会话原则下的文化因素的论文其他相关论文.docx
- 文档编号:12359709
- 上传时间:2023-04-18
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:11
- 大小:74KB
会话原则下的文化因素的论文其他相关论文.docx
《会话原则下的文化因素的论文其他相关论文.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《会话原则下的文化因素的论文其他相关论文.docx(11页珍藏版)》请在冰豆网上搜索。
会话原则下的文化因素的论文其他相关论文
会话原则下的文化因素的论文
其他相关论文
abstract:
therearesomeconversationalprinciplesnecessaryforasuccessfulconversation.oneisthecooperativeprincipleoffourmaxims.violatinganyoneofthefourmaximswillgiverisetoconversationalimplicatures;theotheristhepolitenessprinciple,proposedtorescuethecooperativeprinciple.
todrawpragmaticimplicationsfromtheviolationofthecooperativeprincipleisofnodifferencebetweenthewestandtheeast.whataredifferentliesinpeople’schoiceofthemaximsofthecooperativeprincipleandthisisduetodifferentculturalbackground.chinese-styledpolitenessischaracterizedbyfouraspects:
respectfulness,modesty,attitudinalwarmthandrefinement.
language,asaspecialformofcommunication,maybeviewedasasystem,asavehicleforculturaltransmission.itdoesnotexistapartfromculture.thus,languageandculturalareinteractiveandunderstandingofonerequiresunderstandingoftheother.tobetterachievethecommunicativegoal,itisnecessarytochoosetheappreciatewayofexpressionundercertaincircumstancesandculturalfactorsplaysanimportantroleinusinglanguageeffectively.
keywords:
culturaldifference;conversationalprinciples;cooperativeprinciple;politenessprinciple
fewareasofpeople’sexperienceareclosertothemormorecontinuouslywiththemthantheirlanguage—theyhavetocommunicatebyspeaking,listening,readingandwritingineverydaylife.inthecourseofcommunication,itisnodoubtthatspeechenjoysprioritynotonlybecauseitprecedeswritingintermsofevolution,butalargeamountofcommunicationiscarriedoutinconversationaswell.anidealconversationisusuallyassumedtobecarriedoutby“turn-taking”andthusthemeaningsoftheutteranceareexpressedaccordingly.however,therealintentionsofthespeakerscannotalwaysbedrawnbysimplyinterpretingthesurfacemeaningsofthewordsintheutterance,forpeopleoftentendtomeanmoreinaroundaboutwaythanwhattheyactuallysay.let’sfirstlookatanexamplewhichtookplaceonthecampusatnoon:
devin:
whattimeisit?
jakie:
thestudentsaregoingtothedininghall.
here,jakie’sanswerdoesn’tseemtomakesenseonthefaceofit,butitisstillanadequateanswerfordevin,becausetheparticularcontextsofthisconversationincludethefactthatthestudentsusuallyhavelunchatabout11:
30intheuniversityanddevinisawareofthis.itispossiblefordevintoworkoutthetimebyinterpretingorguessingwhatjakiesaysandthemoresheknowsaboutthecontext,themorequalifiedherguessworkisgoingtobe.
normallyinconversationalinteraction,peopleworkontheassumptionthatacertainsetofrulesisinoperation,unlesstheyreceiveindicationstothecontrary.forexample,ifjakiegivesthesameanswertoastranger,it’lllikelyleadtocommunicationbreakdownbecausenobodyexpectsasuccessfulconversationinwhichpeopletrytoconfuse,trick,orwithholdrelevantinformationfromeachother.inotherwords,asuccessfulconversationshouldbethefruitofalltheparticipants’effortsandcollaborationisanecessaryfactorforthemtoachieveacertaingoal.therefore,peopleareexpectedtobecooperateduringaconversation,andsuchcooperativemechanismshaveverylittletodowithlogicandsemantics,butaregroundedinsomepragmaticprinciples,especiallythecooperativeprinciple.
in1967,americanphilosopherh.p.griceputforwardthecooperativeprincipleinlogicandconversation:
“makeyourconversationalcontributionsuchasisrequired,atthestageatwhichitoccurs,bytheacceptedpurposeordirectionofthetalkexchangeinwhichyouareengaged”(yule,37).supportingthisprincipleisthefourmaxims:
quantitymaxim:
makeyourcontributionasinformativeasisrequired,butnotmore,orless,thanisrequired.qualitymaxim:
donotsaythatwhichyoubelievetobefalseorforwhichyoulackevidence.relationmaxim:
berelevant.mannermaxim:
beclear,briefandorderly.
theimportanceofthisprincipleliesintwoaspects:
firstly,itisthefirsttimetosystematicallyinducepeople’sconversationalactivitiesintolaw.secondly,whenviolationofthecooperativeprincipletakesplace,inonecase,understandingofthediscourseishinderedandthespeakershouldmakeremediesimmediatelytosmooththeconversation;inanothercase,ifthespeakerdoessointentionally,therewillbemoretoitthanwhatissaid.conversationalimplicatures,inthisway,willbegivenriseto.
1.violationofthequantitymaxim
1.1知之为知之,不知为不知。
WWW..Com(《论语》)
inthissentence,repetitionofthesamewordappearstwice,whichaccordswiththeformula“p=p”.fromapurelylogicalperspective,thesentencehasnocommunicativevaluesinceitexpressessomethingcompletelyobvious,butitcanbeunderstoodeasilythatthissentenceprimarilyadvisespeopletobehonestinengaginginscholarship.similarapparentlypointlessexpressionsare“businessisbusiness”and“girlsaregirls”.thiskindofphenomenoniscalledtautology.whentautologyisappliedinaconversation,itisclearthatthespeakerintendstoexpressmorethanissaid.usually,thiskindofusagehasstrongsenseofemotion.
