了得網社會科學_包裝名詞在語篇中的態度意義研究

編輯推薦

內容簡介

包裝名詞(packing noun)以thing、fact、problem、idea 等抽像名詞
為典型代表，具有獨特的認知、語義和信息特征，是語言使用中的高
頻詞，在實際語篇中與獨特的詞彙–語法模式共現。《包裝名詞在語篇中的態度意義研究= Packing Nouns asAttitudinal Resources in Discourse》立足於繫統功
能語言學，以評價繫統為理論框架，以包裝名詞的認知、語義和信息
特征為出發點，借助語料庫語言學研究方法，對包裝名詞在語篇中的
態度意義進行繫統和深入的研究。研究發現，包裝名詞具有明示和引
發不同態度意義的功能，是語篇態度意義得以實現的重要資源。《包裝名詞在語篇中的態度意義研究= Packing Nouns asAttitudinal Resources in Discourse》
是語篇人際意義研究的理論拓展和方法創新。

作者簡介

Contents
叢書序 i
序 iii
前言 vii
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
1.1 Preliminaries 1
1.2 The Rationale of Attitudinal Studies on Packing Nouns 3
1.3 The Objectives of the Present Study 9
1.4 The Organization of This Study 11
Chapter 2 Packing Nouns Diffused in Studies of Abstract Nouns 14
2.1 Introduction 14
2.2 Traditional-grammatical Studies of Abstract Nouns 15
2.2.1 The Monistic Approach to Abstract Nouns 16
2.2.2 The Dualist Approach to Abstract Nouns 19Contents
叢書序 i
序 iii
前言 vii
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
1.1 Preliminaries 1
1.2 The Rationale of Attitudinal Studies on Packing Nouns 3
1.3 The Objectives of the Present Study 9
1.4 The Organization of This Study 11
Chapter 2 Packing Nouns Diffused in Studies of Abstract Nouns 14
2.1 Introduction 14
2.2 Traditional-grammatical Studies of Abstract Nouns 15
2.2.1 The Monistic Approach to Abstract Nouns 16
2.2.2 The Dualist Approach to Abstract Nouns 19
2.2.3 The Trichotomist Approach to Abstract Nouns 20
2.3 Philosophical Studies of Abstract Nouns 22
2.3.1 The Controversy of the Existence of Abstract Entities 22
2.3.2 The “Container” Image of Abstract Nouns 24
2.4 Systemic Functional Study of Abstract Nouns 27
2.4.1 Structurally-based Studies of Abstract Nouns 28
2.4.2 Lexically-based Studies of Abstract Nouns 34
2.5 Corpus Linguistic Studies of Abstract Nouns 36
2.5.2 Studies Mentioning the Evaluative Function of Packing Nouns in
Passing 39
2.6 Other Studies 42
2.7 Summary 44
Chapter 3 Packing Nouns and Attitudinal Resources in Discourse
47
3.1 Introduction 47
3.2 Packing Nouns Revisited 47
3.2.1 The Cognitive Characteristics of Packing Nouns 48
3.2.2 The Semantic Characteristics of Packing Nouns 54
3.3 The Lexico-grammatical Patterns of Packing Nouns 62
3.3.1 Semantic Co-referentiality and Cognitive Identity 63
3.3.2 The Lexico-grammatical Patterns of Packing Nouns 67
3.4 The Interpersonal Information of Packing Nouns 72
3.4.1 Packing Nouns and Information Loss in Nominalization 72
3.4.2 The Attitudinal Information of Packing Nouns 75
3.4.3 Attitudinal and Non-attitudinal Packing Nouns 78
3.5 Strategies of Attitude Realization in Discourse 80
3.5.1 Attitude Inscription in Discourse 80
3.5.2 Attitude Invocation in Discourse 82
3.5.3 The Interaction of Inscription and Invocation 83
3.6 Attitudinal Packing Nouns and Attitude Inscription 84
3.7 Non-attitudinal Packing Nouns and Attitude Invocation in
Discourse 87
3.8 Packing Nouns Redefined in the Framework of Attitude
Realization in Discourse 93
3.9 Summary 94
Chapter 4 Research Design 98
4.1 Introduction 98
4.2 Identifying the Optimally Representative Packing Nouns 99
4.2.1 The Corpus， the Concordance Tool and the Queries 99
4.2.2 Data Processing 100
4.2.3 A Survey of the Results of the Corpus Inquiry 105
4.3 Analyzing the Attitud

