《生活大爆炸》中修辞性疑问句的语用研究文献综述

 2021-10-23 20:17:24

毕业论文课题相关文献综述

Introduction Each language has a stable interrogative system for users to ask questions in communication. Questions in English are generally divided into four types: Yes-No questions, wh-questions, choice questions and tag questions. The main function of these four types of questions is to satisfy the questioners need for information. But in actual communication, asking questions is often more than just to get information. People sometimes express their opinion by asking questions. For example, Do you take me for a fool?. In this question, it is obvious that the questioner does not mean to ask the listener whether he is a fool. The questioners implied meaning is that Im not a fool and dont lie to me. This type of question plays a rhetorical role and enhances the expressive ability of language, so it is called rhetorical question. Rhetorical questions have various forms in interpersonal communication and play an important role. Therefore, rhetorical question has been widely studied by scholars at home and abroad, who have studied rhetorical question from various perspectives, such as rhetoric, syntax and pragmatics. The research focus is on the application and embodiment of rhetoric in rhetorical questions, the syntactic patterns of rhetorical questions and the pragmatic functions of rhetorical questions in different contexts. Based on the previous research results, I will combine the interrogative form and pragmatic function of rhetorical questions in the present study.The Big Bang Theory is a famous life sitcom, which is popular for its vivid characters and humorous dialogue lines. This thesis will study the use of rhetorical questions in this sitcomand analyze the form and function of rhetorical questions of actors lines to shed light on the use of rhetorical questions in interpersonal communication.Literature Review Empirical evidence indicates that no real communication can take place without questions (Ilie, 2015: 1). Whether questions are explicit or implicit, direct or indirect, their significant role in communication can hardly be overlooked. Compared with other types of interrogative sentences, rhetorical questions may have more complicated interrogative patterns and pragmatic functions. Therefore, in recent decades the research on information-seeking questions and rhetorical questions have drawn more and more attention from researchers at home and abroad. Defining rhetorical questions:The study of rhetorical questions have a long history. Ilie (2015) stated that what we normally call questions, that is, utterances that are syntactically interrogative sentences, are often perceived by language users as seeking an answer and/or information. In other word, the questions that aim for answer are called standard questions. Requiring answer and information are often regarded as the basic and most common function of questions. However, not all interrogatives have this questioning function in actual communication. Apart from informative answers, questions may receive some other types of responses, such as answers of confirmation, permission- granting, suggestion acceptance, and so on. Questions that fulfill other functions than requesting information or explicit answers are often called nonstandard questions. In general, those nonstandard questions are grouped into rhetorical questions.Characteristics of rhetorical questions: In this subsection, I will explore two characteristics of rhetorical questions. First, the difference between form and function. Gao Linxing(2016) argued that rhetorical questions are questions in form but not in meaning and rhetorical questions usually aim to emphasize or express a particular feeling such as invitation, advice, appreciate and boredom. The second characteristic is that the answer to rhetorical questions are often implicit, and it could also be in the form of question. In the thesis of Some Pragmatic Implication of The Use of YES and No in Response to YES-NO Questions, M.A. Yadugiri (1986). expressed that the formulation of response to yes-no questions depends not only on whether the answerer intends to affirm or negate the proposition put forward in the question but also on the pragmatic implications of the affirmation and negation of certain types of propositions are different, yes and no when used in response to yes-no questions which have some presuppositions are not equivalent. Hu Jiamin(2006) studied the linguistic phenomenon of rhetorical questions as the answer in response. Using relevance theory and politeness principle, she made a comparative analysis of this special linguistic phenomenon, and compared the different effects of rhetorical questions between acquaintances and strangers. The results show that the use of rhetorical questions as responses between acquaintances can produce positive effects, while may produce negative effects between strangers.Functions of rhetorical questions:Athansiadou (1991) studied the modes and functions of questions. He found that questions are not only about information. Different patterns of asking can reflect the connection between the questioner and the questioned, and the various function of the question have relation to the roles of both sides of question. His research method is to analyze the questioners intentions and the influence of the question on both questioner and answerer according to the dialog database, which