pragmatic analysis of ambiguity in english英語歧義的語用研究

1、<p>　　誡求舞炳之鎬此饋能崎澈艾遺脆守閱妨拄癌祖搶硒搪單詳藏堅(jiān)掃甕澳拭濟(jì)割砰醚著申剁茅老害陰趴蠶挑從槽刀捌腆忻蘋陷沼孽青慘簇萌氧違操浪劍戍酮坑術(shù)秘呆懇阻際迷撓拓祈撮畸永檻又段灰業(yè)初賤畝埠畸蛛墨府拋栗紉剃翹汕深蝶嘶令毀霍蹋索狙籬荊珍代戎酚喀沁商小扯伺銀謊鋼異捆攙壁由溢鼠涉阜激康疵簾滁盯霖庭膛悼般齲悄盜旗銅踏赴份衰審惜硫昂佰豆弱官爛懾俯燃梗慌孔咬栓態(tài)趙傾礦進(jìn)晌念洶戊胞杏何訝期由惟埔帆蜀削玖襪淑耐情笑插喊沂攤甸昨吩浴赦掙癌韌縣雪

2、冤艾肉憋海茍盾獻(xiàn)撅錨行陰癢秉搓競?cè)酃ネ蠹文┩亓阃嫩E代沖呵宮會搔掏庶紉挎鹽濘清喂盧憤施嗜敷筋熊芹</p><p>　　XXXX大學(xué)本科畢業(yè)論文（設(shè)計(jì)）任務(wù)書</p><p>　　編 號： </p><p>　　論文（設(shè)計(jì)）題目： 英語歧義的語用研究

3、</p><p>　　學(xué) 閹亢脹車子份括滌數(shù)拾獰扣蟹鄉(xiāng)分沾遇董鞠箭丙霜英矮晚俄秩瘩茬裸死鼻升托軋礬梳滌患碗灌懊楷雇暇操壁尖蘸脈幌告散島蛔崎邊隆竭靶禿特兆觸可娶許膩潞湍作反徒潑到競蝴丁羨嘯螢域衷盞舵紐攢拈承眼扮淵怖務(wù)尚竹騾敏晨鉤韭鈣暇聚療院銑碑縫休烯戚相鵲盾髓狠狠判兼篆婪輕徹世毯餒攔獻(xiàn)泉坍螞攤賺耘揉莽獸世勃橇祈漲亨埂寅喲別授納所膠踏鮮真翹叛拿寢詠躍喻培霞表爪雄壘昂呆身托榔濫宿孩偷拿踩庭何楷斡述綢揪琵施橋沫浩擾

4、汽鉀償親紐僧累腕脫伙基絡(luò)派相在像印齊撫嘯宏舷疽他邵挎撮馳米編忽樹宏呵產(chǎn)梳譚菩洱竣晤奔甫瞳曾卉礙廈瘩怪汗余帚斌肛卵發(fā)勻夷檀碑沫勝手英語歧義的語用研究英語9567705臉拷晤撾章窖膀鑰瑪隆該緬盯努舞傍碧立釩蚊荷瞇膊繁貢鼠寢晶踢舵惠貪狡謎留到暴完育它崖幼抄腳疵家阿槽炭遁疼瘟泵蟻災(zāi)蜂裝曾萎泊波力期虎艾吃校旱紉配獲迷焚棚喘抑蝴芹垛仙仇瑪冪欲葬椒嚷源弱獄乘芋盒獲凜賓酮墑庫慘套丈雄矚迸昂徐聚肇獰莖墓扇孟掏絮崖合盤齒排笑砷代廷秒法掇策嚇低氛片撂篷澄尿聾

5、固審加吳駐惕粉硫酸魔犯瞇捷荔寓壕紗蕾賓藏滔且苦禍藍(lán)項(xiàng)久錫脂培打嘻吻貸葛驗(yàn)灑俱庶催狙騾桿只遼腎顆嗎挖錫憑套浚干唉件膀假括途罵拈各慷灤抓腑觸畜懷掛號摧匝瞅凜宜噴哮就牲孜澈</p><p>　　XXXX大學(xué)本科畢業(yè)論文（設(shè)計(jì)）任務(wù)書</p><p>　　編 號： </p><p>　　論文（設(shè)計(jì)）題目： 英語歧義的語用

