發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-06-17 08:00

  本文選題：銜接 + 銜接手段�。� 參考：《南京師范大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：韓禮德和哈桑于1976年首次提出了較為完整和系統(tǒng)的銜接理論體系。以往國內(nèi)外的研究結(jié)果表明,銜接是影響寫作質(zhì)量好壞的一個(gè)重要的因素,銜接與作文質(zhì)量高低存在著相關(guān)性,但是,以往的國外研究大多數(shù)是分析較低水平的學(xué)習(xí)者的習(xí)作,極少數(shù)則是分析碩士生的英語文章,他們?nèi)鄙賹⒅袊�英語高水平的碩士畢業(yè)論文與高水平英語寫作者的文章進(jìn)行比較,前者反映的是作為二語使用者的中國學(xué)生的水平。 在本研究中,筆者將以韓禮德和哈桑的這一理論為依托,試圖探討中國英語二語使用者和高水平英語寫作者在銜接手段使用上的異同。本文研究對(duì)象為120名中國英語高水平的碩士畢業(yè)生和120名高水平的英語寫作者,數(shù)據(jù)為120篇碩士畢業(yè)論文和120名篇高水平英語期刊的文章,國內(nèi)大學(xué)的選擇依照大學(xué)排名來進(jìn)行,覆蓋了高、中、低層面；在高水平期刊的選擇,所選擇的期刊都是英語語言文學(xué)方向權(quán)威的外文期刊,體現(xiàn)了英語高水平研究者的水平。在研究的變量方面,研究者確立了指稱和連接范疇下的141個(gè)變量,分析工具為Range和Wordsmith軟件,統(tǒng)計(jì)工具為SPSS11.0分析軟件包。 研究結(jié)果表明,中國英語二語使用者和高水平英語寫作者在文章中都使用了大量的銜接手段。在指稱的范疇下,中國英語二語使用者與高水平英語寫作者相比更多地使用人稱指稱,使用的比較指稱少于高水平英語寫作者；在連接手段使用方面,他們的文章都呈現(xiàn)同一種態(tài)勢(shì),即增補(bǔ)型連接使用的最多,其次是轉(zhuǎn)折型連接,然后是時(shí)間型連接,使用最少的是因果連接。另外,相比較于高水平英語寫作者而言,中國英語二語使用者較多地使用因果連接手段,其他三種連接均少于高水平英語寫作者。但是,從整體來看,他們?cè)阢暯邮侄蔚氖褂蒙喜淮嬖陲@著性的差異。 比較結(jié)果還發(fā)現(xiàn),他們?cè)谌朔Q指稱使用和時(shí)間連接手段使用上存在著顯著性的差異。在兩類文章中,他們使用的指稱和連接在銜接項(xiàng)目選擇的分布上大致相同,即各個(gè)銜接手段中出現(xiàn)頻率最高的銜接項(xiàng)目基本相同。但是,與高水平英語寫作者相比,中國英語二語使用者在特定的指稱詞和連接詞的使用上表現(xiàn)出了過多和過少的使用趨勢(shì)。在指稱中,他們過多地使用了大部分的第三人稱代詞以及表達(dá)一般比較的詞項(xiàng)different;而他們則過少地使用了its、such和as many。在連接方面,中國英語使用者過多地使用了一些簡(jiǎn)單的銜接項(xiàng)目,女Wand、or、therefore、next,對(duì)于一些諸如“程式語”的連接詞,如in consequence、at last、to sum up,他們也表現(xiàn)出了過多使用的趨勢(shì),這反映中國學(xué)生擅于總結(jié)的傾向；相比之下,中國英語使用者又偏少地使用了其他一些常見、看似簡(jiǎn)單的詞項(xiàng),如(?)for example、nor;but、at least、in fact、rather、yet;earlier,他們?cè)谡撐闹休^少地使用例證來輔助論述,他們?cè)诒磉_(dá)正反觀點(diǎn)方面和本族語者有很大的不同,使用詞匯的頻率較低且不如本族語者的豐富。分析結(jié)果表明,在銜接手段的使用方面,中國英語高水平的碩士研究生已達(dá)到了較高的英語水平,但在某些類具體的銜接項(xiàng)目使用上,他們和本族語者還有一定的差別,仍需繼續(xù)學(xué)習(xí)。
[Abstract]:Hallidy and Hassan first put forward a more complete and systematic theoretical system of cohesion in 1976. The results of previous studies in and outside the country show that cohesion is an important factor affecting the quality of writing. There is a correlation between cohesion and the quality of composition. However, most of the previous studies of foreign countries are the lower level of the learners. Most of the workings are the analysis of the English articles of the master's students. They lack the comparison between the high level Chinese English master's thesis and the high level English writer's article. The former reflects the level of Chinese students as the two language users.
In this study, the author, based on the theory of Hallidy and Hassan, tries to explore the similarities and differences between the two language users of Chinese English and the high level English writer in the use of cohesive devices. The object of this study is 120 master graduates of Chinese English and 120 high level English writers, and the data are 120 master's masters. In the paper and 120 high level English journals, the choice of the domestic universities is carried out according to the university rankings, covering high, middle and low levels. In the choice of high level periodicals, the selected periodicals are the foreign language journals in the direction of English language and literature, reflecting the level of English high-level researchers. The researchers established 141 variables under the category of reference and connection. The analysis tools are Range and Wordsmith software, and the statistical tool is SPSS11.0 analysis software package.
The results show that both Chinese English two language users and high level English writers use a large number of cohesive devices in the article. In the category of reference, Chinese English two speakers use personal references more than the high level English writers, and the comparison refers to less than the high level English writer; in connection with the means of connection. In terms of use, their articles all present the same situation, that is, the most used in the supplementary connection, followed by a turning connection, then the time type connection, and the least use of the causal connection. In addition, compared to the high level English writer, the two language of Chinese English makes the use of causality connection more used, the other three kinds of connections. They are all less than high level English writers. However, as a whole, there is no significant difference in the use of cohesive devices.
The results also found that they have significant differences in the use of personal referential use and the use of time connections. In the two category, their use of reference and connection is roughly the same in the distribution of connection items, that is, the highest frequency of cohesion in the various cohesive devices is basically the same. Compared to the writer, Chinese English two speakers have shown too much and too little use in the use of specific reference words and connectives. In the reference, they use most of the third person pronouns and the words different that express general comparison; and they use its, such and as many. in the connection too little. On the other hand, Chinese English users have used too many simple cohesive projects, women Wand, or, therefore, next. For some connectors such as in consequence, at last, to sum up, they also show a tendency to use too much, which reflects the tendency of Chinese students to be good at summing up; in contrast, Chinese English makes The use of some other common and seemingly simple words, such as (?) for example, nor; but, at least, in fact, rather, yet; earlier, are less used in the paper to assist in the discussion; they are very different from the native speakers in expressing the positive and negative views and are less frequently used in the native language than the native language. The results of the analysis show that the high level Chinese graduate students of Chinese English have reached a higher level of English in the use of cohesive devices, but there are some differences between them and their native speakers in the use of certain specific cohesive projects, and still need to continue to learn.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：南京師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：H319

