资源描述
-摘要常用句型：This paper deals withThis article focuses on the topics ofThis thesis discusses/analyzesThis paper provides/gives an overview ofThis paper elaborates onThis paper includes discussions concerningThis paper touches uponThis paper introduces an applicable procedure to analyzeThis article e*ploresThis paper e*presses views onThis paper tries to describeThe aim of this paper is toThe purpose of this article is to reviewThe objective of this paper is to e*ploreThis article paresandThis paper develops a theoretical framework toThis paper presents an approach toThis report(thesis，presentation，document，account) e*plains(outlines，summarizes，evaluates，surveys，develops， investigates，discusses，focuses on，)the results ofThis article addresses the following questions：This paper has three main objectives：This research project is devoted toThe objective of this paper isOne goal has been to developIt has been found(observed，proved，shown)thatThese e*periments indicate(reveal，show，demonstrate )thatThe approach(method，framework，)promises to beThe results show(indicate，suggest，)thatIt is shown(concluded，proposed，)thatThis could imply thatThese studies are of significance toThese results have direct application toThe author suggests/remends/concludes thatThis article shows thatIt is suggested thatThe author finds it necessary to*例：提纲式摘要：转喻视角下汉语旧词新义的词汇语用意义演变研究作为一种普遍的语言现象,新词也越来越受到语言学家的关注。不少研究从新词的定义、来源、分类、特点及其与社会、文化的关系等角度展开了讨论,但却较少论及语义演变的深层机制。在日常的语言交际中,新词的词义往往会脱离其原义,产生新的语用意义。本文以新词中的旧词新义的词汇语用意义演变为研究对象,以认知转喻为理论框架,探讨旧词新义词汇语用意义的转喻表现及转喻阐释。所采取的研究方法是基于一定语料的定性分析。 本文共分六章。 第一章为引言,介绍相关研究现状、研究理据、研究对象及研究方法。 第二章为理论框架局部,介绍认知转喻的概念。重点介绍同一理想认知模式中的转喻类型。 第三章讨论了汉语新词词汇语用意义演变生成模式转喻表现。 第四章以新词“山寨为例,山寨词义演变的各阶段进展转喻阐释。 第五章以本研究关于转喻理论对新词词汇语用意义演变阐释的探讨,对新词释义有启示作用。 第六章为结语局部,得出结论,指出本研究存在的问题,并指出后续研究的开展方向。 综上所述,本文为汉语新词的词汇语用意义演变研究提供了新的视角。认知转喻理论对词汇语用意义的阐释丰富和完善了词汇语用学的研究*围,对未来词汇语用学的研究方向有一定的启示作用。杰克伦敦与?马丁伊登?：美国梦的追寻与幻灭；相关理论及艺术手法探究杰克伦敦(1876-1916)是美国现代多产作家,是美国文学史上著名的现实主义小说家之一。其小说塑造了众多形象鲜明的人物,其中以马丁伊登的塑造最为突出,最为成功。?马丁伊登?是作者根据自己的亲身体验塑造,其主人公马丁伊登这一超人般的艺术形象,是作家的“自画像,是一曲知识分子的精神悲剧。实际上,马丁伊登一生的追求,奋斗,受挫,成功,幻灭全部都折射着作家自己的人生历程。 本文通过对杰克伦敦和马丁伊登的比较,分析作家最后悲剧的原因以及其美国梦从实现到幻灭的过程,从而折射当时美国社会的人们为了实现梦想所做的努力及在努力的过程中所遭受的痛苦。并通过相关理论解析作者及主人公的精神信仰。 “美国梦源于殖*义时期,其代表人物为本杰明富兰克林。在富兰克林之后,“美国梦成为美国民众心中无法抹去的情节。他们相信,只要通过努力就可以获得自己想要的东西,取得成功。正如我们所熟知的小说?喜福会?,就是反映美国梦这个主题。然而美国梦在与现实发生冲突时就会造成梦想在现实面前破灭。本文所分析的作品正是如此。 本文共分为五个局部,第一章介绍作者生平及其主要作品。第二章文献综述及对小说?马丁伊登?进展简单的概括。第三章对主人公美国梦的存在及幻灭进展分析,讨论其幻灭的原因。第四章通过斯宾塞的相关理论分析马丁伊登及杰克伦敦的精神信仰及对?马丁伊登?中运用的自然主义和现实主义艺术手法及相关理论进展探讨。第五章为结论局部。内容式摘要：学习策略和学习风格的相关性基于大学英语学习者的研究作为个体差异研究的热点话题之一，学习策略和学习风格与“个性化学习密不可分，已经引起语言学家和语言教师的广泛关注。但在过去的研究中，学习策略和学习风格通常是作为两个不同的方向分开探讨，很少有人注意到它们之间是否具有*种内在的相关性。本文着眼于这种相关性，并将二语成绩作为衡量标准，通过网络调查问卷，发现学习风格与二语成绩之间无相关性、学习策略与二语成绩之间存在弱相关性、学习策略与学习风格之间有较强的相关性。这些发现能为策略培训和“个性化学习提供借鉴意义。论英汉文化背景下的习语翻译著名翻译学家奈达指出:“对于真正成功的翻译而言，熟悉两种文化甚至比掌握两种语言更为重要，因为词语只有在其作用的文化背景下才有意义。 也就是说，翻译不仅与语言有关也和文化有关。习语翻译 中对文化差异的研究在中国的翻译领域中仍然较弱，专门对中英习语翻译的研究还不很完善。近 20 年来， 习语翻译大多强调语际的交流，而很少涉及文化差异。本文通过分析中英习语的文化差异，进而从文化角 度研究中英习语翻译方法，并指出中英习语翻译要注意的问题:联系上下文，选择与原文风格，意思相符的 翻译；文化是一种生活方式，文化在变化，出现新的习语，习语翻译要与时俱进。 关键词：习语；文化；“夹缝人的思考浅析?卢布林的魔术师?和?所罗门之歌?的“回归主题少数族裔的处境问题是当今许多少数族裔作家所关注的焦点。犹太裔作家艾萨克巴什维斯辛格和非裔作家托尼莫里森在其各自的长篇代表作?卢布林的魔术师?和?所罗门之歌?中着重探讨了种族的未来出路问题。本文试从身份回归、文化传统回归、人性回归三方面印证两部作品中的回归主题，阐释只有认同民族身份，复归民族精神传统，才会找到最终的生存价值。关键词:?卢布林的魔术师?; ?所罗门之歌?; 回归 中介理论在高校英语教师中的运用情况调查与分析根据学者们以往关于教师中介作用的调查研究发现：教师的中介角色意识与行为不一致，教师中介角色与学生需求存在一定差距。 为了进一步明确教师的中介角色，本文更侧重于从学生评价和反响方面出发，运用费厄斯坦编制的师生调查问卷和自制的学生访谈，来更好地反映学生对教师具体实施中介作用的看法和反响，以期对中介理论在高校教师中的有效实施提供依据。关键词： 中介理论； 中介角色； 教师；文化差异对翻译的影响及对策翻译是一种跨文化的语言转换活动，因此翻译要受原语和译语两种文化的影响。文化的差异导致了不同民族之间不同的思维心理和表达习惯。因此，在翻译过程中译者要充分考虑并理解不同民族之间的文化差异防止因文化差异产生的翻译问题。本文将通过对英汉语中的色彩、习语等词汇的异同点进展比较，利用符号学的理论，分析在翻译过程中文化差异带来的意义的差异和影响，以及探讨涉及文化背景差异的信息的翻译对策。