北京第二外国语学院学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (1): 129-145.DOI: 10.12002/j.bisu.436

• 青年学者论坛 • 上一篇    

基于语式差异的英汉政治话语语法隐喻分布的对比研究

程喜()   

  1. 上海大学外国语学院,上海 200444
  • 收稿日期:2018-04-22 出版日期:2023-02-28 发布日期:2023-03-07
  • 作者简介:程喜,博士,上海大学外国语学院,200444,研究方向:系统功能语言学、政治话语分析。电子邮箱:czh2009cx@163.com
  • 基金资助:
    2017年华东师范大学研究生科研创新能力提升计划资助项目“英汉政治话语中语法隐喻与语式关系的对比研究”(ykc17053);2019年华东师范大学优秀博士生科研创新能力提升计划项目“历时视角下中美政治话语中的隐喻对比研究”的阶段性成果(YBNLTS2019-059)

A Contrastive Study of the Deployment of Grammatical Metaphors in English and Chinese Political Discourses Based on Mode Differentiation

Cheng Xi()   

  1. Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China
  • Received:2018-04-22 Online:2023-02-28 Published:2023-03-07

摘要:

本研究基于语料详细对比分析了不同语式的英汉政治话语在语法隐喻分布上的特征。首先,本研究通过计算词汇密度和语法复杂度界定了英汉3类语篇(报告、演讲和访谈语篇)的语式差异。基于语法隐喻实例的量化结果,分别构建了英汉3类语篇的语法隐喻使用度连续体,并对比和阐释了英汉3类语篇在语法隐喻分布上的差异。结果表明,英语政治报告语篇中语法隐喻使用度高于汉语报告语篇,但英语演讲和访谈语篇中语法隐喻使用度均低于汉语同语式语篇。通过对概念隐喻的分析,研究发现:英汉报告语篇在隐喻类型1、类型2、类型6和类型13的分布上差异较大,英汉演讲和访谈语篇在类型5和类型6的分布上差异较大。在对人际隐喻的分析中发现,英汉演讲和访谈语篇主要使用情态语法隐喻,尤其是“可能性”隐喻。探索不同语式政治话语中的语法隐喻分布特征有助于更好地把握语言与语境的关系。

关键词: 语式差异; 语法隐喻; 概念隐喻; 人际隐喻; 英汉政治话语

Abstract:

This study explored the features of grammatical metaphor (GM) deployment via a comparative analysis of English and Chinese political discourses in different modes. The paper first described the mode differentiation among the three text types—political reports, speeches, and interviews—by calculating their lexical density and grammatical intricacy. After quantifying the instances of GMs, the study identified a GM distribution continuum across the three English and Chinese text types respectively, followed by an examination of the similarities and differences in the distribution of GMs in English and Chinese text types. It was found that the degree of GM deployment in English reports was higher than it was in Chinese reports, but that the use of GMs in English speeches and interviews was less than it was in Chinese texts in the same mode. The analysis of conceptual GMs revealed that the distributions of Types 1, 2, 6, and 13 were quite different in the English and the Chinese reports, while the distributions of Types 5 and 6 differed in the English and the Chinese speeches and interviews. The discussion of interpersonal GMs suggested that English and Chinese speeches and interviews mainly used GMs of modality, particularly the subcategory “probability”. Exploring the features of GM deployment in political text types with different modes is expected to contribute to a better understanding of the relationship between language and context.

Keywords: mode differentiation; grammatical metaphors; conceptual grammatical metaphors; interpersonal grammatical metaphors; English and Chinese political discourses

中图分类号: