当代外语研究 ›› 2020, Vol. 20 ›› Issue (2): 96-110.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2020.02.012
出版日期:
2020-03-28
发布日期:
2020-02-25
作者简介:
陆军,扬州大学外国语学院教授。主要研究方向为语料库语言学、二语习得。电子邮箱: 基金资助:
Online:
2020-03-28
Published:
2020-02-25
摘要:
语义韵是语料库语言学的重要理论贡献,大量研究相继开展,但以书面语语料证据为主。本文以情态词can和“能”为主要对象,考察英汉口语会话的语义韵特征和对应关系。研究发现:1)在英汉口语会话中,can和“能”都趋于出现在多种型式中,表达多种语义韵。2)部分型式可表达多种语义韵,需要借助会话语音信息判定。3)can与“能”在类联接和语义韵上呈复杂对应关系,主要型式在类联接和语义韵上趋于对应,部分型式在类联接上对应,但语义韵不对应或两者都不对应。分析表明,口语会话的语义韵非常丰富,与语音语调等因素密切相关,这些因素因语言不同而异。上述发现对深入探讨语义韵特征和界定要素具有一定理论启示,对口语教学研究具有实用价值。
中图分类号:
陆军, 李聪慧. 英汉口语会话中的语义韵研究[J]. 当代外语研究, 2020, 20(2): 96-110.
LU Jun, LI Conghui. A Corpus-driven Study of Semantic Prosody in English and Chinese Con versation[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2020, 20(2): 96-110.
表1
“能”的语义韵特征
类联接 | 语义韵 | 比例 | |
---|---|---|---|
能+VP | Affirm. +能+VP | 积极:对某事件怀有期待、希望 | 19.8% |
积极:有把握、期待 | 12.1% | ||
中性:与听者共情 | 4.1% | ||
Neg.+能+VP | 消极:反对、拒绝 | 18.4% | |
消极:遗憾、后悔 | 0.8% | ||
中性:疑问 | 0.2% | ||
消极:反对 | 0.2% | ||
能+VP+(疑问语气词)+? | 积极:期待肯定 | 5.9% | |
消极:不耐烦、反对 | 2.2% | ||
消极:谴责 | 0.4% | ||
积极:好奇、赞美 | 0.4% | ||
能够+VP | 积极:期望、赞成 | 21.3% | |
只/才能 +VP | 只能+VP | 消极:困难、无奈 | 3.5% |
中性:贬低自己、抬高他人 | 0.5% | ||
才能+VP | 消极:客观条件限制,有难度 | 2.9% | |
积极:赞扬、抬举 | 0.6% | ||
能不能 +VP | 中性:期望 消极:埋怨、抱怨 中性:试探、期待 | 4.9% 1.2% 0.6% |
表2
can的语义韵特征
类联结 | 语义韵 | 比例 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
can+VP | can+[实义动词]VP | 积极:建议、支持 | 26.0% | |
中性:肯定、有把握 | 23.5% | |||
中性:有较大把握 | 12.2% | |||
can+[be]+NP/AP/V-ed | 中性:有把握 | 1.9% | ||
消极:犹豫、拒绝 | 0.7% | |||
can+pron. +VP | can+[1st/2nd]pron.+[行为]VP | 中性:请求、询问 | 13.6% | |
can+pron.+? | 中性:肯定、期待得到支持 | 2.2% | ||
中性:不确定 | 1.3% | |||
can+[1st/2nd]pron.+[感官]VP | 中性:诧异、期待 | 1.0% | ||
can+Neg. +VP | can+Neg.+[事件活动]VP | 消极:困难、遗憾 | 3.5% | |
can+Neg.+[行为、动作]VP | 消极:反对 | 2.7% | ||
can+Neg.+[感官]VP | 消极:反对、拒绝 | 1.4% | ||
积极:兴奋、期待 | 0.4% | |||
pron.+can (结句) | pron.+can(结句) | 中性:附和、肯定回应 | 4.6% | |
as+adj./adv.+as+pron.+can(结句) | 中性:尽力、极限 | 0.6% | ||
疑问词+can+ (pron.)+VP | Wh-+can+pron.+VP | 中性:疑惑、寻求答案 | 1.3% | |
消极:反对 | 0.1% | |||
How+can+pron.+VP | 中性:疑惑、希望回复 | 1.0% | ||
消极:怀疑、反对 | 0.4% | |||
can+“only/ just”+VP | can+only+VP | 消极:困难、无奈 | 0.9% | |
can+just+VP | 中性:建议 | 0.7% |
[1] |
Culpeper, J., D. Bousfield & A. Wichmann. 2003. Impoliteness revisited: With special reference to dynamic and prosodic aspects[J]. Journal of Pragmatics 35(10-11):1545-1579.