引言举例：1 IntroductionWhen mentioning face, everyone is very familiar with it. However, there are not so many people who can e*press clearly what face is, since it is so abstract, neither can be seen, nor can be touched. Then what is face on earth? Lin Yutang, an outstanding writer and translator in China gave a vivid description of face. He argued, “Face cannot be translated or defined. It is like honor and is not honor. It cannot be purchased with money, and gives a man or a woman a material pride. It is hollow and is what a man or a woman die for. It is invisible and yet by definition e*ists by being shown to the public (qtd. in Liu Liru:19). However, many scholars, both at home and abroad, have given some definitions of face. It was Hu *ianjin, a Chinese anthropologist who first brought his definition of face to western countries. He discovered that there were two types of face in China, “lian and “mian-zi. “lian represents the confidence of society in the integrity of egos moral character, loss of which makes it impossible for him to function properly within the munity, while Mian-zi stands for the kind of prestige that is emphasized, a reputation achieved through getting on in life, through success and ostentation (qtd. in Liu Jing: 123). According to Goffman (1955), who laid the foundation for the research of this field, “face is a kind of positive social value that people tries to win for themselves in social munication and it is a kind of self-image that is shown by individuals according to the admiring standard of society (qtd. in Liu *in 15: 22). Brown and Levinson e*panded and e*plained Goffmans theory by saying that face is “the public self-image that every member wanted to claim for himself or herself (qtd. in Liu Liru: 22). Face, in this sense, is a universal phenomenon which all people have and desire to maintain and even try to get more. The most influential study about face was pointed out by Stella Ting-Toomey in 1988. She concluded that face is “a projected image of ones self in a relational situation and later “the claimed sense of favorable social self-worth and the estimated other-worth in an interpersonal situation (215). So in conclusion, face refers to self-awareness and social assessment of ones value elements both outside such as ones appearance, living environment, etc and inside such as ones dignity, reputation, etc.Most studies on face can be classified into three main categories. First, studies on face as a prevalent concept in all cultures (noted by Goffman, 1955, 1967; Brown and Levinson, 1978, 1987; Ting-Toomey, 1988 ,1998; etc). Second, studies on face as a cultural phenomenon. For instance, Chinese face perceptions have been studied by scholars all over the world (Smith, 1894; Lin, 1936; Ho, 1976; Ge, 1998; Jia, 1997, 1998;etc). Third, parative studies on face between Western cultures and Eastern cultures have been conducted by some scholars (Ho, 1976; Hartzell, 1988; Hu and Cornelius, 1991; Ting-Toomey, 1999; Dong and Li, 2003, etc). It is well-known that munication plays a more and more significant role in every field of world affairs. In any interpersonal munication situation, it is of great importance for an individual to understand clearly his or her partners face needs. How the face of a person from another cultural background is respected or threatened plays a very important part in interpersonal relationships. Because western cultures are different from Chinese ones, people tend to hold their own understanding about face when municating with each other. That is why we need to understand face in order to cope with any potential face threatening act, or conflicts so that it is possible for people to reach a successful inter-cultural munication. Therefore, this thesis aims to analyze the distinctions of face perception between Chinese cultures and western cultures.In the following parts, the thesis first describes the theoretical framework, including the definitions of face, roles of face and e*planations for face differences. Then, it puts emphasis on the contrast between Chinese face and Western face from the aspect of meaning, recognition, e*tension and speech act. After that it presents the root-causes of these differences, including history, values and thinking mode. Lastly, some conclusions are drawn in this paper.