英汉学术书评中投射结构的评价研究

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2015.02.005

当代外语研究 ›› 2015, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (02): 18-23.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2015.02.005

英汉学术书评中投射结构的评价研究

周惠, 刘永兵

东北师范大学,长春,130024

出版日期:2015-02-28 发布日期:2020-07-25
作者简介:周惠,东北师范大学外国语学院在读博士、讲师。主要研究方向为二语习得、系统功能语法、学术用途英语。电子邮箱:zhouh993@nenu.edu.cn;刘永兵,东北师范大学外国语学院院长、教授。主要研究方向为应用语言学、二语习得、话语分析。电子邮箱:liuyb008@nenu.edu.cn
基金资助:
*本文系教育部人文社会科学基金一般项目“中学生外语语言能力发展的系统性和差异性研究”(编号12YJA740050)和吉林省哲学社科基金项目“投射语言现象的多维度研究”(编号2013BS99)的部分成果。

Evaluative Analysis of Projections in English and Chinese Academic Book Review

ZHOU Hui, LIU Yongbing

Online:2015-02-28 Published:2020-07-25

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 文章以应用语言学类英汉学术书评中投射结构的使用为切入点,考察书评语篇中评价意义的跨文化差异。文章对所收集的语料进行量化统计与语篇分析,结果发现:(1)与英语书评相比,汉语书评投射结构的使用相对较少,尤其在著者行为和作者立场上存在显著性差异;(2)投射结构使用的差异体现出汉语书评评价潜势与英语书评相比更倾向于经验意义,而非评价意义。这些差异可能源于不同学术文化、学科社团内人际关系和写作者声音的影响。

关键词: 学术书评, 投射结构, 评价意义, 跨文化比较研究

Abstract: Based on an analysis of the use of projections in English and Chinese academic book reviews in Applied Linguistics, this study aims to explore the evaluative meanings in the review discourses from a cross-cultural perspective. The quantitive and textual analyses of the corpus data reveals that compared with English academic book review, there exists a marked difference in a less frequent use of projections in Chinese book reviews, specifically, in the categories of Author’s Acts and Writer’s Stance, and that a reduced interpersonal investment is made in Chinese book reviews with a preference for the experiential meaning potential, in contrast with the evaluative meaning potential. These differences are interpreted in reference to the nature of academic culture, interpersonal relations in the disciplinary community and the authorial voice.

中图分类号:

周惠, 刘永兵. 英汉学术书评中投射结构的评价研究[J]. 当代外语研究, 2015, 15(02): 18-23.

ZHOU Hui, LIU Yongbing. Evaluative Analysis of Projections in English and Chinese Academic Book Review[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2015, 15(02): 18-23.

