学位论文 > 优秀研究生学位论文题录展示

英汉论辩语篇修辞的跨文化研究

作　者: 夏莉
导　师: 胡曙中
学　校: 上海外国语大学
专　业: 外国语言学及应用语言学
关键词: 对比修辞学英汉论辩语篇多角度评价体系
分类号: H315
类　型: 博士论文
年　份: 2005年
下　载: 906次
引　用: 1次
阅　读: 论文下载

内容摘要

本论文是一项以对比修辞学研究方法为分析框架,以现代论辩研究的主要成果为理论基础所进行的关于英汉论辩语篇修辞特征的跨文化研究。论文首先总结了国内外英汉对比修辞研究与论辩研究的成果及存在的不足,重点分析了英汉论辩语篇在组织模式、论证策略、诉求方式和信息阐释等方面存在的同质性和殊异性特征,同时还挖掘了造成这些异同的根源—英汉思维文化传统的影响。论文通过对英汉论辩语篇的相关数据的定量分析以及定性阐释,试图构建英汉论辩语篇的多角度评价体系,以期充实和丰富对比修辞学在论辩语篇分析方面的跨文化研究。作为应用语言学的重要领域,英汉对比修辞研究取得了一定的成果,但同时也存在着用于对比的语篇类型单一、汉语语料陈旧、例文选取数量过小等问题。英语论辩研究硕果累累,但是汉语论辩缺乏系统研究。英汉论辩语篇对比研究存在明显的缺陷。科诺(U. Connor)曾经为跨文化的论辩语篇的对比研究提供了一个分析框架,其内容包含三个方面:(1)问题-解决型的宏观结构;(2)图尔明非形式逻辑论证的分析模式;(3)论辩的诉求手段。本论文参照此研究框架,借鉴现代西方论辩理论中的有关论辩的有效性、读者在论辩语篇中的作用及论辩的动态过程中作者与读者之间的互动性等核心内容,选取充足数量的英汉论辩语篇作为定量分析的语料,多角度对英汉论辩语篇的修辞特征进行对比,运用科学统计手段和分析工具对数据加以分析,得出的客观真实的结论为对比修辞学在英汉论辩语篇方面的研究提供有益的参考。论文共分为六章。第一章简要介绍对比修辞学和论辩研究的现状及存在的不足,阐述了本研究的目的和必要性、研究方法和预期目标。第二章着重探讨影响英汉论辩语篇修辞特征形成的各种相关因素。从英汉论辩传统、思维文化、诉求手段、价值取向等方面为分析英汉论辩修辞的异同提供铺垫。第三章考察了现代

