩(朝)汉概念意义结构标记的功能和使用特点。首先,考察了韩(朝)汉话题研究中存在的不足点,并指出韩(朝)汉话题的共同特征。其次,根据典型话题的构成特征,把韩(朝)汉语篇话题分为指称性话题、介引性话题、命题性话题等三种类型,重点对比了指称性话题中的不定指性话题,不仅归纳了不定指性话题的主要表现形式,还归纳了不定指性话题在两种语言中的对应形式和对应规律。再次,考察了话题的组织,按照信息类型把话题分为初始性话题、回指性话题和激活性话题,并据此对比了韩(朝)汉语篇话题的推进模式,归纳出延续式、派生式、集中式、交叉式、,链条式等五种模式。第四章对比了韩(朝)汉逻辑意义结构标记的功能和使用特点。首先,归纳了韩(朝)汉逻辑意义结构标记的特点,把它分为“元素—元素”关系标记、“对应点—对应点”关系标记、“原因—结果”关系标记等三种主要类型,并对每一类型的下位类型进行了细致的对比,重点对比了罗列标记、转折标记和条件标记。第五章对比了韩(朝)汉人际意义结构标记的功能和使用特点。首先,在指出韩(朝)汉人际意义结构标记的共同点之后,根据韩(朝)汉话语标记在话轮结构中的起始功能、延续功能、切换功能、抢夺功能及结束功能进行分类；其次,在归纳韩(朝)汉元话语标记的共同点的基础上,根据它们在语篇结构中的衔接功能,把它们分为话语态度标记、话语组织标记和话语信息标记,其中,重点对比了韩(朝)汉话语组织标记。第六章是结语。对全文进行了总结,指出研究中的新发现和存在的不足点。总之,语篇结构标记是在语篇中负载一定的语法、语义关系,并能通过这种关系管领语篇构成单位的语言标记。语篇结构,既是话者/作者建构连贯话语的结果,又是听者/读者重构连贯话语的过程。话者/作者为了使听者/读者更好地领会自己的交际意图,除了传递主要信息之外,还会选择恰当的语篇结构标记来有效地组织语篇,以表明自己的态度、观点以及谋篇思路；而语篇结构标记在很大程度上影响和制约听者/读者对主要信息的理解和对话语关联性的寻求,因为听者/读者在理解语篇时,除了推理机制以外,语篇结构标记往往是他们寻求最佳关联的重要线索。我们认为,不一定所有的语篇都有结构标记,但是典型的语篇必有结构标记。不论是韩国语(朝鲜语)还是汉语,影响语篇结构和语篇结构标记的主要参数不是语言类型,而是语篇类型以及作者/话者的话语风格。更多还原

【Abstract】 [Abstract]Traditional linguistics regards a sentence as the most basic language unit, and mainly studies the internal structure of sentences and the grammatical function, it can be called as sentence linguistics. Although the sentence linguistics has obtained plentiful and substantial achievements, it is at a loss to some language phenomenon in reality, which can be found from the observation of the language phenomenon in using. For example:the reference, ellipsis, beyond-the-sentence conjunctive, generative and comprehension of convention and so on, they all can’t be obtained satisfactory explanation in the isolated sentence that is separated from a context. Moreover, the language communication between man and man can’t be achieved by the isolated sentences, but by the discourse which is composed of many coherent sentences. Therefore, if we truly want to know the language which is used as a kind of communicative tool, and its’ function, we have to expand the research field to the discourse level with the sentence linguistics as a basis, and take a comprehensive, in-depth study on discourse.However, in the academic circles of the contrastive study in Korean and Chinese, few people have paid a little attention to the contrastive studies of discourse, some limited achievements have mainly focused on the study of reference, and the discourse structure study is almost a blind spot. In the west linguistic circle, a discourse structure and a discourse function are the central subjects of discourse linguistics, and the discourse structure is not only a starting point, but also the destination of discourse studies. Then, how to contrast the discourse structure in Korean and Chinese, what subject can be taken as a staring point, what contrastive frame should be used?Therefore, this dissertation takes the theory of discourse analysis and systemic-functional linguistics as a frame, and synthetically uses the correlation theories and research methods of discourse analysis, cognitive linguistics, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, stylistics, rhetoric, psycholinguistics, system philosophy, narratology and so on, takes the discourse structure marker as a starting point, with the principle of function first and form second, uses the thinking of contrast from common basis to individual differences, conducts a comprehensive and detailed contrastive study on the discourse structure marker in Korean and Chinese.This dissertation is divided into six chapters.Chapter One is an introduction. It mainly introduced the research content of this dissertation, the related research survey in western linguistic circle and the Korean and Chinese linguistic circle,. as well as the value of this topic, theory basis, research methods, research thinking, the frame of this dissertation, the language materials origination, and some related terminologies can be involved in this chapter.Chapter Two contrasted the general characteristics of the discourse system in Korean and Chinese. With the principle of system philosophy, Chapter Two summed up some basic characteristics of discourse system--pluralism, orderliness, integrity and finiteness. Then it pointed out that the discourse structure in Korean and Chinese is composed of sentences, segments, paragraphs, paragraph groups, and the paragraphs are the core constitution units. Secondly, it also pointed out that the discourse system is a kind of triadic compound structure