發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-05-11 22:17

  本文選題：照應(yīng) + 替代　； 參考：《四川師范大學(xué)》2009年碩士論文

【摘要】： 本文從對(duì)外漢語(yǔ)語(yǔ)篇教學(xué)現(xiàn)狀出發(fā),針對(duì)教學(xué)中照應(yīng)、替代、省略方面出現(xiàn)的問(wèn)題,以韓禮德的功能主義語(yǔ)言學(xué)、對(duì)比語(yǔ)言學(xué)理論、語(yǔ)篇分析理論及語(yǔ)篇銜接理論為指導(dǎo),全面、充分地對(duì)比了英漢語(yǔ)篇中照應(yīng)、替代和省略三種銜接手段的差異。在照應(yīng)方面,人稱照應(yīng)、指示照應(yīng)和比較照應(yīng)除了在形式和表達(dá)上不同以外,還存在著諸如使用頻率、使用功能等方面的不同。在英漢語(yǔ)篇的替代現(xiàn)象中,由于英語(yǔ)有詞的屈折變化形式,所以名詞性替代詞有單復(fù)數(shù)形式的區(qū)分,動(dòng)詞性替代詞有時(shí)態(tài)上的形式變化,而這些都是漢語(yǔ)所沒(méi)有的。其次,英漢兩種語(yǔ)言中的替代現(xiàn)象在具體的表達(dá)上并不體現(xiàn)為一一對(duì)應(yīng)的關(guān)系,相反,還體現(xiàn)出較大的差異。最后,漢語(yǔ)中的替代現(xiàn)象出現(xiàn)的頻率要低于英語(yǔ)。英漢語(yǔ)里都有名詞性省略、動(dòng)詞性省略和小句性省略。但是英語(yǔ)中的省略常伴有形式或形態(tài)的變化,而漢語(yǔ)沒(méi)有。英語(yǔ)中動(dòng)詞性省略,特別是謂語(yǔ)實(shí)義動(dòng)詞的省略要多于漢語(yǔ),而漢語(yǔ)中主語(yǔ)的省略要多于英語(yǔ)。并且,英漢語(yǔ)的省略現(xiàn)象不是一一對(duì)應(yīng)的關(guān)系。 因此,在比較的基礎(chǔ)之上,我們從語(yǔ)言系統(tǒng)的角度出發(fā),從語(yǔ)言類型學(xué)理論、主題性理論等微觀層面到不同思維方式、民族心理、哲學(xué)及文化等宏觀層面探討其產(chǎn)生差異的原因。在對(duì)比分析英漢語(yǔ)篇照應(yīng)、替代和省略三種銜接手段的差異及產(chǎn)生差異根源的基礎(chǔ)之上,我們針對(duì)對(duì)外漢語(yǔ)語(yǔ)篇連貫與銜接教學(xué)中存在的問(wèn)題,提出了相關(guān)的教學(xué)建議。 筆者力求通過(guò)對(duì)英漢語(yǔ)篇中照應(yīng)、替代和省略三種銜接手段異同的充分描寫(xiě),對(duì)差異根源的透徹分析,提出了相應(yīng)的教學(xué)策略,以期減少對(duì)外漢語(yǔ)語(yǔ)篇教學(xué)中這三種語(yǔ)法銜接手段偏誤,提高母語(yǔ)為英語(yǔ)的漢語(yǔ)習(xí)得者的語(yǔ)篇連貫性。但是需要指出的是,由于提出的只是教學(xué)策略,其具體實(shí)施還需在實(shí)際教學(xué)中不斷落實(shí)和完善,其教學(xué)效果還需在教學(xué)實(shí)踐中不斷檢驗(yàn)。
[Abstract]:Based on the present situation of discourse teaching in TCFL, this paper aims at the problems of reference, substitution and ellipsis in teaching, guided by Halliday's functional linguistics, contrastive linguistic theory, discourse analysis theory and discourse cohesion theory. This paper makes a comprehensive and full comparison of the three cohesive devices in English and Chinese texts: anaphora, substitution and ellipsis. In the aspect of anaphora, personal anaphora, deixis anaphora and comparative anaphora are different not only in form and expression, but also in use frequency and function. In the substitution of English and Chinese texts, because of the inflectional forms of English words, there is a distinction between noun substitutes and verb substitutions in the form of single multiplicity and tense, which are not found in Chinese. Secondly, the substitution phenomenon in English and Chinese does not reflect one-to-one correspondence in concrete expression, on the contrary, it also shows great difference. Finally, the frequency of substitution in Chinese is lower than that in English. There are nominal ellipsis, verb ellipsis and clause ellipsis in English and Chinese. However, ellipsis in English is often accompanied by changes in form or form, but not in Chinese. In English, verb ellipsis, especially predicate actual verb, is more ellipsis than Chinese, and the subject ellipsis is more in Chinese than in English. Moreover, ellipsis in English and Chinese is not a one-to-one relationship. Therefore, on the basis of comparison, from the perspective of language system, from the micro level of linguistic typology theory and thematic theory to different ways of thinking, national psychology, This paper discusses the causes of the differences in philosophy and culture at the macro level. Based on the contrastive analysis of the differences among the three cohesive devices in English and Chinese, such as anaphora, substitution and omission, and the root causes of the differences, we put forward some relevant teaching suggestions in view of the problems existing in the teaching of coherence and cohesion in Chinese as a foreign language. The author tries to make a thorough analysis of the root causes of the differences and similarities of the three cohesive devices in English and Chinese texts by describing the similarities and differences of anaphora, substitution and ellipsis, and puts forward the corresponding teaching strategies. The purpose of this paper is to reduce the errors of the three grammatical cohesive devices in the teaching of Chinese as a foreign language and to improve the coherence of the Chinese learners who are native speakers of English. However, it should be pointed out that because the teaching strategy is only put forward, its concrete implementation needs to be carried out and perfected in the actual teaching, and its teaching effect should be constantly tested in the teaching practice.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：四川師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2009
【分類號(hào)】：H315.9

