發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-07-07 15:21

  本文選題：文化價(jià)值 + 言語(yǔ)行為��； 參考：《魯東大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：在跨文化交際中，英語(yǔ)學(xué)習(xí)者經(jīng)常會(huì)出現(xiàn)跨文化語(yǔ)用失誤。雖然在語(yǔ)法、詞匯等方面造詣?lì)H深，但是若對(duì)于目的語(yǔ)文化不求甚解，也會(huì)導(dǎo)致跨文化交流的失敗。因此，本文對(duì)中國(guó)人和美國(guó)人在使用日常生活中廣泛應(yīng)用的請(qǐng)求和拒絕這兩種言語(yǔ)行為進(jìn)行一些調(diào)查研究。 本文主要研究三個(gè)問題：造成語(yǔ)用失誤的原因是什么；英漢請(qǐng)求和拒絕言語(yǔ)行為的具體區(qū)別是什么；中國(guó)人和美國(guó)人主要采用什么請(qǐng)求和拒絕策略。本文以Austin和Searle的言語(yǔ)行為理論和Hofstede的文化維度理論為依據(jù)，在原有理論的基礎(chǔ)上，試圖通過例證來分析這些問題，以來源于文學(xué)作品的經(jīng)典例子和一個(gè)兩小時(shí)的錄音材料為研究對(duì)象�？紤]到受試者的選擇將會(huì)影響到研究結(jié)果，因此本研究選取的受試者全部為在校大學(xué)生，保證所有受試者有相似的教育程度；另外，中國(guó)受試者為母語(yǔ)是漢語(yǔ)的非英語(yǔ)專業(yè)學(xué)生，美國(guó)受試者為母語(yǔ)是英語(yǔ)的非外語(yǔ)專業(yè)學(xué)生。本文主要目的是找出英漢請(qǐng)求策略和拒絕策略使用上的差異，并幫助英語(yǔ)學(xué)習(xí)者有效地培養(yǎng)跨文化交際能力，促進(jìn)跨文化交際的成功。 數(shù)據(jù)分析結(jié)果顯示，受試者在請(qǐng)求策略方面都盡可能間接的并禮貌的實(shí)施，但中國(guó)人和美國(guó)人實(shí)施的方法不盡相同。中國(guó)人在實(shí)現(xiàn)請(qǐng)求策略的同時(shí)喜歡添加不同的稱呼語(yǔ)，使用祈使句，并進(jìn)行說明理由和解釋；而美國(guó)人更喜歡使用情態(tài)動(dòng)詞，，疑問句，運(yùn)用不同的、復(fù)雜的句子結(jié)構(gòu)。受試者在實(shí)現(xiàn)拒絕策略方面，美國(guó)人較中國(guó)人更頻繁使用直接拒絕策略，中國(guó)人在日常對(duì)話中更多地使用間接拒絕策略。此外，中國(guó)受試者是隨機(jī)選取的中國(guó)在校大學(xué)生，豐富了原有文化維度理論只從臺(tái)灣選取受試者的材料內(nèi)容，進(jìn)一步證實(shí)了中國(guó)人傾向于集體主義價(jià)值取向和高權(quán)力距離的文化價(jià)值，而美國(guó)人往往傾向于個(gè)人主義價(jià)值取向和低權(quán)力距離的文化價(jià)值。 本研究為外語(yǔ)教學(xué)提供了如下啟示：教師應(yīng)把英語(yǔ)文化元素融入到語(yǔ)言教學(xué)中，使教學(xué)目的不僅局限于讓學(xué)生學(xué)好發(fā)音、詞匯和語(yǔ)法，還要豐富英語(yǔ)學(xué)習(xí)者的文化背景知識(shí)。只有讓英語(yǔ)學(xué)習(xí)者掌握全面的文化背景知識(shí)，提高綜合運(yùn)用外語(yǔ)的能力，才能被認(rèn)為是真正掌握英語(yǔ)。 由于本研究研究工具的局限性，所調(diào)查的受試者的人數(shù)有限，所以不能完全代表所有的中國(guó)人和美國(guó)人請(qǐng)求和拒絕言語(yǔ)行為使用情況，另一方面由于影響請(qǐng)求和拒絕言語(yǔ)行為的因素還有很多，比如年齡、性格和性別差異等，因此本研究建議從更廣泛更深入角度進(jìn)行跨文化言語(yǔ)行為研究。
[Abstract]:In cross-cultural communication, English learners often have cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Although there are many achievements in grammar and vocabulary, if we don't understand the target language culture, it will lead to the failure of cross-cultural communication. Therefore, this paper investigates the two kinds of speech acts, which are widely used by Chinese and Americans in their daily life, such as request and refusal. This paper focuses on three questions: what is the cause of pragmatic failure; what is the specific difference between English and Chinese requests and refusal of speech acts; and what are the main requests and refusal strategies adopted by Chinese and Americans. Based on the speech act theory of Austin and Searle and the cultural dimension theory of Hofstede, this paper attempts to analyze these problems through illustrations on the basis of the original theory. A classic example from a literary work and a two-hour recording material are taken as the object of study. Considering that the choice of subjects will affect the results of the study, the subjects selected in this study are all college students to ensure that all subjects have similar educational levels. Chinese subjects are non-English majors in Chinese and non-English majors in America. The main purpose of this paper is to find out the differences between English and Chinese request strategies and refusal strategies, and to help English learners effectively develop their intercultural communicative competence and promote the success of cross-cultural communication. The results of data analysis showed that the subjects' request strategies were carried out indirectly and politely as far as possible, but the methods used by Chinese and Americans were different. Chinese people like to add different forms of address, use imperative sentences, explain reasons and explain them while Americans prefer to use modal verbs, interrogative sentences and different and complex sentence structures. In the aspect of realizing rejection strategies, Americans use direct rejection strategies more frequently than Chinese, and Chinese people use indirect rejection strategies more frequently in daily conversation. In addition, Chinese subjects are randomly selected Chinese college students, enriching the material content of the original cultural dimension theory that only selects the subjects from Taiwan. It is further confirmed that Chinese tend to collectivism and cultural value of high power distance, while Americans tend to individualism value orientation and low power distance cultural value. This study provides the following enlightenment for foreign language teaching: teachers should integrate English cultural elements into language teaching, so that the purpose of teaching is not only to enable students to learn pronunciation, vocabulary and grammar, but also to enrich the cultural background knowledge of English learners. Only if English learners master comprehensive cultural background knowledge and improve their ability of comprehensive use of foreign language can they be considered to be truly proficient in English. Due to the limitations of this research tool, the limited number of subjects surveyed does not fully represent all Chinese and American requests for and refusal to use speech acts. On the other hand, there are still many factors that influence the speech act of request and rejection, such as age, personality and gender difference, so this study suggests that the cross-cultural speech act should be studied from a broader and deeper perspective.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：魯東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：H136;H313

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前4條

1 王曉彤;張紹杰;;“請(qǐng)求”言語(yǔ)行為的跨文化研究[J];東北師大學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年03期

2 洪瑋;;對(duì)言語(yǔ)行為“請(qǐng)求”的教學(xué)探討[J];世界漢語(yǔ)教學(xué);1996年02期

3 顧曰國(guó);禮貌、語(yǔ)用與文化[J];外語(yǔ)教學(xué)與研究;1992年04期

4 張紹杰,王曉彤;“請(qǐng)求”言語(yǔ)行為的對(duì)比研究[J];現(xiàn)代外語(yǔ);1997年03期

本文編號(hào)：2105377