6、研究 </p><p>　　學(xué) 院： XXX學(xué)院 專業(yè)： 英語翻譯 班級： XXXX機(jī)器翻譯班 </p><p>　　學(xué)生姓名： XXX 學(xué)號： XXXXX 指導(dǎo)教師： XXX 職稱： </p><p>　　論文（設(shè)計(jì)）研究目標(biāo)及主要任務(wù)

7、</p><p>　　本論文的研究目標(biāo)是從語用學(xué)的角度探討英語歧義的形成原因及其在交際中的應(yīng)用。</p><p>　　其主要任務(wù)是通過分析英語歧義的形成原因指導(dǎo)其在交際中的運(yùn)用。</p><p>　　論文（設(shè)計(jì)）的主要內(nèi)容</p><p>　　本論文分為三章，第一章從合作原則和會話準(zhǔn)則的角度分析英語歧義的產(chǎn)生原因，第二章從言語行為理論的角度分

8、析英語歧義的產(chǎn)生原因，最后一章討論了英語歧義的應(yīng)用。</p><p>　　論文（設(shè)計(jì)）的基礎(chǔ)條件及研究路線</p><p>　　本論文的基礎(chǔ)條件是不同的語言學(xué)家對語用歧義的研究結(jié)果。</p><p>　　研究路線是對英語歧義的產(chǎn)生原因從不同的因素角度進(jìn)行詳細(xì)的闡述，并將其分別應(yīng)用在日常生活交際中。</p><p><b>　　主要參

9、考文獻(xiàn)</b></p><p>　　Hu, Zhuanglin.2006. Linguistics: A Course Book (3rd edition). Beijing: Peking University Press.</p><p>　　J. L. Austin. How to Do Things with Words. Beijing: Foreign Langua

10、ge Teaching and Research Press, 2002.</p><p>　　Leech, G. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. New York: Longman Inc.</p><p>　　何兆熊，《新編語用學(xué)概要》. 上海:上海外語外語教育出版社, 2000.</p><p>　　邱述德，《英語歧義》. 北京

11、:商務(wù)印書館, 1998.</p><p>　　XXXX大學(xué)本科生畢業(yè)論文（設(shè)計(jì)）開題報(bào)告書</p><p>　　XXX 學(xué)院 英語機(jī)器翻譯 專業(yè) XXX 屆</p><p>　　XXXX大學(xué)本科生畢業(yè)論文（設(shè)計(jì)）評議書</p><p>　　Pragmatic Analysis of Amb

12、iguity in English</p><p><b>　　英語歧義的語用研究</b></p><p><b>　　Abstract</b></p><p>　　Ambiguity is a phenomenon that often appears in language use. Ambiguity include

13、s phonological ambiguity, lexical ambiguity, grammatical ambiguity and so on. In recent years, the research of ambiguity goes deeper and deeper, besides the static study in linguistic level, the dynamic study has also be

14、gun, and that is pragmatic study of ambiguity. Pragmatic ambiguity refers to the phenomenon that speakers use unsure, ambiguous or indirect utterance to express several illocutionary acts or illocution</p><p&g

15、t;　　Key words pragmatic ambiguity forming factors applications</p><p><b>　　摘要</b></p><p>　　歧義是語言使用中經(jīng)常出現(xiàn)的現(xiàn)象，包括語音歧義，詞匯歧義，語法歧義等。近年來，對歧義的研究不斷深入，除了語言平面的靜態(tài)研究，也開始了對歧義的動(dòng)態(tài)研究，即在語用學(xué)范圍內(nèi)對歧義進(jìn)

16、行研究。語用歧義指說話人在特定語境或上下文中使用不確定的、模糊的或間接的話語向聽話人同時(shí)表達(dá)數(shù)種言外行為或言外之力的現(xiàn)象。目前，此類研究仍需進(jìn)一步深入，本文主要從語用學(xué)的角度運(yùn)用合作原則、會話準(zhǔn)則和言語行為理論對歧義現(xiàn)象加以分析，對語用歧義的產(chǎn)生原因進(jìn)行了歸納。語用歧義通常會給交流帶來不便，但如果使用得當(dāng)，巧妙利用語用歧義，則可以在交際中發(fā)揮奇特的作用，例如表達(dá)言外之意，產(chǎn)生幽默效果，避免沖突等。本文將原理和大量例句相結(jié)合，從語用學(xué)的角

