蓄意歧义作为言语交际策略的语用研究

论文摘要

歧义现象在语言中普遍存在,但也常给交流制造麻烦。人们习惯上将歧义看作是一种语言上的误用。正如许多学者所认为,这种误用如果不小心避开将会妨碍人们的正常交流。然而,歧义并非一无是处。相反,如若能够对之加以恰当巧妙的运用,歧义也会发挥积极的作用,帮助人们满足某种交际需要或是实现某些特殊交际效果。这种在言语交际中对歧义的故意运用被称为是蓄意歧义,它也被认为是一种交际策略。蓄意歧义的运用在人们的日常交流中极为常见。但是之前对于歧义的研究却大多属于静态研究,且常常是停留在语言层面上。动态研究只零星可见,此外也罕有学者致力于探究隐藏在这种语言现象背后的各种机制及动机。因此,本研究之主要意图即是要探究蓄意歧义是如何被应用到人们的互动会话中以增进交流的。本研究主要基于对语料的定性分析。理论框架则是以维索尔伦(Verschueren)的语言顺应论为依托,兼据布朗(Brown)和莱文森(Levinson)的面子理论及格莱斯(Grice)的合作原则和会话含义理论。所以该研究是一项既有理论依据又有语料支撑的研究。研究将集中探讨蓄意歧义的变异性、顺应性和功能性。作为一种交际策略,蓄意歧义显然是一种动机性很强的对语言的处理运用。换言之,对歧义的故意运用是一种高度意识的、有目的的行为,它可以在不同的语言层面对语言作出选择。因此,本研究也将试图细究蓄意歧义是如何在不同的语言层面上被加以处理运用的。研究还发现,蓄意歧义常被运用以顺应不同的语境因素。本研究将顺应划分为自我引导的顺应和他人引导的顺应。如果语境变量是涉及到说话人,那么这种顺应就是自我引导的;如果语境因素是与听话人相关,那么这种顺应就是他人引导的。对于蓄意歧义的语境顺应研究使得我们从中得出一个结论,即,对于蓄意歧义的选择实际上也是语言顺应的结果。通过仔细观察并分析我们收集到的语料,本研究还致力于对蓄意歧义可能实现或意图实现的功能作一个详尽的分析,以期充分展示它作为一个语言选择结果的动态特征。研究发现,蓄意歧义能够提高话语的适切性;制造特殊的交际效果;扭转不利局势。同时,这几类功能下含的次类功能也得到了进一步的分析。通过对这些功能的分析,蓄意歧义无疑被认为是一种有效的交际策略。运用蓄意歧义将会帮助说话人在特定语境中实现其各种交际需要。

论文目录

• Acknowledgements
• Abstract
• 中文摘要
• Chapter One Introduction
• 1.1 The object of the present study
• 1.2 Motivation
• 1.3 The objective of the study
• 1.4 The research methodology and source of data
• 1.5 The use of the terms “speaker/hearer”and other synonymous terms
• 1.6 Overview
• Chapter Two A Review of Previous Studies on Ambiguity
• 2.1 Introduction
• 2.2 Definition of ambiguity
• 2.3 Different approaches to the study of ambiguity
• 2.3.1 The philosophical approach
• 2.3.2 The linguistic approach
• 2.3.3 The psycholinguistic approach
• 2.3.4 The pragmatic approach
• 2.4 Summary
• Chapter Three A Description of the Conceptual Framework
• 3.1 Introduction
• 3.2 The delimitation of intentional ambiguity
• 3.2.1 The working definition of intentional ambiguity
• 3.2.2 Intentional ambiguity vs. pragmatic vagueness
• 3.2.3 Intentional ambiguity vs. pun
• 3.2.4 Intentional ambiguity vs. deliberate misinterpretation
• 3.3 A discussion of the theoretical basis of the framework
• 3.3.1 Verschueren’s linguistic adaptation theory
• 3.3.2 Brown and Levinson’s face theory
• 3.3.3 Grice’s cooperative principle and conversational implicature
• 3.4 Characterization of the conceptual framework
• 3.4.1 Intentional ambiguity as a result of linguistic choice-making
• 3.4.2 Intentional ambiguity as a product of negotiation and adaptation
• 3.4.3 Intentional ambiguity as a way to satisfy communicative needs
• 3.5 Summary
• Chapter Four Manipulation of Intentional Ambiguity
• 4.1 Introduction
• 4.2 The notion of linguistic manipulation
• 4.3 Linguistic manipulation for intentional ambiguity
• 4.3.1 Linguistic manipulation on the phonological level
• 4.3.2 Linguistic manipulation on the lexical level
• 4.3.3 Linguistic manipulation on the syntactic level
• 4.3.4 Linguistic manipulation on the pragmatic level
• 4.4 Summary
• Chapter Five Adaptability of Intentional Ambiguity
• 5.1 Introduction
• 5.2 The notion of adaptability
• 5.3 Adaptation realized through intentional ambiguity
• 5.3.1 Adaptation directed by “self”
• 5.3.2 Adaptation directed by “others”
• 5.4 Summary
• Chapter Six Functionality of Intentional Ambiguity
• 6.1 Introduction
• 6.2 Defining the notion of functionality
• 6.3 The communicative functions of intentional ambiguity
• 6.3.1 Enhancing the appropriateness of the utterance
• 6.3.2 Creating special communicative effects
• 6.3.3 Reversing unfavorable situation
• 6.4 The mechanism for the performance of the special functions
• 6.4.1 Intentional ambiguity: loose use of language
• 6.4.2 Intentional ambiguity: lower degree of accessibility and more functions
• 6.5 Summary
• Chapter Seven Conclusion
• 7.1 Introduction
• 7.2 Major findings
• 7.2.1 Intentional ambiguity: a highly motivated linguistic manipulation
• 7.2.2 Intentional ambiguity: a result of linguistic adaptation
• 7.2.3 Intentional ambiguity: an effective communicative strategy in verbal communication
• 7.2.4 Intentional ambiguity: a revelation of the dynamic process of language use
• 7.3 Implications
• 7.4 Limitations
• 7.5 Suggestions for further study
• References