文献回忆举例： 2 Literature ReviewFace perception has been studied in a variety of fields, such as anthropology, psychology, philosophy, culture, munication, etc.At present, scholars both at home and abroad mainly concentrate their studies on the definitions of face, the roles of face and the differences of face in Chinese and Western cultures.2.1 Definitions of FaceIt is quite a long time since “face was considered to be a crucial factor in interpersonal munication, but a perfect definition of face has not been reached. Most of the scholars in this field have tried to give their own definition of face. However, as cultures differ from country to country, face is defined according to different cultures.In China, face is a significant element in everyday life of its people, so it has attracted great attention of many people who have made great contributions to this field. Actually, its long history of more than five thousand years endows the concept of face with more ple*ity and multiplicity. American missionary Arthur Smith identified Chinese face as “a key to the bination lock of many of the most important characteristics of the Chinese in his book Chinese Characteristics first published in 1890. So he thought although face played a very important role in Chinese social life, but the concept of face was beyond peoples prehension and it was e*tremely difficult to e*plain (17). Then Hu *ianjin (1944), a Chinese anthropologist discovered that face in China could be classified into two types, “lian and “mian-zi (qtd. in Liu Jing: 123). Hwang (1997) thinks that face is a power game in China (8). Jia (1997) insists that face is interpersonal identity which occurs in the process of human munication but is easily being ignored by people (43-61). King (1998) pares face functions to a credit card, whose best state is in balance. In western countries, people dont consider face as important as it is in China. Thats why few scholars have clearly pointed out what the concept of face is in western countries. Hartzell (1988) noticed that some incidents can be related to face perception in some western countries. For e*ample, uncountable possessions, e*pensive clothing and attention to the speaker in a meeting can enhance ones face, while getting drunk and acting some indecent behaviors in public can lose face (89). Then Barnlund (1989) suggests that the United States is a horizontal country in which any intrusion on an individuals right is unwarranted, so it can be inferred that the Americans pay more attention to individual right than face (78). Hu and Grove (1991) also emphasized that in the United States, individual integrity is considered e*tremely important, therefore, loss of face causes only personal embarrassment but not personal integrity or group integrity (qtd. in Liu Liru :24). Above all, all the definitions can reflect some parts of face but a perfect definition has not been given.2.2 Roles of Face Face is an important element in any munication situation. Whether face needs are fully concerned or not will have great impact on the consequence of munication. So the roles of face showed in interpersonal munication should be noticed.Smith (1894), Wang (1988), Sun (1997) and many other scholars believe that face is one of the key Chinese personal features and even Chinas national character. Further, Jia (1997) points out that besides an individuals identity, there is still another identity that has long been neglectedinterpersonal identity, which is usually called “mian-zi (43-61). Yong (1994) argues, “Face goes deep to the core of a Chinese persons identity and integrity and Chinese regard ones ideas as entangled with ones identity or