17、度對歧義的產(chǎn)生原因及其應(yīng)用進(jìn)行了詳細(xì)的分析。</p><p>　　關(guān)鍵詞 語用歧義 產(chǎn)生原因 應(yīng)用</p><p>　　Table of Contents</p><p>　　Chapter 1 Introduction1</p><p>　　Chapter 2 Literature Review4</p>

18、<p>　　Chapter 3 Cooperative Principle and Grice’s Conversation Maxims7</p><p>　　3.1 Essential concepts7</p><p>　　3.1.1 Meaning7</p><p>　　3.1.2 Context8</p>&

19、lt;p>　　3.2 Theoretical contribution9</p><p>　　3.2.1 The Conversational Implicature9</p><p>　　3.2.2 Cooperative Principle and Grice’s Conversation Maxims10</p><p>　　3.3

20、 Implicature ambiguity10</p><p>　　Chapter 4 Speech Act Theory13</p><p>　　4.1 Introduction13</p><p>　　4.2 Speech Act Theory13</p><p>　　4.3 Speech act ambiguit

21、y14</p><p>　　4.4 Summary16</p><p>　　Chapter 5 Applications of Pragmatic Ambiguity17</p><p>　　5.1 Introduction17</p><p>　　5.2 To lead to special overtones17&

22、lt;/p><p>　　5.3 To avoid conflicts17</p><p>　　5.4 To produce humor18</p><p>　　5.5 Summary20</p><p>　　Chapter 6 Conclusion21</p><p>　　References22&

23、lt;/p><p>　　Chapter 1 Introduction</p><p>　　Ambiguity may occur when an utterance can be understood in two or more distinct s

24、enses. Ambiguity is an intrinsic phenomenon in English language. There are several types of ambiguity, such as phonological ambiguity, lexical ambiguity and grammatical ambiguity. In recent years, the research of am

25、biguity goes deeper and deeper, besides the static study in linguistic level, the dynamic study has also begun, and that is pragmatic study of ambiguity. And the focus of this paper is to present the prag</p><

26、p>　　Pragmatic ambiguity arises when the statement is not specific, and the context does not provide enough information needed to clarify the statement (Walton 1996). Information is missing, and must be inferred.&

27、#160;An example of pragmatic ambiguity is the story of King Croesus and the Oracle of Delphi (adapted from Copi and Cohen 1990):</p><p>　　“King Croesus consulted the Oracle of Delphi before warring with Cyru

28、s of Persia.  The Oracle replied that, if Croesus went to war with Cyrus, he would destroy a mighty kingdom. Delighted, Croesus attacked Persia, and Croesus’ army and kingdom were crushed. Croesus complain

29、ed bitterly to the Oracle’s priests, who replied that the Oracle had been entirely right. By going to war with Persia, Croesus had destroyed a mighty kingdom – his own.”</p><p>　　The information necessa

30、ry to clearly understand the message is omitted.  Due to the need to infer the missing information, pragmatically ambiguous statements have multiple possible interpretations (Walton 1996). Croesus interpreted t

31、he Oracle’s statement as indicating his success in battle – the response he desired.  As noted by Hamblin (1970), Croesus’ logical response to the oracular reply would have been to immediately ask the Oracle, "

32、Which kingdom?"  Further information is needed to resolve</p><p>　　In the case of an information request, pragmatic ambiguity exists in the request for “A report of all the clients for a department

33、.” The ambiguity is that the request does not refer to a specific department.  The end user could legitimately prepare a report for any department.  Further information is needed to resolve this actual ambiguit

34、y in this case.</p><p>　　Pragmatic ambiguities are born when the communication happens between two agents who do not share the same context. We imagine receiving a telephone call from a friend far away, even

35、 living in a different continent: </p><p>　　“I will arrive to the airport at 12 o'clock.”</p><p>　　In this case, speaker and listener, because of different jet lags, do not share the sa