which includes micro structure, intermediate structure and macro structure, and the structural relation is usually manifested by the structure marker. Meanwhile, it gave a definition to the Korean and Chinese discourse structure, according to the function characteristics, it divided the discourse structure marker into three types:ideational meaning structure marker, logic meaning structure marker and interpersonal meaning structure marker.Chapter Three contrasted the function and using characteristics of ideational meaning structure marker in Korean and Chinese. First, it reviewed the shortcomings of topic studies in Korean and Chinese, and pointed out the common characteristics in Korean and Chinese topics. Secondly, according to the formation characteristics of typical topic, it divided Korean and Chinese discourse topics into referentiality topics, introduction topics and proposition topics, focusing on contrasting the indefinite topics in referentiality topics. It included not only the main manifestation, but also the correspondence forms and correspondence laws of indefinite topics in Korean and Chinese. Once more, according to the information types, this dissertation divided topics into initial topics, anaphora topics and activation topics, and according to the above, it contrasted the discourse thematic progression in Korean and Chinese, and then summarized the extension type, derivation type, central type, cross type and chain type. Finally, it contrasted the manifestation and boundary problem of Korean and Chinese time markers.Chapter Four contrasted the function and using characteristics of logic meaning structure marker in Korean and Chinese. It concluded the characteristics of Korean and Chinese logic meaning structure marker and put it into three main types:"the element-element" relational marker, "the corresponding points-corresponding points" relational marker and "the cause-consequence" relational marker. Finally, it carried on a detailed contrast to each type’s lower position type, focusing on the display marker, adversative marker and condition marker. Chapter Five contrasted the function and using characteristics of interpersonal meaning structure marker in Korean and Chinese. First, after pointing out the common ground of Korean and Chinese interpersonal meaning structure marker, according to the initial function, extended function, switching function, seizing function and conclusion function of Korean and Chinese discourse marker in turn-taking structure, it divided the interpersonal meaning structure marker into several types; Secondly, on the basis of including the common ground of Korean and Chinese metadiscourse marker, according to their cohesion function in discourse structure, this dissertation divided it into discourse attitudes marker, discourse organization marker and discourse information marker, which focused on the Korean and Chinese discourse organization marker.Chapter Six is a conclusion. It carried on a summary to the full dissertation and pointed out the new findings and deficiency points in the study.In short, the discourse structure marker is a kind of language marker which loads the grammar and semantic relations, and it can lead to two or two above discourse formation units with this relationship. The discourse structure is not only the result of an author’s/speaker’s construction to coherence discourse, but also the process of a reader’s/listener’s reconstruction to coherence discourse. In order to make readers/listeners can understand the communicative intent better, in addition to passing the main information, authors/speakers will choose the appropriate discourse structure marker to effectively organize the discourse to indicate their attitudes, views and thinking; and in a large extent, discourse structure marker will influence and restrict a reader’s/ listener’s understanding to the main message and the search to discourse relevance theory, because when readers/ listeners understand the discourse, in addition to the reasoning mechanism, discourse marker will be an important clue to seek the best connection for them.We believe that not all the discourses have structure markers, but the typical discourse must have it. No matter it is Korean or Chinese, the main parameters that affect a discourse structure and a discourse structure marker are not the language types, but the discourse types and the author’s discourse style.更多还原