前言

媒體評論

在線試讀

Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Preliminaries
This book is to carry out a corpus-based attitudinal study of a special
class of abstract nouns， the typical examples of which are thing， fact， idea，
problem， result， etc. The most striking grammatical feature of these nouns
is that they can be inserted in the lexico-grammatical pattern N+be+cl1:
“Determiner + (premodifier) + Noun + be + complementing that clause，
wh- clause or to- infinitive” (Schmid 2000: 3). Based on their cognitive，
semantic and information characteristics， the term “packing noun” will be
used as a “taken-for-granted” and functional referring term， though a
working definition of it will be given till in Chapter 3.
Packing nouns have been popular objects of modern linguistic research.
Table 1-1 is a brief chronological list of terms given to nouns we
have just mentioned and their first coiners.
Table 1-1 A brief chronological list of terms given to packing nouns
Terms given to the nouns The coiners
nouns that prop up the clause Jespersen (1927: 24-26)
container noun Vendler (1967: 122-146)
general noun Halliday & Hasan (1976: 274)Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Preliminaries
This book is to carry out a corpus-based attitudinal study of a special
class of abstract nouns， the typical examples of which are thing， fact， idea，
problem， result， etc. The most striking grammatical feature of these nouns
is that they can be inserted in the lexico-grammatical pattern N+be+cl1:
“Determiner + (premodifier) + Noun + be + complementing that clause，
wh- clause or to- infinitive” (Schmid 2000: 3). Based on their cognitive，
semantic and information characteristics， the term “packing noun” will be
used as a “taken-for-granted” and functional referring term， though a
working definition of it will be given till in Chapter 3.
Packing nouns have been popular objects of modern linguistic research.
Table 1-1 is a brief chronological list of terms given to nouns we
have just mentioned and their first coiners.
Table 1-1 A brief chronological list of terms given to packing nouns
Terms given to the nouns The coiners
nouns that prop up the clause Jespersen (1927: 24-26)
container noun Vendler (1967: 122-146)
general noun Halliday & Hasan (1976: 274)
low-content noun Bolinger (1977: 5-6)
abstract noun Quirk， et al. (1985: 247)
A-noun (anaphoric noun) Francis (1986)
carrier-noun Ivani? (1991)
Continued
Terms given to the nouns The coiners
unspecific noun Winter (1992)
label Francis (1994)
cognitive shell Schmid (1999)
signaling noun Flowerdew (2003)
As can be clearly seen in Table 1-1， packing nouns have caught linguists’
attention at a very early stage of modern linguistics (cf. Jespersen
1927) and have continued to be objects of modern linguistic research. In
view of the fact that Table 1-1 lists only the terms and their first coiners，
the number of terms is remarkable indeed for a small subclass of “common
noun” (cf. Quirk， et al. 1985: 247; Halliday & Matthiessen 1999: 515).
Schmid (2000: 10) observed that “they (packing nouns) have never been a
very popular object of research in the field of linguistics”. Table 1-1， however，
clearly suggests the contrary: packing nouns ARE the popular objects
of modern linguistic research.
The popularity of packing nouns in modern linguistic research
comes from their high-frequency value in actual language use. It is found，
for example， that in the 225-million British Branch of the Bank of English
at COUBUILD， the singular forms of “fact”， “idea”， “problem”， “thing”， etc.
are among the most frequent ones. The relative frequencies of these nouns
range from 356 per million (80，013 occurrences in the corpus) for “thing”
to 207 per million (46，654 occurrences in the corpus) for “idea” (Schmid
2000: 6). Compared with the relative frequencies of the majority of lexical
items lower than 20 per million (Clear 1993: 274)， packing nouns indeed
have a remarkably high-frequency value in actual language use.
The popularity as objects of linguistic research and the remarkably
high frequency value in real language use， especially the latter， deserves
our research effort. Our study of packing nouns concentrates mainly on
their attitudinal function in discourse2. See the following example taken
from BNC.
(1) The current problem is that we cannot predict which of today’s
options will be tomorrow’s mainstream.
3， 4
In the above example， the word in bold face plays the function of attitudinally
shading the content in the that-clause. With the nominal problem，
the speaker evaluates the ensuing proposition (we cannot predict
which of today’s options will be tomorrow’s mainstream) as “a situation that
causes difficulties” (Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (4th edition);
hereafter “LDOCE4”). Undoubtedly， problem indicates a situation
that is unpleasant and better to be avoided. This example shows that besides
adjectives of Quality， verbs of Process and Modal Adjuncts (Martin
& White 2005; Martin & Rose 2003)， packing nouns can also function as a
kind of resource for realizing speakers’ or writers’ attitudes in discourse.
1.2 The Rationale of Attitudinal Studies on
Packing Nouns
Previous studies on packing nouns can be grouped into two general
categories， i.e.， the traditional studies and the modern studies. The traditional studies describe words and thus packing nouns either by writing
dictionaries or by writing thesauruses (see Marin 1992: 271-275; Halliday，
et al. 2004: 3-11). These two types of traditional studies are different in
that a thesaurus groups together words that are similar in meaning while a
dictionary arranges the entries in the way that each of them stands by itself
as an independent piece of work， but they are the same in the sense
that they treat words as semantically autonomous units. The traditional
treatments on lexis and thus on packing nouns presuppose that meaning
is to be found only inside packing nouns. This presupposition of meaning
is against the very nature of language because “It is entirely within the
confines of the discourse that we can find the answer to what a unit of
meaning means， be it a singl

商品搜索

商品分类

【醫學】

【各大出版社】