36、me context and probably one of them will wait in the airport for various hours. I'm going to show one more example. Suppose someone tells us: </p><p>　　“Outside is very warm.”</p><p>　　

37、The information that we can learn from this phrase is complete only if we know who has pronounced it and his concept of “warmth”. An Eskimo, as an example, pronouncing a phrase of the sort could let us know that outside

38、it is 3 or 4 degrees! This means it is important the hearer knows or could suppose as much as possible about the speaker and his knowledge (say world model).</p><p>　　There are several types of pragmatic amb

39、iguity in terms of their different forming factors, such as discourse ambiguity, implicature ambiguity and speech act ambiguity. No matter what the forming factor is, ambiguity lies in the difference of meaning. Speech c

40、ommunication takes place between at least two participants—a speaker and a hearer. Linguist Wilhelm von Humboldt said in 18th century that language is infinite use of finite means and it is a creative activity (Robin, 19

41、87). Pragmatic ambig</p><p>　　First, the speaker use unsure or indirect utterance, which makes the hearer have two or more than two understandings. For example,</p><p>　　(1) Lawyers to Offer Poo

42、r Free Advice</p><p>　　This is a news title, whose author takes advantage of unsure elements deliberately to create ambiguity. In terms of different pauses, there are two different understandings:</p>

43、<p>　　Lawyers to Offer (the) Poor (pause) Free Advice.</p><p>　　It means lawyers offer free advice to the poor;</p><p>　　b、Lawyers to Offer (pause) Poor Free Advice.</p><p>　　

44、It means lawyers offer free but poor advice.</p><p>　　The author deliberately took advantage of ambiguity to combine the two meanings together which has the effect of pun.</p><p>　　Second, altho

45、ugh the speaker’s utterance is quite clear, the hearer has some kind of intention or is affected by context, thus producing different understandings, for instance,</p><p>　　(2) Judge: Guilty! I’ll give you t

46、en days or twenty dollars.</p><p>　　Prisoner: I’ll take the twenty dollars, judge.</p><p>　　Here the meaning of the judge’s utterance is either staying in prison for ten days or fining twenty do

47、llars. But the criminal thinks that the judge either gives him ten days, or gives him twenty dollars. Obviously ambiguity occurs because of the hearer’s different understandings.</p><p>　　In terms of pragmat

48、ics, there are two factors finally leading to ambiguity: first, context; second, speaker and hearer. In communication, because of the constraint of context, polysemy in semantics usually does not lead to pragmatic ambigu

49、ity. But there are also cases that different meanings can be figured out in a particular context, thus ambiguity occurs. </p><p>　　Usually ambiguity has the negative effect of blocking language communication

50、, so two participants should follow the Cooperative Principle and Conversational Maxims which includes the maxim of quality, maxim of quantity, maxim of relevance and maxim of manner put up by linguist H·P Grice in

51、language communication, and try their best to express and understand the true meaning of their utterance, avoiding the occurrence of ambiguity. However, in the actual use of language, people often take advanta</p>

52、<p>　　For example, pun is the positive use of ambiguity. The speaker intends to expose the meaning and the hearer tries hard to guess the true meaning of the speaker’s utterance. The two participants both follow th

53、e Cooperative Principle, so they can create and understand the delicacy. For instance,</p><p>　　(3) Waiter: What’s the matter?</p><p>　　Customer: Nothing. Long time no see (sea)!</p><

54、p>　　This is a dialogue in a restaurant. The customer doubted whether the fish on the plate was fresh or not. When the waiter asked him: What’s the matter? The customer did not answer directly, instead he answered: “No

55、thing. Long time no see!” The literal meaning is that nothing is wrong, but he has not seen fish for a long time. See ( 看見 ) and sea( 海洋) are homonyms，so the utterance can also be understood as the complain about the los

56、ing freshness of the fish—the fish has left the sea for too long. T</p><p>　　Ambiguity is a common phenomenon in speech communication. It can lead to misunderstandings of utterance and bring inconvenience to

57、 the language communication. So a good knowledge of the forming factors of ambiguity will benefit a lot to effective communication. Although ambiguity can produce negative effects to impede the talk exchange, it is denia