sense of personal worth; an attack on ones ideas is therefore an attack on ones self, or more specifically, ones face (qtd. in Liu Liru: 14). Jia (2001) also notes that face has helped to constitute and maintain the Chinese identity and the destiny of Chinese culture (76). Therefore, face is a key element in constituting and maintaining identity.In a study of middle-level business e*ecutives in Hong Kong, Redding and Ng (1982) note, “Strong feelings of satisfaction, pride, and enhanced confidence are associated with gaining face, whereas strong negative feelings of shame, worry, uneasiness, an*iety, and tension, difficulty in concentrating on work, and symptoms such as blushing are related to losing face (qtd. in Liu Liru: 15). Carbaugh (1994) states in his cultural munication model that face also involves some personal feelings which are e*pressed in the following phrases, giving mianzi, earning mianzi, rewarding mianzi and saving mianzi (17-45). Jia (2001) concluded that “lian/mian can be regarded as a practical concept consisting of both emotions and social actions, which can be called emotive actions or active emotions (26). Thus, face has great relation with emotions.According to the research achievement of cross-cultural researchers, “facework is a prevalent concept that e*ists in all cultures. Brown and Levinson (1978) argue that each social being has basic face wants, and every body knows others desires, so they try to work together to maintain each others face. And facework is “the actions taken to deal with the face-wants of one or the other (qtd. in Liu Liru: 16). Ting-Toomey describes facework as “an artful process of diffusing and managing self-focused emotions and other-focused emotions and specific verbal and nonverbal messages that help to maintain and restore face loss, and to uphold and honor face gain (190). So during conflict, facework functions a lot, alleviating or aggravating a conflict, protecting or damaging ones image and so forth.2.3 E*planations for Face DifferencesMost of the scholars in this field try to e*plain the differences of face between Eastern countries and Western countries in cultural conte*t. Generally speaking, there are following three e*planations stated by them.Firstly, the contrast of individualism and collectivism has long been considered a major factor to e*plain the differences. According to Ting-Toomey (1996), individualistic cultures focus more on self-face concern and maintenance while collectivistic cultures divide their emphasis on self-face, other-face and mutual face-concerns (190). Secondly, when talking about face issues, Ting-Toomey also uses low-conte*t and high-conte*t as one of the important e*planations (102). Edward T. Hall (1976) suggests that a high-conte*t munication is “one in which most of the information is either in the physical conte*t or internalized in the person while very little is in the coded, e*plicit, transmitted part of the message (79). On the contrary, a low-conte*t munication is “the mass of information which is vested in the e*plicit code (20). According to Hall (1983) and Ting-Toomey (1985), “a low conte*t munication prefers an individual value orientation, linear logic, direct verbal interaction, and an individualistic nonverbal style. The high conte*t munication prefers a group value orientation, spiral logic, indirect verbal interaction and a conte*tual nonverbal style (qtd. in Liu Liru: 8). Thirdly, in studying face issues, Ting-Toomey and Oetzel identify self-construal as one of the significant elements to e*plain the differences of face (197).Based on the preceding theoretical foundations, this paper aims at e*ploring the specific differences in face perception in Chinese and Western cultures from the aspect of meaning, recognition, e*tension and speech act, which are different from the general findings achieved by the previous scholars. z
展开阅读全文