doi: 10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00118-2 URL |
[2] | Ellis, N. C. & E. Frey. 2009. The psycholinguistic reality of collocation and semantic prosody: Affective priming [A]. In R. Corrigan, E.Moravcsik, H. Ouali & K. Wheatley (eds.). Formulaic Language. Typological Studies in Language[C]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 473-497. |
[3] | Ellis, N., E. Frey & I. Jalkanen. 2009. The psycholinguistic reality of collocation and semantic prosody: Lexical access [A]. In U. Römer & R. Schulze (eds.). Exploring the Lexis-Grammar Interface: Studies in Corpus Linguistics[C]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 89-114. |
[4] | Firth, J.R.. 1957. Papers in Linguistics,1934-1951[M]. Hague:Mouton & Co. |
[5] |
Guo, X., L. Zheng., L. Zhu., Z. Yang., C. Chen & L. Zhang. 2011. Acquisition of conscious and unconscious knowledge of semantic prosody[J]. Consciousness and Cognition 20(2):417-425.
doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2010.06.015 URL |
[6] | Gussenhoveo, C. 2004. The Phonology of Tone and Intonation [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. |
[7] | Ladd, D. R. 1996. Intonational Phonology [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. |
[8] | Ladd., D. R., K. Scherer & K. Silverman. 1986. An integrated approach to studying intonation and attitude [A]. In C. J Lewis (ed.). Intonation in Discourse[C]. London: Croom Helm. 125-138. |
[9] | Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B. 1996. Cross-linguistic and language-specific aspects of semantic prosody[J]. Language Sciences (1-2):153-178. |
[10] | Louw, B. 1993. Irony in the text or insincerity in the writer? The diagnostic potential of semantic prosodies [A]. In M. Baker, G. Francis & E. Tognini-Bonelli (eds.). Text and Technology. In Honour of John Sinclair[C]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 157-175. |
[11] | Louw, B. 2000. Contextual prosody theory:Bringing semantic prosodies to life [A]. In C. Heffer,H.Sauntson & G.Fox (eds.). Words in Context:A Tribute to John Sinclair on His Retirement[C]. Birmingham:University of Birmingham.48-94. |
[12] | Morley, J. & A. Partington. 2009. A few frequently asked questions about semantic-or evaluative-prosody[J]. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics (14):139-158. |
[13] | Oster, U. 2010. Using corpus methodology for semantic and pragmatic analyses: What can corpora tell us about the linguistic expression of emotions?[J]. Cognitive Linguistics (4):727-763. |
[14] | O’Halloran, K. 2007. Critical discourse analysis and the corpus-informed interpretation of metaphor at the register level[J]. Applied Linguistics (1):1-24. |
[15] | Partington, A. 1998. Patterns and Meanings: Using Corpora for English Language Research and Teaching[M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. |
