英語(yǔ)教育畢業(yè)論文淺談?wù)J知語(yǔ)境在語(yǔ)用推理中的作用

1、<p><b>　　漳州師范學(xué)院</b></p><p><b>　　畢業(yè)論文</b></p><p>　　A Brief Analysis on the Cognitive Context of Pragmatic Inference in the Verbal Communication</p><p>　　

2、淺談?wù)J知語(yǔ)境在語(yǔ)用推理中的作用</p><p>　　姓 名： </p><p>　　學(xué) 號(hào)： </p><p>　　系 別： 外語(yǔ)系 </p><p>　　專(zhuān) 業(yè)： 英語(yǔ)教育 </p><p>　　

3、年 級(jí)： 2007級(jí) </p><p>　　指導(dǎo)教師： </p><p>　　2010 年 12 月 30日</p><p><b>　　Abstract</b></p><p>　　Communication is one of the most widespr

4、ead social phenomena of human beings. The communication conducted through language is called verbal communication. Verbal communication is a highly context-dependent dynamic interactive process. The traditional study of

5、context emphasizes the functions of the external world in communication from the static perspective but neglects the mental activity of human beings and the dynamic nature of communication, so it is static and can not ex

6、plain the dynamic pr</p><p>　　Key Words: cognitive context; verbal communication; pragmatic inference</p><p><b>　　摘 要</b></p><p>　　交際是人類(lèi)最普遍的社會(huì)現(xiàn)象之一，通過(guò)語(yǔ)言進(jìn)行的交際稱(chēng)為語(yǔ)言交際。交際是基于語(yǔ)

7、境的動(dòng)態(tài)過(guò)程，而傳統(tǒng)語(yǔ)境觀將其視為靜態(tài)，忽視了人在交際時(shí)內(nèi)心世界的作用及交際的動(dòng)態(tài)特征，因而無(wú)法對(duì)這一動(dòng)態(tài)過(guò)程予以詮釋。所以本文立足于關(guān)聯(lián)理論框架，嘗試從認(rèn)知語(yǔ)境的角度研究語(yǔ)言交際，并將認(rèn)知知語(yǔ)境置于明示——推理這一動(dòng)態(tài)的,不斷發(fā)展的交際模式中進(jìn)行解析。本文闡述了語(yǔ)境和認(rèn)知語(yǔ)境的概念，結(jié)合一些典型的日常交際例子，嘗試對(duì)語(yǔ)言交際提出自己的見(jiàn)解，從說(shuō)話者和聽(tīng)話者雙方的角度探討認(rèn)知語(yǔ)境在語(yǔ)言交際中的作用。</p><p&g

8、t;　　關(guān)鍵詞:認(rèn)知語(yǔ)境；語(yǔ)言交際；語(yǔ)用推理</p><p><b>　　Contents</b></p><p>　　AbstractI</p><p>　　1.Introduction1</p><p>　　2.Context and cognitive context1</p><p>

9、;　　2.1 Traditional views on context1</p><p>　　2.2 Cognitive context2</p><p>　　2.2.1 Definition of cognitive context2</p><p>　　2.2.2 Characteristics of cognitive context3</p&g

10、t;<p>　　2.2.3 Relevance Theory and cognitive context4</p><p>　　3. Cognitive context of language inference in verbal communication4</p><p>　　3.1 Verbal communication4</p><p&g

11、t;　　3.2 Roles of the speaker’s cognitive context5</p><p>　　3.2.1 Guiding the appropriateness of presentation6</p><p>　　3.2.2 Enhancement of ostension7</p><p>　　3.2.3 Enlargement

12、of contextual effects8</p><p>　　3.3 Roles of the hearer’s cognitive context8</p><p>　　3.3.1 Strengthening the effectiveness of interpretation9</p><p>　　3.3.2 Enhancement of infer

13、ence10</p><p>　　4. Conclusions11</p><p>　　References12</p><p>　　Acknowledgement13</p><p>　　1. Introduction </p><p>　　Communication is one of the most c

14、ommon social phenomena, and it is a function that one learns to do as one travels through life. If we communicate with others by language, that is called verbal communication. So, to investigate the verbal communication

