期刊文献+

认知视角下英汉语篇照应词的对比分析 被引量:2

A Contrastive Study of English and Chinese Discourse Anaphora From the Perspective of Cognitive Linguistics
下载PDF
导出
摘要 从认知视角出发,对比分析英汉语篇照应词在照应词选择和使用规律中的异同。研究中利用认知语言学的可及性理论和参照点模型构建框架,选取中英文10篇记叙文建立语料库,使用定量分析的研究方法。研究发现,在指称语篇中处激活状态的实体时,英汉语均倾向使用高可及性照应词;照应词选择和所指对象的性质有关:所指对象为生命实体时,高可及性照应词使用频率高于非生命实体;汉语零照应词、英语定冠词"the"、英汉指示代词和英汉人称代词是英汉两者在语篇照应词使用中的主要差异。 Anaphora is one of the most common linguistic phenomena in human language communication. It originates from using linguistic symbols( the signifiers) to replace the entities( the signified) in the real world. This paper makes a comparative and contrastive analysis in the options and usages of anaphora between Chinese and English discourses within the framework of cognitive principles. In this study,the cognitively accessible theories and the CRP model are applied to set up the theoretical framework. At the same time,10 narrative articles are collected as the database of the analysis and quantitative research method is used in the study. It is found that when referring the activating entities,the use of frequencies of highly accessible anaphora in animate entities is higher than the use of that in inanimate ones both in English and Chinese; the option of anaphoric devices depends on the category of its referent; the use of zero anaphora,definite article,demonstrative pronouns and personal pronouns in discourse are prudently different between English and Chinese.
出处 《江西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》 CSSCI 北大核心 2016年第1期137-144,共8页 Journal of Jiangxi Normal University(Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition)
关键词 认知 照应 指称 可及性 Recognition anaphora reference accessibility
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

二级参考文献20

  • 1文旭.国外认知语言学研究综观[J].外国语,1999,22(1):35-41. 被引量:191
  • 2文旭.认知语言学:诠释与思考[J].外国语,2001,24(2):29-36. 被引量:109
  • 3Chafe, W. 1994. Discourse, Consciousness and Time [M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • 4Dirven, R. & M. Verspoor. 1998. Cognitive Exploration of Language and Linguistics [M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • 5Fesmire, S. A. 1994. What is ‘cognitive' about cognitive linguistics? [J] Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 9: 149-154.
  • 6Fillmore, C. 1975. An alternative to checklist theories of meaning [J]. Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society: 123-131.
  • 7Fillmore, C. 1976. Frame semantics and the nature of language [J ]. Annals of the NY Academy of Sciences 280: 20-32.
  • 8Fillmore, C. 1988. The mechanisms of construction grammar [J]. Berkeley Linguistic Society 14: 35-55.
  • 9Fillmore, C. et al. 1988. Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of ‘let alone'[J]. Language 64: 501-38.
  • 10Goldberg, A. 1995. Constructions [M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

共引文献154

同被引文献10

引证文献2

二级引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部