[16] | Partington, A. 2004. Utterly content in each other’s company: Semantic prosody and semantic preference[J]. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics (1):131-156. |
[17] | Sinclair, J. 1996. The search for units of meaning[J]. Textus (9):75-106. |
[18] | Sinclair, J. 1998. The lexical item [A]. In W. Weigand (ed.). Contrastive Lexical Semantics[C]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 1-24. |
[19] | Sinclair, J. 2004. Trust the Text: Lexis, Corpus, Discourse[M]. London: Routledge. |
[20] | Sinclair, J. 2007. Collocation Reviewed (manuscript)[M]. Italy: Tuscan Word Centre. |
[21] | Smith, K. A. & D. A. Nordquist. 2012. Critical and historical investigation into semantic prosody[J]. Journal of Historical Pragmatics (2):291-312. |
[22] | Stewart, D. 2010. Semantic Prosody: A Critical Evaluation[M]. London: Routledge. |
[23] | Stubbs, M. 1996. Text and Corpus Analysis:Computer-assisted Studies of Language and Culture[M]. Oxford:Blackwell. |
[24] | Tognini-Bonelli, E. 2001. Corpus Linguistics at Work [M]. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. |
[25] | Wei, N. & X. Li. 2014. Exploring semantic preference and semantic prosody across English and Chinese: Their roles for cross-linguistic equivalence[J]. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 10(1):103-138. |
[26] | Wichmann, A. 2009. Prosody and pragmatic effects [R]. Barcelona: Workshop on Prosody and Meaning. |
[27] | Wichmann, A., N. Dehe' & D. Barth-Weingarten. 2009. Where prosody meets pragmatics: Research at the interface [A]. In D. Barth-Weingarten, N. Dehe' & A. Wichmann (eds.). Where Prosody Meets Pragmatics[C]. Bingley, UK: Emerald. 1-20. |
[28] | Xiao, R & T. McEnery. 2006. Collocation,semantic prosody and near synonym: A cross-language perspective[J]. Applied Linguistics (1):103-129. |
[29] | 李文中. 2019. 局部语义韵与话语管理[J]. 外国语(4):81-91. |
[30] | 陆军、 卫乃兴. 2014. 短语学视角下的二语词语知识研究[J]. 外语教学与研究 (6):865-878. |
[31] | 陆军、 吴茜. 2019. 短语单位移变研究:汉语流行词语序列证据分析[J]. 现代外语 (5):597-609. |
[32] | 王雅刚、 刘正光、 邓金莲. 2014. 语义韵研究的核心问题:争鸣与考辨[J]. 外国语 (6):51. |
[33] | 卫乃兴. 2006. 基于语料库学生英语中的语义韵对比研究[J]. 外语学刊 (5):50-55. |
[34] | 卫乃兴. 2011. 基于语料库的对比短语学研究[J]. 外国语 (4):32-42. |
[35] | 卫乃兴、 陆军. 2014. 对比短语学探索[M]. 北京: 外语教学研究出版社. |
[36] | 甄凤超、 杨枫. 2019. 再谈语义韵的短语及语用属性[J]. 外语教学理论与实践(3):34-40. |
[1] | 李文中. 接着做:扩展意义单位分析①[J]. 当代外语研究, 2021, 21(6): 13-26. |
[2] | 濮建忠. John Sinclair的短语理论与意义研究[J]. 当代外语研究, 2021, 21(6): 60-76. |
[3] | 李文中, 濮建忠, 甄凤超, 邵斌. 再探语义韵①[J]. 当代外语研究, 2020, 20(2): 72-83. |
[4] | 钟书能, 梁嘉仪. 语言量域与肯定和否定对应认知机制[J]. 当代外语研究, 2018, 18(03): 73-78. |
[5] | 孙莉. 中国英语学习者近义词使用情况的语义韵新解——对比affect和influence[J]. 当代外语研究, 2017, 17(01): 57-60. |
[6] | 林雪微. 从语义韵看小说翻译中联想意义的损失——以莫言《生死疲劳》英译本片段为例[J]. 当代外语研究, 2014, 14(10): 59-64. |
[7] | 陈新仁;. 词汇的语义韵及其翻译——基于truly exceptional汉译的个案研究[J]. 当代外语研究, 2012, 12(06): 24-27+76. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||