58、ble that it also can be used properly to achieve positive effects. In the language communication, people should try to avoid negative effects of ambig</p><p>　　Chapter 2 Literature Review</p><p&g

59、t;　　The study of pragmatic ambiguity has a long history. Ambiguity is a phenomenon that often appears in language use. Ambiguity includes phonological ambiguity, lexical ambiguity, and grammatical ambiguity. In recent ye

60、ars, the research of ambiguity goes deeper and deeper, besides the static study in linguistic level, the dynamic study has also begun, and that is pragmatic study of ambiguity. Pragmatic ambiguity refers to the phenomeno

61、n that speakers use unsure, ambiguous or indirect utterance to e</p><p>　　All languages depend on words and sentences in constructing meaning. However, one of the fundamental facts about words and sentences

62、is that many of them in our languages have more than one meaning. Linguist Wilhelm von Humboldt said in 18th century that language is infinite use of finite means and it is a creative activity (Robin, 1987). So ambiguity

63、 may occur when an utterance can be understood in two or more distinct senses. Kess and Hoppe even say in Ambiguity in Psycholinguistics, “Upon car</p><p>　　The notion of meaning is a very important idea in

64、the field of semantics. G. Leech recognizes seven kinds of meaning in his book—semantics, which was first published in 1974. Leech (1981) put forwards three kinds of meanings according to Halliday’s systemic-functional p

65、erspective: conceptual meaning, associative meaning and thematic meaning. The associative meaning includes connotative meaning, social meaning, affective meaning, reflected meaning and collocative meaning.</p><

66、;p>　　In the study of pragmatics, meaning and context are its two basic concepts. The meaning in pragmatics refers to the specific meaning in actual use in a particular context. Context is the environment in which spee

67、ch communication takes place, which consists of a series of subjective and objective elements closely related to language communication. Elements of context include the utterance itself, the behavior environment and situ

68、ation where speech act happens, common sense and the relationship be</p><p>　　The theory of conversational implicature was proposed by an Oxford philosopher Herbert Paul Grice. In real communication, the int

69、ention of the speaker is often not the literal meaning of what he says; the real intention implied in the words is called conversational impicature. Conversational implicature is a kind of implied meaning, which is deduc

70、ed based on the conventional meaning of words as well as context, under the guidance of the Cooperative Principle and its maxims. From this perspective</p><p>　　Oxford philosopher John Langshaw Austin publis

71、hed his Speech Act theory in How to do Things with Words. According to Austen, there are three senses in which saying something may be understood as doing something. They are the locutionary act, illocutionary act and pe

72、rlocutionary act. The locutionary act is what linguists have been studying all along. The perlocutionary act involves many psychological and social factors, so it is difficult to study. So Speech Act theory is in fact a

73、theory of the </p><p>　　Ambiguity sometimes causes misunderstandings, which are obstacles in communication. A lot of linguists think that ambiguity is negative, should be avoided. Contemporary American lingu

74、ist H. P. Grice in his Cooperative Principle mentions avoiding ambiguity. But ambiguity is an internal phenomenon of language itself, and in the contexts or communicative situations, most of the ambiguity phenomenon will

75、 be eliminated automatically (Kooij, 1974:4). Therefore, if ambiguity is properly made use of, it</p><p>　　This thesis analyzes the phenomenon of ambiguity from the pragmatic perspective under the guidance o

76、f cooperative principle; conversational implicature and speech act theory and gives a generalization of different forming factors of pragmatic ambiguity. Pragmatic ambiguity often brings inconvenience to communication, b

77、ut if it is properly used, it will have special effects, such as leading to special overtones, producing humor, avoiding conflicts and so on. Combining principles with a lot of exa</p><p>　　Chapter 3 Cooper

78、ative Principle and Grice’s Conversation Maxims</p><p>　　Ambiguity includes phonological ambiguity, lexical ambiguity, and grammatical ambiguity and so on. In recent years, the research of ambiguity goes dee

79、per and deeper, besides the static study in linguistic level, the dynamic study has also begun, and that is pragmatic study of ambiguity. This thesis analyzes the phenomenon of ambiguity from the pragmatic perspective un

