（外国语言学及应用语言学专业论文）得体原则与汉语语内语用失误.pdf

iv 摘摘 要要 语用失误作为生活中的一种常见现象，会对言语交际产生不同程度的负面影 响。虽然语用失误是语言学中一个经常被中外研究者探讨的话题，但大多数研究都 集中于语际语用失误，对于语内语用失误的系统性研究较少。在现有的对语内语用 失误研究中，从得体原则对语内语用失误的探讨几乎没有。因而，本文结合得体原 则来研究汉语言语交际中的语内语用失误，既能加深我们对语内语用失误的认识， 同时也能检验得体原则的解释力，在实践和理论方面都有积极意义。 在对 leech （1983） 的得体准则、 李瑞华 （1994） 、 王希杰 （1996） 及索振羽 （2000） 各自提出的得体原则分析的基础上，本文采用了李瑞华得体原则的主要框架并借鉴 了王希杰得体原则中语境因素的进一步分类，提出了作者对得体原则的理解，并用 其来分析汉语言语交际中的语内语用失误，数据主要来源于日常交际实例和一些研 究者的文章。 本研究认为语内语用失误是无意识违反得体原则的结果，并且发现话语与语言 知识相关的不得体、与交际者相关的不得体、与交际情景相关的不得体以及与社会 和文化规约相关的不得体都会导致语内语用失误。具体的说，如果说话时运用了不 恰当的语体、语调，或者运用了带有负面命题意义的话语，这些与语言知识相关的 不得体就会导致语内语用失误的发生。如果说话时未做到对于交际者的性别、年龄、 身份、受教育程度、信仰等社会特征的得体，或者未做到对交际者心理期待或性格 等心理特征的得体，未做到对时间、空间、话题等交际情景因素的得体以及区域、 民族、禁忌和委婉等社会文化规约的得体，语内语用失误就会发生。因而在交际中， 要权衡考虑各种因素来达到语言的得体运用，避免并减少语内语用失误。与此同时， 本研究指出培养语用能力重要性、开放思想的必要性，并建议用真诚道歉来拯救或 减少语内语用失误带来的负面影响。 关键词：关键词：得体原则；语内语用失误；语境 ii abstract pragmatic failure as a common phenomenon in daily life causes different degrees of negative effects on communication. though as an old topic in pragmatics, it has been widely studied by scholars home and abroad, there lacks systematic study about intra-lingual pragmatic failure. and among the present study about intra-lingual pragmatic failure, there is rare study by adopting the appropriateness principle which is taken as the highest principle of pragmatics by some researchers. therefore, this study has both practical and theoretical value in helping deepen understanding of intra-lingual pragmatic failure and in verifying the explanatory power of the appropriateness principle. this study takes the intra-lingual pragmatic failure as the research content. on the basis of the analysis of the appropriateness principles put forward by leech(1983), li ruihua (1994), wang xijie (1996), and suo zhenyu (2000), and relevant concepts to help understand the appropriateness principle, this study puts forward the authors own understanding of appropriateness principle by adopting the frame of li ruihuas appropriateness principle and some subcategories of wang xijies appropriateness principle as the theoretical framework to analyze the intra-lingual pragmatic failure in chinese verbal communication with data collected from daily communication and from the articles of some researchers. this study considers unconscious violation of the appropriateness principle as the cause for intra-lingual pragmatic failure and finds that intra-lingual pragmatic failure can be caused by the inappropriateness related to the language knowledge, the inappropriateness related to the communicator, the inappropriateness related to the communicative situation, and the inappropriateness related to the social and cultural norms. if people fail to use appropriate style, tone, or fail to avoid words with negative propositional meaning, which results in the inappropriateness related to the language knowledge, intra-lingual pragmatic failure may occur. if people do not take the communicators social features such as gender, age, identity, educational background, and belief, etc. and psychological features such as expectation and disposition, etc. into consideration, and fail to consider the factors related to the communicative situation such as time, place, topic, and factors related to the social and cultural norms such as area, nationality, taboo, and euphemism, etc. which results in the appropriateness of language use, intra-lingual pragmatic failure may also occur. therefore, a comprehensive iii consideration should be made during the communication to ensure the appropriate use of language and hence avoid and reduce intra-lingual pragmatic failure. at the same time, this study points out the importance of cultivating the pragmatic competence, the necessity of having an open mind, and suggests apologizing as a way to rescue or reduce the negative effect of intra-lingual pragmatic failure. key words: the appropriateness principle; intra-lingual pragmatic failure; context chapter one introduction 1 chapter one introduction 1.1 introduction pragmatic failure, as an important issue in pragmatics, has been widely studied by researchers both abroad and at home since jenny thomas put it forward in 1983. but most of the researches focus on inter-lingual pragmatic failure and specialized studies on intra-lingual pragmatic failure are rare. as an undeniable existence in daily communication, pragmatic failure exerts great negative influence on verbal communication and even can cause the change of interpersonal relationship. thus, the study of intra-lingual pragmatic failure has practical value both in helping people have a comprehensive understanding of pragmatic failure in general, and in supplying more comprehensive theoretical support for finding remedies and strategies to deal with pragmatic failure in communication. based on the appropriateness principle put forward by li ruihua (1994) and wang xijie (1996), this study tries to make a comprehensive analysis of the intra-lingual pragmatic failure in chinese language, find out the possible reasons for intra-lingual pragmatic failure and offer some suggestion to deal with intra-lingual pragmatic failure. at the same time，though the appropriateness principle has been regarded as “the highest principle in pragmatics” (li ruihua 1994:26), there lacks sufficient research to verify it. so this study also plays a role in proving its great explanatory power. 