《傲慢与偏见会话分析.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《傲慢与偏见会话分析.doc（29页珍藏版）》请在三一办公上搜索。
1、傲慢与偏见会话分析ContentsAbstract in English.IAbstract in Chinese.Chapter 1 Introduction.31.1 Research Questions.31.2 Significance of the Study.31.3 Thesis Organization .41.4 Research Methodology.41.5 Collection of Data5Chapter 2 Literature Review.6Chapter 3 Theoretical Framework.73.1Grices Cooperative Prin
2、ciple73.1.1 The Four Conversational Maxims.73.1.2 Flouting the Maxim.73.1.2.1 Flouts Exploiting the Maxim of Quality73.2.2.2 Flouts Exploiting the Maxim of Quantity.73.2.2.3 Flouts Exploiting the Maxim of Relevance.83.2.3.4 Flouts Exploiting the Maxim of Manner.83.2 Brown and Levinsons Politeness Th
3、eory93.2.1 The Notion of Face.93.2.2 Face Threatening Acts.103.2.3 Super Strategies for Performing the FTA.103.3 Summary.11Chapter 4 Case Analysis: Pride and Prejudice.124.1 Brief Introduction to Pride and Prejudice.124.2 Conversational Analysis in Pride and Prejudice.124.2.1 Violation of the Qualit
4、y Maxim in Pride and Prejudice124.2.1.1 Irony.134.2.1.2 Denying144.2.1.3 Metaphor.154.2.1.4 Rhetorical Question.164.2.2 Violation of the Quantity Maxim in Pride and Prejudice.174.2.2.1 Overstatemen174.2.2.2 Understatement 184.2.3 Violation of the Relevance Maxim in Pride and Prejudice.194.2.4 Violat
5、ion of the Manner Maxim in Pride and Prejudice.224.2.4.1 Being Ambiguous or Vague.224.2.4.2 Being out of Order234.2.4.3 Being Incomplete and Using Ellipsis.244.3 Summary.24Chapter 5 Conclusion.265.1 General SummaryMajor Findings of the Study.265.2 Contributions of the Study.265.3 Limitations of the
6、Study 27References.28Acknowledgements.29Chapter 1 IntroductionJane Austin, a English female writer in the Romanticism Age, has created 6 works, each of which is a huge success. She is distinguished for her marital views, treatment of character, the exquisite humour, narrative method and irony. The t
7、opic of feminism, religion as well as politics are also involved in the works.Pride and Prejudice, according to her sister Cassandras letter, is Jane Austins favourite work. For centuries, millions of people are fascinated by its lovely and moving love story, interesting characters, and humor. The c
8、onversations in Pride and Prejudice, noted for the employment of irony and satire, attract great interests and scrutiny. Jane Austen ia a master in dealing with dialogues. “She is one of the greatest,one of the most accurate writers of dialogue of her own or any age,” as Dr.Chapman claims (Lascelles
9、,1995:96; qtd. from Yang Liu 2003). These dialogues are perceived from the aspect of stylistics, history or philosophy. Compared with these conventional approaches, linguistics approach is still in its early stage. Thus, attempts in this thesis aims to make a full understanding of the characterizati
10、ons through conversational analysis. 1.1 Research QuestionsBased on the theoretical models and with the analysis of conversations in Pride and Prejudice, the present study intends to figure out the answers to the following questions:(1)What maxims in Grices Cooperative Principle are violated?(2)Why
11、are maxims in Pride and Prejudice violated?(3)What are the functions of these strategies for Performing the FTA?1.2 Significance of the StudyConversations, even in daily life, is a kind of art, not to mention in literature works. When people talk with each other, they tend to execute in a smooth way
12、 and cooperation is the basis of successful conversations. However, in daily life, the phenomena of violating maxims of cooperative priciples occurs at a high frequency. Most of the time, its for the sake of “face”. Through inference, the hearer can inteprate the implicatures and by making use of cu
13、mmunication strategies, the risk of face loss is lower with less conflicts and relations between the speakers and hearers can be maintained.1.3 Thesis OrganizationChapter one includes a brief introduction to the thesis topic, the language data, research methodology and the organization of the thesis
14、.Chapter two is devoted to literature review. It reviews what the previous study have done on the prominent novel.Chapter three is the theoretical framework, with the emphasis being placed on Grices CP and the implicature theory as well as Brown and Levinsons politeness theory, the FTAs.Chapter four
15、 is committed to the conversational analysis in Pride and Prejudice. Conversations that flout the CP and do the FTA indirectly are under investigation from the approach of the CP, Brown and Levinsons Politeness theory. The last chapter is the conclusion. A general summary is made and followed by the