comes from some people with different social relations. What he concluded is that the use of rhetorical assumptions can reflect social relations, which is a special pragmatic function. Besides, In the study of Eugene E(1999), rhetorical questions can express speakers illocutionary act including command, tentative statements and evaluations. By analyzing the use of rhetorical question in different filed including context-specific questioning practices, political interaction, broadcast interviews, legal settings and medical settings, Cornelia Ilie(2015) concluded that Such nonstandard questions always serve a rhetorical function. thesestudies make me initially understand the function of rhetorical questions and the difference between rhetorical questions and ordinary questions. In addition, Cornelia Ilie(1994,1998,1999) investigated the argumentative function of question and response in talk shows and he found that the framing of questions and response are central to the talk show structure and is particularly effective in indicating the show guests' personal and professional lives, while at the same time revealing the show host's personality. Next, I will introduce several researches of the pragmatic functions of rhetorical questions by several domestic scholars. Chen Yuanqing(2001) made a preliminary analysis of the pragmatic functions of rhetorical questions by combining the static sentence pattern and dynamic context, focusing on the relationship among the forms, pragmatic functions and effects. Then she found that in specific context, under certain conditions, the commonality of interrogative question is weakened and personal expression is enhanced, which constitutes the special meaning of rhetorical questions. Yao Jianpeng(2006) conducted multi-dimensional analysis of the definition, syntactic features, pragmatic functions and translation of rhetorical questions, he also found that rhetorical questions have rich pragmatic functions and distinctive features in sentence transformation, illocutionary behavior and translation practice. Cheng Mingxia(2007) also expressed the similar opinion in the thesis Analysis of Rhetorical Questions from the Perspective of Pragmatic. She concluded that the proper use of rhetorical questions is an important condition for people to communicate successfully. Rhetorical question helps us avoid the embarrassment and unhappiness caused by direct expression, and at the same time makes our views more acceptable to the other side, thus achieving the purpose of communication. On the pragmatic analysis of rhetorical question, Wang Xiangfeng and Tang Yuting(2013) studied the pragmatic functions of rhetorical questions from the perspective of speech act theory and found that rhetorical questions can achieve better communicative effects, such as expressing politeness, developing topics, creating humorous atmosphere and promoting reasoning. Li Lihong(2011) commented on the language features of The Big Bang Theory from the perspective of linguistics, and analyzed the source of humor by using the cooperative principle of pragmatics. He also made a comparative analysis of the precise scientific language and the fuzzy language in daily life, and finally found that sometimes the violation of the principle of cooperation and the use of fuzzy language is more conducive to interpersonal communication. There is also another researcher, Lin Ya (2015) studied the language features and pragmatic of The Big Bang Theory based on the principle of cooperation. They both analyze the language feature of The Big Bang Theory by using the principle of cooperation. As a reference, I will also study the relation between the principle of cooperation and rhetorical questions. From the above literature, we can see that scholars have studied the form and functions of rhetorical questions from various perspectives and have come up with some insightful and inspiring conclusions. However, we can also discover that only very few researchers have attempted to associate the pattern and functions of rhetorical questions with character traits. So, based on previous studies on the rhetorical questions and the analysis of The Big Bang Theorys language features, I will make a correlation analysis on the personality characteristics of people in The Big Bang Theory and the rhetorical questions they use.ReferencesAthanasiadou, A (1991). The discourse function of questions. Pragmatics 1(1),107-122.Ilie, C., (1994). What else can I tell you? A pragmatic study of English rhetorical questions as dis- cursive and argumentative acts. Stockholm, Sweden: Almqvist 135.Ilie, C., (1999). Question response argumentation in talk shows. Journal of Pragmatics, 31(8), 975 999. Ilie, C., (2015). Question and questioning. Published on line.Loos, E.E., (1999) Glossary of Linguistic Terms. Yaduglri, M.A., (1986). Some pragmatic implications of the use of YO and NO in response to YES -NO questions. Journal of Pragmatics 10, 199-210.陈元琴（2001），浅谈修辞性疑问句，东疆学刊,18（4）:99。

程明霞（2007），从语用学视角解析修辞性疑问句，《牡丹江师范学院学报》，142:73-75。

高灵新（2016），略谈英语修辞疑问句，燕山大学校报,4（3）:14-16。

李丽红（2011），美剧 《生活大爆炸》 语言评析，《电影文学》，7:121-123。

林雅（2015），美剧 《生活大爆炸》语言特色分析，5:5-7。

沈彤（1998），《修辞格的运用与合作原则的违反》。

哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社。

许小纯（1998），修辞性问句语用例析，《广州师范学报：社会科学版》，19（8）：10-12。

姚剑鹏（2006），修辞疑问句的多维分析，《大学英语》，1（3）：197-201。

剩余内容已隐藏，您需要先支付 10元 才能查看该篇文章全部内容！立即支付

以上是毕业论文文献综述，课题毕业论文、任务书、外文翻译、程序设计、图纸设计等资料可联系客服协助查找。

您可能感兴趣的文章