1.2 the rationale of the present study the reason for choosing intra-lingual pragmatic failure as the research subject is as follows: firstly, pragmatic failure is an old and familiar topic. the research on inter-lingual pragmatic failure has done great contribution to smoothen communication between those who are from different cultural background. the achievements on inter-lingual pragmatic failure play an important role and have practical value in the present world where international communication is essential. but the frequent occurrence of intra-lingual pragmatic failures and their negative effects on communication is also a problem catching language users attention. unfortunately, there is no specialized study on this phenomenon. so a specialized study of intra-lingual pragmatic failure has both theoretical and practical significance. we hope this study can help us have deeper understanding of pragmatic failure and contribute to the construction of a harmonious society. the appropriateness principle and the intra-lingual pragmatic failure in chinese verbal communication 2 secondly, though the appropriateness principle is put forward as the “highest principle in pragmatics” (li ruihua 194:26), the systematic analysis of pragmatic failure by employing this principle is rare. therefore, this study will supply a further understanding of the appropriateness principle, and at the same time verify its explanatory power. 1.3 problems with the existing studies researches on pragmatic failure are carried out from many different perspectives. but there are still some problems. most of the researches focus on the cross cultural pragmatic failures. however, pragmatic failures not only occur among people from different cultural background, but also happen among speakers from the same dominant culture. “there are differences between pragmatic failures in cross-cultural communication and pragmatic failures in the same cultural background” (qian guanlian 1997:224). they can be called inter-lingual pragmatic failure and intra-lingual pragmatic failure respectively. the intra-lingual pragmatic failure should not be neglected. at the same time, most researches have been done on a micro level, for example, focusing on a specific speech act, and they fail to give a macro view of pragmatic failures. there are some attempts to give a macro perspective of pragmatic failure by employing the relevance theory and the adaptation theory, but the limitations of the two theories (the relevance theory neglects the social factors, and the adaptation theory is too abstract concerning the concrete objects of adaptation) prevent the relevant studies from offering practical ways to reduce or avoid pragmatic failure in real communication. 1.4 objectives of the present study this study tries to obtain the following objectives: firstly, it tries to give a comprehensive description of intra-lingual pragmatic failures in chinese verbal communication, analyzing the contextual factors concerning which the inappropriateness would result in the occurrence of intra-lingual pragmatic failure. secondly, by combining the concrete factors in li ruihuas appropriateness principle and wang xijies appropriateness principle, it is hoped that the causes for intra-lingual pragmatic failure can be concrete and practical, thus offering practical suggestions for people to understand and deal with intra-lingual pragmatic failures. thirdly, by analyzing the intra-lingual pragmatic failures with the appropriateness principle, this study tries to verify its explanatory power as one of the major principles of chapter one introduction 3 pragmatics. 1.5 methodology and data collection this study is mainly of qualitative analysis with the data collected from the two sources: one is the daily conversation. examples are mainly supplied by teachers in the foreign language school of shanxi university, and by students in the english department of taiyuan normal university, with some from the authors own experience. and the other is the articles of some researchers, such as chen yating, jin zhengkun, tan ruwei, etc. 1.6 outline of the thesis there are five chapters in this thesis. chapter one is a brief introduction about the rationale of the present study, the problem with the existing studies, the objectives of the present study and methodology used in this thesis and data sources. chapter two is a critical review of previous researches of pragmatic failure at home and abroad, including representative classifications and definitions of pragmatic failure, main approaches used in the study of pragmatic failure, the achievements and limitations. chapter three introduces leechs tact maxim (1983), the appropriateness principle put forward by li ruihua (1994), wang xijie (1996), and suo zhenyu (2000) and some related concepts. on the basis of the analysis of the above researchers understanding of appropriateness, the author puts forward her own understanding of the appropriateness principle and uses it as the framework of the present thesis. chapter four is a detailed analysis of intra-lingual pragmatic failure in chinese verbal communication. this study finds that intra-lingual pragmatic failure can be caused by inappropriateness in the linguistic context, communicator-related inappropriateness, inappropriateness in the situational context, and inappropriateness in the cultural context. at the same time, this study points out the importance of cultivating the pragmatic competence, the necessity of having an open mind, and suggests apologizing as a way to rescue or reduce the negative effect of intra-lingual pragmatic failure. chapter five is a conclusion. main findings of the study are summarized, and limitations of the study and the implication for further study are pointed out. the appropriateness principle and the intra-lingual pragmatic failure in chinese verbal communication 4 chapter two literature review 2.1 introduction in 1983, the english linguist jenny thomas firstly used the concept of “pragmatic failure” in her article “cross-cultural pragmatic failure” published in applied linguistics. she distinguished “pragmatic failure” from “pragmatic error”, gave her definition and classification of pragmatic failure, and explored some possible reasons for pragmatic failure. since then, pragmatic failure has become an important component of pragmatics and has being explored by many scholars and researchers. the following is a brief review concerning the definition, classification and relevant research about pragmatic failure and also a summary. 