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 宋志平;英漢語(yǔ)形合與意合對(duì)比研究綜觀[J];東北師大學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2003年02期

2 張思潔，，張柏然;試從中西思維模式的差異論英漢兩種語(yǔ)言的特點(diǎn)[J];解放軍外國(guó)語(yǔ)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1996年05期

3 張德祿;語(yǔ)篇內(nèi)部銜接的原則[J];解放軍外國(guó)語(yǔ)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2001年06期

4 張德祿;語(yǔ)篇跨類銜接研究[J];解放軍外國(guó)語(yǔ)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2002年06期

5 陳曉湘,禹琴;英漢語(yǔ)篇中照應(yīng)、替代銜接手段對(duì)比與翻譯[J];湖南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2002年02期

6 彭小川;關(guān)于對(duì)外漢語(yǔ)語(yǔ)篇教學(xué)的新思考[J];漢語(yǔ)學(xué)習(xí);2004年02期

7 徐玉臣;英漢語(yǔ)言主要銜接手段的對(duì)比分析[J];山東外語(yǔ)教學(xué);1996年04期

8 張德祿;社會(huì)文化因素與語(yǔ)篇連貫[J];山東師大外國(guó)語(yǔ)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2000年04期

9 張德祿,劉汝;語(yǔ)篇連貫與翻譯[J];山東師大外國(guó)語(yǔ)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2002年02期

10 王淑華,于秀華;英漢照應(yīng)的語(yǔ)篇銜接功能對(duì)比[J];山東外語(yǔ)教學(xué);2003年06期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前5條

1 黎彥;英漢照應(yīng)對(duì)比分析[D];廣西師范大學(xué);2006年

2 張鳳玲;英漢語(yǔ)法銜接手段對(duì)比與翻譯[D];上海海事大學(xué);2006年

3 閻凱;《紅樓夢(mèng)》英漢照應(yīng)銜接對(duì)比研究[D];天津理工大學(xué);2006年

4 薛曉萍;英漢語(yǔ)篇銜接手段對(duì)比研究[D];福建師范大學(xué);2002年

5 許保芳;英漢敘述語(yǔ)篇人稱指稱對(duì)比分析[D];中國(guó)海洋大學(xué);2005年

本文編號(hào)：1875855