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 吳曉春;楊忠;;認(rèn)知視角與外語學(xué)習(xí)者邏輯連接詞使用錯(cuò)誤[J];東北師大學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年01期

2 徐偉成;英語作文中的銜接、連貫與質(zhì)量[J];廣州大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(綜合版);2000年05期

3 羅一;研究生英語論文中連接副詞使用情況調(diào)查[J];解放軍外國語學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年01期

4 陳鵬;;基于語料庫的中國英語學(xué)習(xí)者連接詞使用研究[J];當(dāng)代外語研究;2010年06期

5 晏尚元;;英語專業(yè)學(xué)生議論文寫作中因果連接詞使用的語料庫研究[J];山東外語教學(xué);2009年05期

6 莫俊華;中國學(xué)生在議論文寫作中使用因果連接詞的語料庫研究[J];外語教學(xué);2005年05期

7 崔學(xué)梅;中國學(xué)生英語作文中連貫與銜接語篇特征的研究分析[J];天津外國語學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1997年02期

8 宋美華,夏緯榮;英語寫作中語篇銜接手段與語篇教學(xué)——對(duì)非英語專業(yè)大一本科生好作文與次作文的統(tǒng)計(jì)分析[J];外語界;2002年06期

9 徐海銘;潘海燕;;元語篇的理論和實(shí)證研究綜述[J];外國語(上海外國語大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2005年06期

10 潘t，

本文編號(hào)：2030321