全文目录

论文独创性声明  3-4
Acknowledgements  4-7
Abstract  7-11
内容提要  11-20
Chapter One Introduction  20-46
  1.1 An Analytical Framework  20-30
    1.1.1 An Overview of Contrastive Rhetoric  20-27
    1.1.2 Deficiency in Contrastive Rhetorical Research  27-30
  1.2 Contrastive Study of Modern English and Chinese Argumentation Research  30-35
    1.2.1 Modern Argumentation Research---A Literature Review  30-33
    1.2.2 Previous Contrastive Study of English and Chinese Argumentative Discourses  33-35
  1.3 Need and Purpose of the Contrastive Study of English and Chinese Argumentation  35-38
  1.4 Research Design: Methodology and Data Collection  38-46
Chapter Two Contrastive Argumentation: English vs. Chinese  46-87
  2.1 Feasibility of A Contrastive Study  46-56
    2.1.1 Two Distinct Cultures and Rhetorics  46-49
    2.1.2 Influence of Language, Culture and Logic on English and Chinese Rhetorics  49-56
      2.1.2.1 Previous Studies of the Interrelationships among Language, Culture,Thought patterns and Logical Reasoning  49-53
      2.1.2.2 Significance of These Factors in the Formation of Two Distinct Rhetorics  53-56
  2.2 Contrastive Traditional Argumentation: English vs. Chinese  56-73
    2.2.1 Origin of English and Chinese Argumentation  56-63
      2.2.1.1 Basic Concepts in Traditional English Argumentation  56-58
      2.2.1.2 Traditional Chinese Modes of Argumentation  58-59
      2.2.1.3 Contrastive Traditional and Modern Chinese Argumentation  59-63
    2.2.2 Exploration of English and Chinese Means of Persuasion  63-72
      2.2.2.1 Means of Persuasion in Traditional English Rhetoric  63-66
      2.2.2.2 Means of Persuasion in Traditional Chinese Rhetoric  66-68
      2.2.2.3 Contrastive Traditional English and Chinese Artistic Proofs  68-72
    2.2.3 Roles of Audience in Traditional English and Chinese Argumentation  72-73
  2.3 Exploration of the Factors Contributive to the Distinct Features in English and Chinese Argumentation  73-83
    2.3.1 Variations in Ways of Thinking  73-74
    2.3.2 Influence of Confucianism on Traditional Chinese Rhetoric  74-76
    2.3.3 Influence of English and Chinese Rhetorical Traditions on Writing  76-78
    2.3.4 Influence of Thought Patterns on Modes of Argumentation  78-79
    2.3.5 Social Values in Argumentation and Influence on Writing  79-83
  2.4 Summary  83-87
Chapter Three Modern Argumentation ---A Theoretical Background for Contrastive English and Chinese Argumentation Study  87-126
  3.1 A General Preview of Argumentation Study  87-91
  3.2 Basic Concepts in Modern Argumentation Study  91-95
    3.2.1 Definitions of Argument and Argumentation  91-94
    3.2.2 Aristotle’s Classification of Argumentation  94-95
  3.3 Aristotle’s Concept of Argumentation---Basis for Modern Argumentation Study  95-96
  3.4 Strength of Reasoning: Toulmin’s DWC Model of Argument  96-107
    3.4.1 The DWC Model: Formation and Layout  97-101
    3.4.2 Advantages of Toulmin over Aristotle  101-105
    3.4.3 Advantages of DWC Model as an Instrument for Argument Analysis  105-107
  3.5 The Role of Audience in Modern English Argumentation  107-118
    3.5.1 Aristotle and Perelman: The Old and The New  107-110
    3.5.2 Significance of New Rhetoric on Modern Argumentation Research  110-113
    3.5.3.U niversal Audience : the Core of New Rhetoric  113-118
  3.6 Reciprocality and Interactiveness in Argumentation  118-123
    3.6.1 Features of Pragma-Dialectical Approach to Argumentation  118-121
    3.6.2 Argumentation as a Complex Speech Act ---A Dynamic Process of Logical Reasoning  121-123
  3.7 Summary  123-126
Chapter Four Quantitative Analysis of English and Chinese Argumentative Discourses  126-147
  4.1 Data Collection and Reliability  126-127
  4.2 Methodology and Measurement  127-130
  4.3 Data Analysis and Interpretation  130-144
    4.3.1 Rhetorical Organization(Superstructure: setting-problem-solution-evaluation,and Spiral vs. Linear Discoursal Progression )  135-136
    4.3.2 Location of Thesis Statement: Directness vs. Indirectness  136-137
    4.3.3 Reasoning Strategy: Deductive vs. Inductive and Inductive vs. Quasi-Inductive  137-138
    4.3.4 Persuasive Appeals: Logos, Ethos, and Pathos  138-139
    4.3.5 Strength of Argument: Claim, Data, and Warrant  139-140
    4.3.6 References and Canonical Expressions  140-141
    4.3.7 Reader- vs. Writer-Responsibility for the Clarity of Meaning  141-143
    4.3.8 Reciprocality/Interactiveness: Audience Adaptiveness  143
    4.3.9 End Questions  143-144
  4.4 An Interim Summary  144-147
Chapter Five Qualitative Explanation and Discussion  147-179
  5.1 Focus One: Rhetorical Organization of Argumentative Discourse  147-150
  5.2 Focus Two: Position of Thesis Statement (Indirectness vs. Directness)  150-155
  5.3 Focus Three: Reasoning Strategy (Inductive vs. Deductive and Inductive vs. Quasi-Inductive)  155-159
  5.4 Focus Four: Discourse Interpretation/Clarity of Meaning ---Reader-Responsibility vs. Writer-Responsibility  159-162
  5.5 Focus Five: Persuasive Appeals---Logos, Ethos, and Pathos  162-165
  5.6 Focus Six: Strength of Argument---Claim, Data, and Warrant  165-170
  5.7 Focus Seven: References and Canonical Expressions  170-173
  5.8 Focus Eight: Reciprocality/Interactiveness---Audience Adaptiveness  173-175
  5.9 Focus Nine: End Questions  175-179
Chapter Six Conclusion  179-185
  6.1 Summary of the Major Findings  179-181
    6.1.1 Homogeneity of English and Chinese Argumentation  180
    6.1.2 Heterogeneity of English and Chinese Argumentation  180-181
  6.2 Pedagogical and Practical Implications of the Study  181-183
  6.3 Limitations of This Study and Suggestions for Further Research  183-185
Bibliography  185-217
Appendixes  217-231

英汉论辩语篇修辞的跨文化研究

内容摘要

全文目录

相似论文