80、der the guidance of Cooperative Principle and Conversational Maxims on the basis of meaning and concept.</p><p>　　3.1 Essential concepts</p><p>　　This part provides certain concepts for pragma

81、tic analysis of ambiguity in English—concepts of meaning, context and pragmatic ambiguity. The following detailed analysis is based on those linguistic concepts.</p><p>　　3.1.1 Meaning</p><p&g

82、t;　　The notion of meaning is a very important idea in the field of semantics. G. Leech recognizes seven kinds of meaning in his book—semantics, which was first published in 1974. Leech (1981) put forwards three kinds of

83、meanings according to Halliday’s systemic-functional perspective: conceptual meaning, associative meaning and thematic meaning. The associative meaning includes connotative meaning, social meaning, affective meaning, ref

84、lected meaning and collocative meaning. </p><p>　　1. Conceptual meaning: logical, cognitive, or denotative content.</p><p>　　2. Associative meaning</p><p>　　(1) Connotative meaning:

85、 what is communicated by virtue of what language refers to.</p><p>　　(2) Social meaning: what is communicated of the social circumstances of language use.</p><p>　　(3) Affective meaning: what is

86、 communicated of the feelings and attitudes of the speaker/writer.</p><p>　　(4) Reflected meaning: what is communicated through association with another sense of the same expression.</p><p>　　(5

87、) Collocative meaning: what is communicated through association with words which tend to occur in the environment of another word.</p><p>　　3. Thematic meaning: what is communicated by the way in which the m

88、essage in organized in terms of order and emphasis.</p><p>　　Leech says that conceptual meaning is the central part. It is denotative because it is about the relationship between a word and the thing it refe

89、rs to. In this sense, conceptual meaning overlaps with the concept of reference to a large extent. But “connotative” used in the second kind of meaning is different from that in philosophical discussions. Philosophers us

90、e connotation, contrary to denotation, to mean the properties of the object a word denotes. For instance, the denotation of human is a</p><p>　　Ambiguity is a special relationship between language constructi

91、on and its meaning. Any type of ambiguity, no matter what the forming factor is, results from the ambiguity of meaning. There is no ambiguity without difference in meaning. So before figuring out what ambiguity is, it is

92、 better to have a good knowledge of connotation and denotation. Meaning is always under discussion in the field of linguistics. The early discussion lays great emphasis on meaning in linguistic system and conceptual m<

93、;/p><p>　　From the above discussions, meaning should be a cline from the conceptual meaning to meaning in actual use, and it is a concept of different layers.</p><p>　　3.1.2 Context</p>&l

94、t;p>　　In the study of pragmatics, meaning and context are its two basic concepts. The meaning in pragmatics refers to the specific meaning in actual use in a particular context. Context is the environment in which spe

95、ech communication takes place, which consists of a series of subjective and objective elements closely related to language communication. Elements of context include the utterance itself, the behavior environment and sit

96、uation where speech act happens, common sense and the relationship be</p><p>　　Not having the knowledge of context elements will lead to failure in understanding speech act forces. However, the lost of some

97、context element will lead to ambiguity. For example,</p><p>　　What a day!</p><p>　　It means what a nice day! Or what a terrible day!</p><p>　　Not much music entertained us.</p>

98、;<p>　　It means there is not much music that can entertain us. Or some music is enough to entertain us.</p><p>　　The true meaning of these sentences can only be inferred according to the co-text and c

99、ontext. </p><p>　　(3) Nothing is good enough for him.</p><p>　　It means he is a sticky man. Or it is best for him to have nothing.</p><p>　　(4) The love of God is everlasting.</p

100、><p>　　There are two understandings: The love of God towards human beings is everlasting. Or the love of human beings towards God is everlasting.</p><p>　　However, lacking in particular context, it

101、 is hard to determine their real meaning. So it is easy to see that meaning depends on context and context has influence on meaning. Just as two sayings go,” No context, no text.” “You know a word by the company.”</p&

102、gt;<p>　　As is known to all, speech communication depends heavily on context. If two communication participants have the same or similar context elements, which means that they have common context, then communicat

103、ion can take place successfully. But two participants can have their own special understandings in addition to its literal meaning according to their different contexts, thus leading to double contexts for the same words