政治演讲语篇责任型情态的人际意义研究——以奥巴马每周演讲为例

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2014.04.004

当代外语研究 ›› 2014, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (04): 12-17.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2014.04.004

政治演讲语篇责任型情态的人际意义研究——以奥巴马每周演讲为例

曹霞, 孙启耀, 辛丹

哈尔滨工程大学,哈尔滨,150001

出版日期:2014-04-28 发布日期:2020-07-25
作者简介:曹霞,哈尔滨工程大学外语系副教授、硕士生导师。主要研究方向为外国语言学及应用语言学。电子邮箱:caoxia1967@163.com; 孙启耀,哈尔滨工程大学外语系教授、硕士生导师。主要研究方向为外国语言学及应用语言学、语用学。电子邮箱:1198122268@qq.com; 辛丹,哈尔滨工程大学外语系讲师。主要研究方向为语篇分析、外语教学。电子邮箱:xdeye@163.com
基金资助:
*2013年教育部人文社会科学研究规划基金项目“语用身份构建中责任情态人际意义的研究”(编号13YJA740046)以及2013-2014年黑龙江省教育厅人文社会科学研究项目“基于语料库的英语学术语篇中情态的人际意义研究”(编号12534038)的阶段性成果。

A Study on Interpersonal Meanings of Deontic Modality in Political Speech: Obama’s Weekly Addresses as Examples

CAO Xia, SUN Qiyao, XIN Dan

Online:2014-04-28 Published:2020-07-25

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 本文以系统功能语言学关于情态和人际功能的论述为出发点,结合评价理论的介入语言资源,并参照van Dijk的意识形态分析理论,通过对30篇奥巴马每周演讲中责任型情态的数据统计和语言例证考察,发现政治演讲语篇多选用义务性责任情态、高量值的责任型情态以及主观的责任型情态,既表明了演讲者的态度和立场,又体现了演讲者与听众的社会心理距离,更重要的是责任型情态的运用开启了政治演讲语篇主体间的多声协商,通过运用权力和操控听众来传播演讲者及其所代表的政党的意识形态。

关键词: 政治演讲语篇, 责任型情态, 人际意义, 批评性话语分析

Abstract: Taking Systemic Functional Linguistics and Appraisal Systems as its theoretical framework, this paper explores deontic modality and its interpersonal meanings in political speech from the perspective of van Dijk’s model of ideological analysis. Based on statistics and illustration of 30 Obama’s Weekly Addresses, this study finds that the speaker prefers obligation, high level and subjective deontic modality devices, which have multiple interpersonal meanings, namely, expressing attitudes, satisfying social psychological strategy. And above all, deontic modality in political speech is the token of engagement of interacting stances and voices, uses power, manipulates the public, and spreads the ideology of the speaker and the political party the speaker represents.

中图分类号:

H030

曹霞, 孙启耀, 辛丹. 政治演讲语篇责任型情态的人际意义研究——以奥巴马每周演讲为例[J]. 当代外语研究, 2014, 14(04): 12-17.

CAO Xia, SUN Qiyao, XIN Dan. A Study on Interpersonal Meanings of Deontic Modality in Political Speech: Obama’s Weekly Addresses as Examples[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2014, 14(04): 12-17.

