基于语料库的英语辩论中中外辩手介入标记语的比较研究
A Corpus-Based Comparative Study of Engagement Markers in English Debating between Chinese and Foreign Debaters
DOI: 10.12677/ML.2023.1110622, PDF, 下载: 205  浏览: 272  科研立项经费支持
作者: 杨 娜, 刘宏涛:北京工业大学文法学部,北京
关键词: 介入标记语英语辩论中外对比语料库Engagement Markers English Debate Chinese-Foreign Comparison Corpus
摘要: 英语辩论赛是两方不同立场的群体,对具有争议性的辩题进行论证和说服的过程。它十分考验辩手的综合语言表达能力,是高级语言学习者锻炼口语产出的重要手段,但目前缺乏该方面的研究。因此,本文以英语辩论为研究对象,以Hyland 介入标记语模型作为理论框架,综合英语辩论的语言特征,比较分析中外辩手介入标记语使用情况。分别总结中外辩手使用介入标记语总体分布特征和异同,以及各个子类的分布特征和异同。研究发现:1) 中外辩手在介入标记语的使用上差异性和同一性并存。2) 中外辩手在介入标记语整体、形容词谓语、听者称呼、修辞问题和共享知识单词表达上存在差异性。3) 中外辩手在命令语、义务动词、真实问题和共享知识多词表达上存在统一性。研究结果将帮助中国辩手认识当前使用介入标记语的不足之处,以此来有效改善和提高中国辩手与观众互动。
Abstract: English Debate is a process in which two groups with different positions argue and persuade on a controversial debate topic. It tests the debaters’ comprehensive language expression ability to a large extent and it is also an important means for advanced language learners to practice their oral output. But there is a lack of research on it. Therefore, taking English debate as the object of study, based on Hyland’s  engagement markers model as the theoretical framework, and synthesizing the linguistic features of English debate, this article compared and analyzed the use of engagement markers by Chinese and foreign debaters. The study summarized the overall differences and simi-larities of engagement markers used by Chinese and foreign debaters, as well as the differences and similarities of each subcategory. Here are the findings. 1) There are differences and similarities in the use of engagement markers between Chinese and foreign debaters. 2) The differences exist in the expression of engagement markers as a whole, adjectival predicates, listener mentions, rhetor-ical questions and words in appeals to shared knowledge. 3) The similarities exist in the expression of imperatives, obligation modals, real questions and multi-words in appeals to shared knowledge. These findings will help Chinese debaters recognize the shortcomings of the use of engagement markers at present, and further improve and enhance the interaction between Chinese debaters and the audience in an effective and harmonious manner.
文章引用:杨娜, 刘宏涛. 基于语料库的英语辩论中中外辩手介入标记语的比较研究[J]. 现代语言学, 2023, 11(10): 4635-4643. https://doi.org/10.12677/ML.2023.1110622

参考文献

[1] Hyland, K. (2005) Stance and Engagement: A Model of Interaction in Academic Discourse. Discourse Studies, 7, 173-192.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365
[2] Ädel, A. (2006) Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, 1-255.
https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.24
[3] 陈艳平, 潘璐霖. 汉韩学术论文摘要中元话语劝说功能对比研究[J]. 东疆学刊, 2020, 38(2): 106-112.
[4] Iman, R. (2011) Involving the Reader in the Text: Engagement Markers in Native and Non-Native Student Argumentative Essays.
[5] Zarei, G.R. and Mansoori, S. (2007) Metadiscourse in Academic Prose: A Contrastive Analysis of English and Persian Research Articles. The Asian ESP Journal, 3, 24-40.
[6] Hyland, K. (2010) Constructing Proximity: Relating to Readers in Popular and Professional Science. Journal of English for Aca-demic Purposes, 9, 116-127.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.003
[7] Zou, H. and Hyland, K. (2019) Re-working Research: Interactions in Academic Articles and Blogs. Discourse Studies, 21, 713-733.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445619866983
[8] Hyland, K. (1998) Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, 1-317.
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.54
[9] Hyland, K. (1999) Academic Attribution: Citation and the Construction of Disciplinary Knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 20, 341-367.
https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/20.3.341
[10] Hyland, K. (1999) Persuasion and Context: The Pragmatics of Academic Metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 437-455.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00009-5
[11] Hyland, K. (2004) Disciplinary Interactions: Metadiscourse in L2 Postgraduate Writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 133-151.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.02.001
[12] Hyland, K. (2005) Representing Readers in Writing: Student and Expert Practices. Linguistics and Education, 16, 363-377.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2006.05.002
[13] 周雅. 关于二语学术写作中的介入标记语的比较性研究[D]: [博士学位论文]. 南京: 南京大学, 2012.
[14] 娄宝翠, 王亚丽. 学习者英语学术写作介入标记语使用特征[J]. 当代外语研究, 2019, 19(4): 58.
[15] 许瑾, 林立惜. 中英文刊物科技论文的语篇体裁对比——以高影响因子生物医学刊物为例[J]. 科技与出版, 2011(9): 91-94.
[16] Guziurová, T. (2017) The Role of Metadiscourse in Genre Analysis: Engagement Markers in Undergraduate Textbooks and Research Articles. In: Aijmer, K. and Lewis, D., Eds., Contrastive Analysis of Discourse-Pragmatic As-pects of Linguistic Genres, Springer, Berlin, 211-233.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54556-1_10
[17] 曹润慧. 交往行为理论视角下英语公益广告中介入标记语研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 长春: 东北师范大学, 2019.
[18] Qiu, X. and Jiang, F. (2021) Stance and Engagement in 3 MT Presentations: How Students Communicate Disciplinary Knowledge to a Wide Audience. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 51, Article ID: 100976.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2021.100976
[19] Farghal, M. and Kalakh, B. (2019) Engagement in Translation: In-teractional Metadiscourse Markers in American Presidential Debates. Jordan Journal of Modern Languages and Litera-tures, 12, 103-122.
https://doi.org/10.47012/jjmll.12.1.7
[20] 滕达. 奥巴马就职演讲中互动元话语的对话性分析[J]. 齐齐哈尔大学学报: 哲学社会科学版, 2014(3): 114-116.
[21] Leonardo, R. (2005) Interpersonal Engagement in Academic Spo-ken Discourse: A Functional Account of Dissertation Defenses. English for Specific Purposes, 24, 5-23.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2003.07.001
[22] 庞继贤, 陈明瑶. 电视访谈中介入标记语的人际功能[J]. 浙江大学学报: 人文社会科学版, 2006, 36(6): 168-176.
[23] Cranford, C. (2002) Bring in the Reader: Addressee Features in Academic Articles (Writing). Technical Communication, 49, 262.