元话语的分类(总25页)

2 元话语的分类
由于对元话语的性质和功能的认识差异,对元话语的分类也存在不同。迄今为止,元话语已有几种不同的分类体系(参Williams ,1981 ;Lautamatti ,1978 ;Vande ,1985 ;Crismore ,1989 ;Crismore et al ,1993 ;Hyland ,1998 ,2005) 。本研究将会主要讨论三种分法:Kopple（1985）、Crismore et al （1993）以及Hyland（2004）。
Vande Kopple(1985)基于Lautamatti和Williams对元话语的研究, 概括了7种元话语并将其分为语篇元话语和人际元话语两大类型。其中, 语篇元话语指的是在语篇中连接语篇各层次的主要成分, 组词成篇的词和短语。人际元话语主要是体现作者和读者关系的词和短语, 见表1。
表1　Vande Kopple的元话语分类
Category
Function 
Examples
Textual 
metadiscourse
Text 
connectives
Show how parts of a
text are connected to
one another
sequencers (first, next),
reminders (as I mentioned
in Chapter 2),
topicalizers(with regard to)
Code
glosses
Help readers grasp the writer’s intended
meaning
mean, such as
Validity
markers
Express the writer’s commitment to a
statement
hedges (perhaps, might),
emphatics (undoubtedly)，
attributors (according to)
Narrators
Inform readers of the source of information
according to Smith,
Interpersonal 
metadiscourse
Illocution
markers
Make the discourse act explicit at certain point
to conclude, I hypothesize,
to sum up, we predict
Attitude
markers
Express the writer’s attitudes
unfortunately,  interestingly,
I wish that
Commentaries
 
address readers 
directly, drawing them
into an implicit
dialogue 
you will certainly agree that, you might want to
read the third chapter first
不难看出, VandeKopple的分类存在问题, 如, 同样是“ according to ”, 既属于归属语又属于叙说词。One  problem  in  identifying metadiscourse  is  its  multifunctionality,  that  is,  the  functions  are  not  performed  in isolation  and  one  metadiscourse  may  achieve  several  purposes  simultaneously. Therefore, in order to solve this problem, Crismore, Markkanen, and Steffensen (1993) in  their  classification  try  to  use  a  functional  analysis:  metadiscourse  is  defined according to its primary function in the context. 
　Crismoreetal(1993）在VandeKopple(1985)的分类基础上, 也将元话语分为两大类:语篇元话语和人际元话语。Crismoreetal的分类中去掉了叙说词一项, 将逻辑连接词、序列词、提醒词和主题词概括为语篇标记语, 同时将语码注释词和施事标记词纳入解释标记语。语篇标记语和解释标记语这一全新分法说明了元话语的语篇功能:语篇标记语帮助组织语篇, 解释标记语帮助读者解释和更好地理解作者的意图及写作策略。For interpersonal metadiscourse, validity markers, which is a subcategory of textual metadiscourse, is now under the classification of interpersonal metadiscourse and three  separate subcategories --- hedges, certainty markers，and attributors are included. Attributors are combined with narrators because both are used to inform the readers of the source of ideas. 见表2
不过, Crismore etal的这一分法也存在一些问题, 如, 将语篇元话语分为语篇标记语和解释标记语的依据不明确, 另外, 用来指称语篇前部分所提内容的提醒词属于语篇标记语, 而用于指称语篇后部分所提内容的宣告词却又属于解释标记语, 这似乎有点牵强附会。
discourse
Category
Function
Examples
Textual metadiscourse
Textual Markers 
Logical
Connectives
we noted earlier
Help show connections
between ideas
and, but, therefore
Sequencers
Help show sequence of material 
first, second 
Reminders
Refer to earlier text
material
As we saw in Chapter1
Topicalizers
Indicate topic shift or a new topic 
Well; now I will discuss,in regard to 
Interpretive
Markers
Code Glosses 
Explain text material
What I mean is , that is, for example
Illocution Markers
Name the act performed
To conclude;in sum;I predict
Announcements
Announcing upcoming material 
In the next section
Interpersonal metadiscourse
Hedges 
Show lack of
commitment to the
truth-value of proposition
may, might
Certainty Markers
Show full commitment to
the truth-value of
proposition
I absolutely sure
I know
Attributors
Refer to authorities used for persuasive force
Einstein claimed that
Attitude Markers
Express writer’s affective
values
I agree, unfortunately
Commentary
Build writer-reader
relationships
My friend, you may not agree that
Hyland(2004)认为, 将元话语分为语篇元话语和人际元话语不太确切, 应将元话语分为指引读者读完整个语篇的交互式元话语和帮助读者掌握论点的互动式元话。其中, 交互式元话语涉及作者对读者的意识, 以及作者对读者的知识、兴趣、修辞期望和语篇处理能力的调解, 它反映了作者组织语篇的方法, 在一定程度上体现出作者在创作语篇的过程中考虑到了读者的需求。而互动式元话语是作者通过入侵语篇和对语篇信息加以评论来引领互动展开交际的方法, 它在一定程度上体现了语篇是由作者和读者一起构建的。关于Hyland的分类模式，本文将会在theoretical basis 里详细解释。
Category
Function
Examples
Interactive 
metadiscourse
Help to guide the reader
through the text
Transitions
express relations between
main clause
in addition; but; thus; and
Frame markers 
refer to discourse acts,
sequences or stages
finally;  to  conclude;  my
purpose is
Endophoric markers 
refer to information in
other parts of the text
noted above; see Fig; in
section2
Evidentials
refer to information in
other parts of the text
according to X; Z states
Code glosses
elaborate propositional
meanings
namely; .; such as; in
other words
Interactional
metadiscourse 
Involve the reader in the text
Hedges
withhold commitment and
open dialogue
might; perhaps; possible;
about
Boosters 
emphasize certainty or close dialogue
in fact; definitely; it is
clear that
Attitude markers
express writer’s attitude to
proposition
unfortunately; I agree;
surprisingly
Self mentions 
explicit reference to
author(s)
I; we; my; me; our
Engagement markers 
explicitly build
relationship with reader
consider; note; you can see
that
Class 2 metadiscourse
Recognizing the differences in the nature and function of meta discourse, the discourse of the dollar classification are also different. To date, there are several different metadiscourse classification system (see Williams, 1981; Lautamatti, 1978; Vande, 1985; Crismore, 1989; Crismore et al, 1993; Hyland, 1998, 2005). Xu Jiujiu (2006) summarize findings and discuss the classification of metadiscourse mainly in vocabulary classes. From the current research point of view, there are three main points of law: chapter Kopple (1988) proposed and interpersonal metadiscourse, Hyland and Tse (2004) proposed a guided and interactive metadiscourse, and Ifantidou (2005) proposed internal discourse and External chapter metadiscourse.
The first classification is made Vande (1985) made, he put metadiscourse divided into two categories: Text metadiscourse means connecting the main component of all levels of discourse in chapters, a chapter of the word of words and phrases, including Text Connective (text connectives), language code annotation words (code glosses), validity Sig
ns (validity markers), the narrator (narrator). Interpersonal metadiscourse mainly reflected words and phrases relationship authors and readers, including illocutionary force marked words (illocution markers), attitude identifies words (attitude markers) and author - reader communication identifies words (commentaries).

版权声明：本站内容均来自互联网，仅供演示用，请勿用于商业和其他非法用途。如果侵犯了您的权益请与我们联系QQ:729038198，我们将在24小时内删除。