16、 possible theoretical and practical significance with limitations. 1.4 Research MethodologyThe qualitative method is adopted in this study and the procedures are as follows:(1)To read the novel Pride and Prejudice as well as watch the movie at the same time, paying special attentions to conversation
17、s;(2)To extract interesting dialogues especially those with rhetorical devices from the novel;(3)To classify all these conversations into four categories according to the violations of cooperative principles;(4)To analyze how the maxims are violated;(5)To demonstrate the reasons of violations.1.5 Co
18、llection of DataAll the examples in the case study are extracted from the conversations in the Jane Austins novel Pride and Prejudice. And all these conversations are classified into four categories according to the violations of cooperative principles.Chapter 2 Literature ReviewPride and Prejudice
19、has gained wide readership and many people are fasicinated about it since its publication in 1813, its reputation in critical realm proceeds grudgingly and slowly. The early reviews only rest on” the loveliness of the characterization and the vigor of the writing in Pride and Prejudice”(Southam,1968
20、:6 qtd. from Yang Liu 2004).They offer readers merely outlines of the love story and character accounts.The criticism on Jane Austens novels makes considerable progress with the publication of the Memoir of Jane Austen in 1870 by her nephew Austen-Leigh. The interests in Jane Austen are awakened and
21、 serious discussion about the fiction is launched. Some experts made technical analysis about the fiction art: narrative, characters, plot etc. In the middle 1940s, the ironic implication of the dialogues which reflect and define the characters in Pride and Prejudice begins by Reuben A.Brower. Since
22、 then, many linguists have analyzed Pride and Prejudice from the perspective of pragmatics and expects to make possible contributions.Chapter 3 Theoretical framework:3.1Grices Cooperative PrincipleGrice(1975) propose the Coopreative Principle with the idea that people cooperate with each other in co
23、nversations and the theory runs as follows: Make your contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged. Grice suggests that in conversational interaction people work on the assumption that speakers a
24、nd hearers comply with the rules the CP defines in order to have a meaningful conversation, unless they receive the opposite indications. The CP has observed one regularity in conversation and is used to explain the generation and interpretation of conversational implicature (Thomas 1995:62).3.1.1 T
25、he Four Conversational MaximsThe Cooperative Principles include the following four maxims:The maxim of Quality:1) Do not say what you believe to be false.2) Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.The maxim of Quantity:1) Make your contribution as informative as is required for the curr
26、ent purpose of the exchange2) Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.The maxim of Relation:Make your contributions be relevant.The maxim of Manner:1) Avoid obscurity of expression.2) Avoid ambiguity3) Be brief(avoid unnecessary prolixity).4) Be orderly.(Yang Zhong 2006:98-99
27、)3.1.2 Flouting the MaximIn conversions, people are supposed to obey the above rules. However, more often than not, these maxims are violated and people tend to bahave in a non-cooperative way. Thus, the implicit, non-conventional meanings are generated. 3.1.2.1 Flouts Exploiting the Maxim of Qualit
28、yWhen a speaker says something that is false or for which he lacks adequate evidence, he flouts the maxim of Quality. Here is an example:Example :Jane: Sam has betray you.Jack: He is a good friend.Evidently, Jack is saying something obviously false so he is flouting the maxim of quality. Because a p
29、erson cant be in favor of someone who has ever betrayed him.3.1.3.2 Flouts Exploiting the Maxim of QuantityWhen a speaker offers more or less information than the situation requires, he flouts the maxim of Quantity. Here is an example:Example :Jack: Are you going to spend this weekend with me?Jane:
30、Im leaving for a northen city with my mother.In this case, the maxim of quantity is violated because the information Jane provides is not informative though the sentence seems to be long enough. Jane doesnt answer Jack directly whether she is going to spend the weekend with him or not. From the conv