参考文献

Bondi, M. 2009. Historians at work: Reporting frameworks in English and Italian book review articles [A]. In K. Hyland & G. Diani (eds.). Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings [C]. New York: Palgrave. 179-98.
Diani, G. 2009. Reporting and evaluation in English book review articles: A cross-disciplinary study [A]. In K. Hyland & G. Diani (eds.). Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings [C]. New York: Palgrave. 87-104.
Gao, Y., L. Li & J. Lu. 2001. Trends in research methods in applied linguistics: China and west [J]. English for Specific Purposes 20: 1-4.
Halliday, M. A. K. 2000. An Introduction to Functional Grammar [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Hinkel, E. 2004. Teaching Academic ESL Writing: Practical Techniques in Vocabulary and Grammar [M]. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hu, G. & F. Cao. 2011. Hedging and boosting in abstracts of applied linguistics articles: A comparative study of English-and Chinese-medium journals [J]. Journal of Pragmatics 43: 2795-2809.
Hu, G. & G. Wang. 2014. Disciplinary and ethnolinguistic influences on citation in research articles [J]. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 14: 14-28.
Hunston, S. 2000. Evaluation and the planes of discourse: Status and value in persuasive texts [A]. In S. Hunston & G. Thompson (eds.). Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse [C]. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 176-207.
Hyland, K. 2008. As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation [J]. English for Specific Purposes 27: 4-21.
Hyland, K. 2009. Writing in the disciplines: Research evidence for specificity [J]. Taiwan International ESP Journal 1: 5-22.
Hyland, K. 2013. Writing in the university: Education, knowledge and reputation [J]. Language Teaching 46: 53-70.
Hyland, K. & G. Diani (eds.). 2009. Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings [C]. London: Palgrave.
Khoutyz, I. 2013. Engagement features in Russian & English: A cross-cultural analysis of academic written discourse [J]. Teacher College, Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics 13: 1-20.
Lea, M. & B. Street. 2006. The academic literacies model: Theory and applications [J]. Theory into Practice 45: 368-77.
Lillis, T. & M. J. Curry (eds.). 2010. Academic Writing in a Global Context: The Politics and Practices of Publishing in English [C]. London: Routledge.
Lim, J. M. H. 2008. Indicating significance of current research: Pedagogical implications of a genre analysis for dissertation writing [J]. Open Applied Linguistics Journal 1: 46-55.
Lin, L. & S. Evans. 2012. Structural patterns in empirical research articles: A cross-disciplinary study [J]. English for Specific Purposes 31: 150-60.
Martin, J. R. & P. R. R. White. 2005. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English [M]. Basingstoke & New York: Palgrave.
Moreno, A. & L. Suárez. 2009. Academic book reviews in English and Spanish: Critical comments and rhetorical structure [A]. In K. Hyland & G. Diani (eds.). Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings [C]. New York: Palgrave. 161-78.
Mur-Duenas, P. 2011. An intercultural analysis of metadiscourse features in research articles written in English and in Spanish [J]. Journal of Pragmatics 43: 3068-79.
Paltridge, B. 2002. Thesis and dissertation writing: An examination of published advice and actual practice [J]. English for Specific Purposes 21: 125-43.
Ryshina-Pankova, M. 2011. Developmental changes in the use of interactional resources: Persuading the reader in FL book reviews [J]. Journal of Second Language Writing 20: 243-56.
Shi, L., W. Wang & J. Xu. 2005. Publication culture of foreign language education journals in China [J]. TESOL Quarterly 39: 765-75.
Swales, J. 2004. Research Genres: Explorations and Applications [M]. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Thompson, G. & Y. Ye. 1991. Evaluation of the reporting verbs used in academic papers [J]. Applied Linguistics 12: 365-82.
Tse, P. & K. Hyland. 2009. Discipline and gender: Constructing rhetorical identity in book reviews [A]. In K. Hyland & G. Diani (eds.). Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings [C]. New York: Palgrave. 105-21.
陈令君.2010.语篇评价的语用维度阐释——兼论英语学术书评中的评价策略[J].当代外语研究(3):17-20.
黑玉琴.2010.应用语言学期刊中书评文章的辩论修辞结构[J].外语教学(2):23-28.
唐丽萍.2004.学术书评语类结构的评价分析[J].外国语(3):35-43.
唐青叶.2004.书评的语类结构及其情态的力量动态阐释[J].外语学刊(1):51-55.
许家金.2013.中国学习者英语口头叙事中的话语评价研究[J].外语教学与研究(1):69-79.
姚银燕、陈晓燕.2012.英语学术书评语篇让步语义资源的介入意义[J].外语教学理论与实践(1):38-46.

[1]	王遥, 李景娜. 法律英语古体词的评价潜势与意义[J]. 当代外语研究, 2019, 19(06): 73-82.
[2]	胡开宝, 马秀奇. 莎士比亚戏剧汉译本中“good”评价意义的再现研究[J]. 当代外语研究, 2015, 15(03): 7-13.
[3]	李寒冰. 英语语素评价意义的实例化研究[J]. 当代外语研究, 2014, 14(03): 9-14.
[4]	曹迎春;刘悦明;乐秀华;. 现代汉语量词的评价意义及其翻译简析[J]. 当代外语研究, 2012, 12(11): 61-66+78.
[5]	陈令君;. 语篇评价的语用纬度阐释——兼论英语学术书评中的评价策略[J]. 当代外语研究, 2010, 10(03): 17-20+61.

英汉学术书评中投射结构的评价研究

Evaluative Analysis of Projections in English and Chinese Academic Book Review

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 5

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价