1.2polonius:
whatdoyouread,mylord?
hamlet:
words,words,words.(shakespeare,hamlet)
1.3“我们是睡在鼓里,等人家来杀!
等人家来杀!
”(矛盾:
《子夜》)
frompolonius’perspective,hamlet’sanswerprovideslessinformationthanexpected.for“words”beingtheobjectof“read”seemstobetoogeneralandpoloniusstilldidnotknowwhathamletread.infact,repetitionoftheword“words”showshamlet’sstrongimpatiencethathewasunwillingtotalktopolonius.inanotherpointofview,fromthefactthatpolonius’sattitudeiswarmandcooperativewhilehamlet’sattitudeisimpatientandindifferent,theremustbesomeimplications.similarlyinexample3,repetitionofasentenceshowsthespeaker’sstrongindignation.
2.violationofthequalitymaxim
2.1南唐时,赋税繁重,京城地区又遭旱灾,人民叫苦连天。
一天,烈祖在北苑饮宴,对群臣说:
“外地都下雨了,只是都城却不下雨,怎么回事呢?
”申渐应到:
“雨不感入城,是怕抽税而已。
”烈祖大笑,马上下令除掉重税。
(《古今谭概—微词》)
violationofthequalitymaximhastwocases,onecaseisakindof“moraloffence”,whichmeansthatthespeakerisunwillingtoobservethequalitymaximandislying.theothercaseisakindof“falselie”,whichmeansthatthespeakerisunwillingtocooperativeandistryingtoexpressimplicitmeaning.inthisexample,shenjiancleverlyusedpersonificationthateventherainisscaredofthetaxbecausethemanhetalkedtowasthekingofthedynasty.justthinkoftheimpossibilityofabolishingtheheavytaxationifshenjianusedbluntwordstoremonstrate!
2.2tommy:
mother!
thelorrygoingbyisasbigasamountain!
mother:
why,dear,i’vetoldyouovertenthousandtimesnottoexaggeratethingssoterriblyandyourbadhabitremainsunchanged.
itisbelievedthatthereisnosuchalorryasbigasamountainonearthanditisalsobelievedthatthemothercouldnothavetoldhersoonovertenthousandtimes.hyperbole,justlikeirony,metaphorandmeiosisarealltheresultsthatviolatethequalitymaxim.ofcourse,ifthemotherherselfhadnotexaggerated,thestorywouldnotbesofunny.
3.violationoftherelationmaxim
3.1周冲:
爸,我听说矿上对于这次受伤的工人不给一点抚恤金。
周朴园:
(头一扬)我认为你这次话说得太多了。
(《雷雨》)
zhoupuyuandidnotprovideanyinformationaboutwhatzhouchongwasinterestedin.onthecontrary,heusedaperformativeutterance:
toletzhouchongshutup.violationoftherelationmaxim,infact,isusedtopreventzhouchongtalkingaboutmattersconcerningtheaccidentintheminesandinjuriesoftheworkers.
3.2anotherexamplecomesfromatruestoryofthewriter.onedaysheaskedoneofherstudentstoreadthetextinclass.owingtolackofconcentration,thestudentmisreadanothertext,sothewritersaid,“你的书是那个版本的?
”insteadofdirectcriticizing.alltheclasshadagoodlaugh,includingtheboyhimself,buteveryoneunderstoodherintentionofirony.
4.violationofthemannermaxim
4.1“一个人死了之后,究竟有没有魂灵?
”
“也许有罢,我想。
”我于是吞吞吐吐地说。
“那么,也就有地狱了?
”
“啊!
地狱?
”我很吃惊,只得支吾着,“地狱?
论理,就该也有。
然而也未必……谁来管这等事……”(《祝福》)
toviolatethemannermaximmeansthatthespeakerspeaksobscurelyandambiguouslyinsteadofspeakingbrieflyandorderly.luxunisagreatmasteroflanguage,soheusedmildandindirectwordsinplaceofmoreaccurateordirectwordsinordernottobringmentalagonytoher.also,pun,whichis“aformofspeechplayinwhichawordorphraseunexpectedlyandsimultaneouslycombinestwounrelatedmeanings”(huang,139),isoftenusedtoproduceconversationalimplicature.
4.2mrs.jones:
we’regoingtobeneighborsnow.we’vebroughtahomenexttoyou,rightontheedgeofthelake.
mrs.brown:
soglad!
hopeyou’lldropinsometimes.
4.3ifinallyfiguredouthowgovernmentworks.thesenategetsthebillfromthehouse,thepresidentgetsthebillfromthesenate,andwegetthebillforeverything.
thekeywordinexample2is“drop”,whichbearsthemeaning“fall”andleavesspacetothereaderstoimagineifmrs.jonesfellintothelake.ifmrs.brownchangedtheambiguous“drop”into“visit”,nohumorwillbeproduced.inexample3,thefirstandthesecond“bill”srefertothedraftofaproposedlaw,whilethethirdonereferstoawrittenstatementofmoneyowned.theauthorsatiricallyexposesthecorruptionoftheofficials,whilethecommonpeoplehavetobeartheburden.
sincepeopleshouldfollowthecooperativeprincipleinconversation,thenwhydotheyviolateit?
whydonottheystatetheirviewsfrankly,butlettheirlistenersrecognizethecommunicatedmeaningsviainference?
g.leechhasproposedthepolitenessprincipletorescuethecooperativeprinciple.inhispointofview,the
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- 会话 原则 文化 因素 论文 其他 相关