2.2 definition and classification of pragmatic failure with the deepening of the research on pragmatic failure, different definitions and classifications of pragmatic failure appear. because of the limited space and time, this thesis lists some of the representatives in the following: 2.2.1 jenny thomass definition and classification thomas (1983) points out that： pragmatic failure has occurred on any occasion on which h (the hearer) perceives the force of ss (the speakers) utterance as other than s intended she or he should perceive it. pragmatic failure will occur, if: a: h perceives the force of ss utterance as stronger as or weaker than s intended s/he should perceive it. b: h perceives as an order an utterance which s intended s/he should perceive as a request. c: h perceives ss utterance as ambivalent where s intended non-ambivalence. d: s expects h to be able to infer the force of his/her utterance, but is relying on the system of knowledge or beliefs which s and h do not share (thomas 1983:94). thomas classified pragmatic failure into pragma-linguistic failure and socio-pragmatic failure. this classification has been widely adopted in the later research carried out both abroad and at home. 2.2.2 he zirans definition and classification he ziran (1997:205-206) notes that, “pragmatic failure does not refer to those ordinary performance errors in language use, but refer to those resulting from inappropriate utterance, intact manner, or unidiomatic expressions and as a result, the communication fails to achieve the expected effect”. he ziran (1998:203) points out that, “the distinction between pragma-linguistic failure and socio-pragmatic failure, however, chapter two literature review 5 is not absolute. the intended meaning of both sides utterance and the understanding of what the other sides utterance may be different due to different context. therefore, some improper speech may be pragma-linguistic failure from one point of view， but may also be socio-pragmatic failure from another point of view.” 2.2.3 qian guanlians definition and classification qian guanlian (2002:195) holds that, “in communication，though speakers can make grammatically correct utterances，they may unconsciously violate interpersonal or social norms or produce utterances that are not in accordance with the time, the space, or the interlocutors, and then pragmatic failure occurs.” for the classification, he (1997: 224) thinks, “there is difference between pragmatic failure in cross-cultural communication and pragmatic failure under the same cultural background.” they can be called inter-lingual pragmatic failure and intra-lingual pragmatic failure. 2.2.4 summary of the previous definition and classification of pragmatic failure the above definition shows that thomas thinks that the hearers inability to understand what is meant by the speaker is the cause of pragmatic failure and put the responsibility solely on the hearer. this idea was challenged by qian guanlian who thinks that, “this does not sound like pragmatic failure of the speaker, but like the inability of the hearer” (qian guanlian 2002:195). later in he zhiran and qian guanlians definition, the responsibility is shifted onto the speaker. “mr. qian had intended to correct thomas one-sidedness in blaming the hearer for pragmatic failure, but he himself also went to the other extremeput the responsibility on the speaker, and failed to regain the balance of verbal communication featuring mutuality and interactivity” (mo xiaoying 2007:30). since verbal communication is a mutual interactivity of the speaker and the hearer, both sides should shoulder the responsibility for the non-ideal communicative effects. thomass classification lays the foundation for later research of pragmatic failure, and qian guanlians classification makes contribution to specifying the intra-lingual pragmatic failure in reality and finding new research field about pragmatic failure. 2.3 research on pragmatic failure and the achievements thomas (1983:99) thinks, “pragma-linguistic failure arises when the pragmatic force mapped onto a linguistic token or structure is systematically different from the force most frequently assigned to it by native speakers of the target language, or when speech act the appropriateness principle and the intra-lingual pragmatic failure in chinese verbal communication 6 strategies are inappropriately transferred from li to l2”. “socio-pragmatic failure stems from cross-culturally different perceptions of what constitutes appropriate linguistic behavior” (li guizhi 2002:7). “pragma-linguistic and socio-pragmatic failures show two basically different kinds of pragmatic choices. the first is language-specific and it is possible for the teacher to correct it directly. the second is culture-specific, and it is a reflection of the learners value system and belief system, and can not be corrected, but only be pointed out and discussed” (thomas 1983, cited from liu changjiang 2008:37). in china, the domestic researches on pragmatic failure begins with huang cidong (1984:13-18) who first put forward “pragmatic error” in his article “pragmatics and pragmatic errors” and suggest paying attention to the different applications of linguistic forms in varied non-linguistic contexts in language learning. afterwards, researchers home and abroad made deep researches both in the static area about the definition and classification of pragmatic failure and in the dynamic area about how to reduce and avoid pragmatic failure from different perspectives. 2.3.1 from the perspective of cross-culture communication studying pragmatic failure by analyzing differences in pragmatic features in cross-culture communication has been a major approach abroad to study pr