期刊文献+

小说《杀死一只知更鸟》的会话分析探究

Conversation Analysis of the Novel To Kill a Mockingbird
下载PDF
导出
摘要 会话分析理论包括话轮转换机制、序列组织、优先结构、会话修正、扩展回答等要素。在小说《杀死一只知更鸟》中,作者用大量的篇幅呈现了法庭审理汤姆案件的庭审会话。采用会话分析的研究方法,以汤姆案件的庭审现场的会话为研究对象,通过计算庭审过程中六个询问子话题中律师、被询问者以及法官各自的话轮数、话轮长度、话轮平均长度以及发话控制话轮情况,分析会话参与者尤厄尔、马耶拉、阿蒂克斯、汤姆的话轮中所使用的非优先结构、前扩展、扩展回答、自我修正及背后的原因,揭示他们的性格特征:尤厄尔是个不道德、不求上进、过着游手好闲生活、诬陷无辜者的白人;马耶拉在庭审中迫于父亲的压力撒谎,她其实也是一个受害者;阿蒂克斯是对案件非常负责任、精通业务的律师;汤姆是很有教养、被诬陷的无辜者。 Conversation Analysis includes concepts such as turn-taking,sequence organization,priority structure,conversation repair,and extended answers,etc.In the novel To Kill a Mockingbird,the author Harper Lee presents with several pages the courtroom discourse when Tom Robinson’s case is tried.With the courtroom conversation of Tom’s case as the research object,adopting conversation analysis as the research methodology,this paper does a quantitative analysis of the number of turns,length of turns,average turn length and turn-control occasions of the lawyer,the inquired and the judge in the six inquiries,probes into the reasons of the use of dispreferred organization,pre-expansion,extended answers,self-repair in the turns of conversation participants Ewell,Mayella,Atticus and Tom,and analyzes the characteristics of these characters.The analysis shows that Ewell is an immoral,white loafer who makes a false charge against Tom;Mayella,a victim herself,tells lies in the court under the pressure of her father;Atticus is a proficient lawyer with strong sense of responsibility;Tom,framed by Ewell,is actually a cultivated innocent person.
作者 范宏宇 Fan Hongyu(Department of Foreign Languages,Taiyuan University,Taiyuan 030012)
机构地区 太原学院外语系
出处 《西部学刊》 2023年第23期166-172,共7页 Journal of Western
基金 山西省教育科学规划“十四五”规划课题“基于SPOC的大学生在线学习行为分析”(编号:GH220484)有关成果。
关键词 会话分析 《杀死一只知更鸟》 人物性格分析 conversation analysis To Kill a Mockingbird character analysis
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献30

  • 1Austin, J. L. ( 1962) How to Do Things with Words. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
  • 2Brown, P. & Levinson, S. C. (1987) Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
  • 3Curl, T. (2006) Offers of assistance : constraints on syntactic design. Journal of Pragmatics,38 : 1257 - 1280.
  • 4Curl,T. and Drew,P. (2008) Contingency and action: a comparison of two forms of requesting. Research onLanguage and Social Interaction, 41: 1-25.
  • 5Drew, P. ( 1978) Accusations : the use of members’ knowledge of ’ religious geography * in describing events.Sociology, 12: 1-22.
  • 6Drew, P. (1984) Speakers’ reportings in invitation sequences. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.),Structures of Social Action (pp. 152 - 164). Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
  • 7Drew, P. (2005 ) Conversation analysis, in Fitch, K. and Sanders, R. ( eds. ) Handbook of Language andSocial Interaction, Lawrence Erlbaum. 71 - 102.
  • 8Drew, P., Walker, T. & Ogden, R. (2013) Self-repair and action construction. In M. Hayashi, G. Raymond& J. Sidnell ( eds. ),Conversational Repair and Human Understanding. Cambridge : Cambridge UniversityPress. 71 -94.
  • 9Goffman, E. ( 1955) On face work. Psychiatry, 18: 213 -231.
  • 10Goodwin, C. ( 1981 ) Conversational Organization: Interaction Between Speakers and Hearers. New York:Academic Press.

共引文献33

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