参考文献

Bakhtin, M. M. 1981. The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays [M]. Austin TX: University of Texas Press.
Collins, P. 2009. Modals and Quasi-modals in English [M]. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Fairclough, N. 1989. Language and Power [M]. London: Longman.
Fairclough, N. 1992. Discourse and Social Change [M]. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Fairclough, N. 1995. Critical Discourse Analysis: Critical Study of Language [M]. New York:Longman.
Fowler, R. 1991. Critical linguistics [A]. In K. Malmkjer (ed.). The Linguistics Encyclopedia [C]. London: Routledge.
Fowler, R., et al. (eds.). 1979. Language and Control [C]. London: Routledge.
Halliday, M. A. K. 1994/2000. An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd ed.) [M]. London: Edward Arnold./Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Halliday, M. A. K. & C. M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2004/2008.An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rd ed.) [M]. London: Edward Arnold./Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Leech, G. 2003. Modality on the move: The English modal auxiliaries 1961-1992 [A]. In R. Facchinetti, M. G. Krug & F. R. Palmer (eds.). Modality in Contemporary English [C]. Berlin/New York: Mou-ton de Gruyter.
Martin, J. R. 1992. English Text-System and Structure [M]. Philadelphis/Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Martin, J. R. 2000. Beyond exchange: Appraisal systems in English [A]. In S. Hunston & G. Thompson (eds.). Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse [C]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Martin, J. R. & D. Rose. 2007. Working with Discourse (2nd ed.) [M]. London: Continuum.
Martin, J. R. & P. R. White. 2008. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Palmer, F. R. 2001/2007. Mood and Modality (2nd ed.) [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press./Beijing: The World Publishing Company.
Thompson, G. 2000. Introducing Functional Grammar [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
van Dijk, T. A. 2006. Discourse and manipulation [J]. Discourse & Society 17(3): 359-83.
White, P. 2001. Appraisal Outline [OL]. http://www.grammatics.Com/appraisal
White, P. 2005. A Reader of the Appraisal Theory [R]. Unpublished Papers for the First International Symposium of the Appraisal Theory. Henan University, China.
常晨光.2001.英语中的人际语法隐喻[J].外语与外语教学(7):6-8.
陈新仁.2007.指示语选择的语用视点、语用移情与离情[J].外语教学与研究39(5):331-37.
李战子.2001.学术话语中认知型情态的多重人际意义[J].外语教学与研究(3):353-57.
李战子.2002.话语的人际意义研究[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.
彭宣维.2000.英汉语篇综合对比[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.
沈家煊.2001.语言的“主观性”和“主观化”[J].外语教学与研究(4):268-75.
孙启耀.2013.女性语言的责任型情态的人际意义研究——以美剧《丑女贝蒂》的女性语言为例[J].通化师范学院学报(人文社会科学)(3):87-90.
孙启耀、董欣蓉.2010.责任型情态在语篇中人际意义的分析[J].哈尔滨学院学报(7):84-88.
杨曙、常晨光.2011.情态的系统功能语言学考量[J].外语学刊(3):27-31.
支永碧.2007.批评话语分析研究新动态[J].外语与外语教学(3):27-32.
魏本力.2005.情态动词的量值取向[J].外语学刊(4):56-59.
辛斌.2000.语篇互文性的批评性分析[M].苏州:苏州大学出版社.
辛斌.2005.批评语言学:理论与应用[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.
辛斌、陈腾澜.1999.语篇的对话性分析初探[J].外国语(5):8-13.

[1]	高岩杰, 丁艺, 蒋跃. 英语政治访谈文本中情态量值的人际意义[J]. 当代外语研究, 2020, 450(6): 50-58.
[2]	张道振;. 奇幻型儿童小说语言资源运用及其翻译研究——以Alice in Wonderland及其汉语翻译为例[J]. 当代外语研究, 2015, 15(06): 40-45+78.
[3]	郇昌鹏;吴灿中;. 评价系统:历史、现状与未来[J]. 当代外语研究, 2015, 15(04): 15-22+42+77.
[4]	俞碧芳;. 跨学科博士学位论文摘要的言据性及其人际意义[J]. 当代外语研究, 2015, 15(04): 29-36+77.
[5]	杨雪燕;解敏;. 外语教师课堂提问的互动性分析[J]. 当代外语研究, 2012, 12(03): 142-148+162.
[6]	岳颖;. 学术语篇的介入资源与人际意义构建——基于学习者语篇的个案研究[J]. 当代外语研究, 2011, 11(07): 30-35+60.
[7]	李鸿蕊;. 基于语料库的莎士比亚戏剧汉译本中语气词“吧”的应用研究[J]. 当代外语研究, 2011, 11(01): 24-27+62.
[8]	陈瑜敏;黄国文;. 马丁的语篇分析观[J]. 当代外语研究, 2010, 10(10): 19-24+62.

政治演讲语篇责任型情态的人际意义研究——以奥巴马每周演讲为例

A Study on Interpersonal Meanings of Deontic Modality in Political Speech: Obama’s Weekly Addresses as Examples

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 8

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价