31、ersational implication, Jack can easily understand the truth that Jane doesnt want to be with him.3.1.2.3 Flouts Exploiting the Maxim of RelevanceThe maxim of Relation is exploited by making a response which is completely irrelevant to the subject or the goal of the conversation. Take a look at the
32、following example:Father: Have you done your homework?Daughter: Wow, the TV opera is fantastic!The daughter has made a reply that seems unrelated to the question. She takes anvantage of the maxim of relevance and implies she wouldt like to be disturbed at the moment or she bothers to hear the word “
33、homework”.3.1.3.4 Flouts Exploiting the Maxim of MannerThe maxim of Manner is flouted by speaking redundantly, unclearly or disorderly. Look at the following example:Dad: Lets get the kid something to eat.Mom: Okay, but I veto I-C-E C-R-E-A-M! (Levinson 2001:104).Obviously, Mom infringes the maxim o
34、f manner by spelling out the word “ice-cream” in an effort not to have ice-creams in presence of the children. The Dad can derived the possible interpretation from certain context.3.2 Brown and Levinsons Politeness TheoryGrices theory paints a really rosy picture about conversation and human relatio
35、ns. However, the reality is tough and there are a multitude of conditions which people dont cooperate. Grices Cooperative Princlples is in a weak position to illustrate why people are so often flouting the maxims and indirectly convey what they really mean.Among various reasons, Grice points out tha
36、t a clash of maxims may lead to a compromise by holding one maxim while giving up another.The desire to make ones language interesting and increase its force may also lead to indirectness employment (Thomas 1995:145).The pragmatic interest in the communication of indirect speech acts, in particular,
37、 as well as the interest in the social-relation aspect of and situational constraints on information change, more generally, are at the basis of an intereat in the face and politeness phenomena. One entrance to the study of politeness phenomena can indeed be built around the observation that languag
38、e user often depart from the conditions of optimal information exchange because a failure to do so would result in an amount of lost face(Liu, Kang and Zhao 2009:49).Brown and Levinson have established the most influential theory about politeness in the book Politeness: some universals in language u
39、sage. They point out that in general, people cooperate (and assume each others cooperation ) in maintaining face in interaction, such cooperation being based on the mutual vulnerability of face (Brown and Livenson, qtd. from Chen Xinren 2009:129).3.2.1 The Notion of FaceThe concept “face” is borrowe
40、d from chinese culture and has something to do with the feeling of embarrassed and humiliated. Brown and Levinson (1978:62) define “face” as individuals self-worth or self-image,which can be maintained, damaged, or enhanced, through interaction with others, and further distinguish two kinds of face:
41、 positive facethe desire to be liked, approved, respected and appreciated by others, and negative facethe desire not to be imposed on in ones actions. In simple terms, negative face is the need to be independent and positive face is the need to be connected(Yule 2000:62).3.2.2 Face Threatening ActsA
42、ccording to Brown and Levinson, some illocutionary acts speakers perform are Face Threatening Acts (FTA for short) because they run contrary to either their own face wants or those of their hearers. And the FTAcan be categorized into four types:1) Acts threatening the hearers positive face by indica
43、ting the speakers lack of concern for the hearers self-image (e.g. disagreeing, criticism, accusations, insults, contradiction, boasts);2) Acts threatening the hearers negative face by imposing on the hearer (e.g. requests, orders, offers, expressions of anger);3) Acts threatening speakers negative
44、face (e.g. thanking, accepting offers, making unwilling promises);4) Acts threatening speakers positive face (e.g. apologies, confessions, admissions of responsibility) (Chen Xinren 2009:130-31).In conversational interaction speakers are sensitive about each others face. In order not to threaten fac
45、e or to reduce the degree of face damage, speakers may adopt certain strategies. These strategies are determined by the size of the FTA. Speakers can evaluate the size of the FTA on the basis of the parameters of power (P), distance(D), and rating of imposition(R). The overall weightiness of the FTA then in turn influences the strategies employed (Thomas,1995:169).3.2.3 Super Strategies for Per