15、is inevitable, urgent and meaningful. Actually, much research work has been done on the verbal communication by both domestic and abroad scholars. Scholars tried their best to analyze the factors that play key roles in a

16、 successful verbal communi</p><p>　　In linguistic study, cognitive context plays an important role and has become a hot topic in recent decades. More scholars, such as the abroad scholars: Sperber and Wilson

17、, the domestic scholar Xiong Xueliang, found cognitive context is a crucial factor in the verbal communication, which is further development of traditional context. Since verbal communication is a highly context-dependen

18、t dynamic interactive process, this thesis aims to analyze communication from the aspect of cognitive context</p><p>　　Chapter One is a brief introduction to this paper. Another aim of this chapter is to mak

19、e a better understanding of this paper and show the significances of this thesis.</p><p>　　Chapter Two focuses on traditional context and cognitive context. The most crucial part of this chapter is the defin

20、ition and features of the cognitive context. It also explores the cognitive context in terms of Relevance Theory.</p><p>　　Chapter Three is cardinal in the whole writing. In this chapter, a detailed discussi

21、on on the roles of cognitive context in successful verbal communication is presented. For a better understanding of it, many typical examples in daily verbal communication are analyzed.</p><p>　　Chapter Four

22、 comes to the conclusion, in which the whole paper is summarized. </p><p>　　Although this exploration is not very comprehensive or profound because of the author’s limited opinions and own experiences, the s

23、ignificance of this study is both theoretical and practical. It gives us a better understanding of cognitive context and helps to achieve successful verbal communication through a new but crucial aspect. </p><

24、p>　　2. Context and cognitive context </p><p>　　Traditional views on context </p><p>　　The previous researches on context start from Malinowski, in 1923. He is known as a famous anthropologis

25、t. He believed that utterances and situation are bound up inextricably with each other and the context of situation is indispensable for the understanding of the words ( Liu Runqing、Feng Zongxin，2004:300). He classified

26、context into two categories: context of situation and context of culture.</p><p>　　Then one of his students, J.R Firth took over Malinowski’s context of situation and developed it. Firth classified context i

27、nto situational context and linguistic context(Peng Jianwu，2005:65)While M.A.K Halliday , one of Firth’s students also further developed the theory of context of situation into what is known as register theory, a more ge

28、neralized interpretation intended as a basis for deriving the features of the text from the features of the situation.</p><p>　　The Chinese linguists also do a lot of research work on context. He Zhaoxiong a

29、nd Mei Deming(1999:113-114) stated that notion of context is essential to the pragmatic study of language. It is generally considered as constituted by the knowledge shared by the speaker and the hearer. Xiong Xueliang(2

30、004:113-114) thinks that: “Traditional context is an all-inclusive concept, including the linguistic knowledge, co-text, the time, the place, topic and the manner of speaking on participants, how much </p><p&g

31、t;　　Cognitive context </p><p>　　2.2.1 Definition of cognitive context</p><p>　　Traditional context is almost an all-including concept, involving both linguistic knowledge and non-linguistic know

32、ledge. It’s difficult for us to take all these factors into consideration when studying verbal communication. And from the cognitive perspective, traditional context has two unavoidable defects: Firstly, it cannot object

33、ively reflect the communicators’ mental states in the communication. Secondly, verbal communication is a dynamic process while traditional context is a static concep</p><p>　　Sperber and Wilson both suggest

34、their view of context from the perspective of Relevance Theory. S&W suggest that human communication is a context-dependently ostensive-inferential process in their book Relevance: Communication and Cognition togethe

35、r. In this book, Sperber and Wilson state that the context is a psychological construct, a subset of the hearer’s assumptions about the world (S&W, 2001:15). That is to say, the cognitive context they called includes

36、 not merely context in the tradition</p><p>　　Domestic scholar Xiong Xueliang also holds a view of cognitive context. Different from Sperber and Wilson who claim that a context is a psychological construct,

37、Xiong Xueliang holds that context is something inside, lying in the mind, which he quotes his Dutch supervisor Van Dijk’s words: context is right in your mind. Xu Kuihua (2007:18) states that cognitive context includes l

38、inguistic context, situational context and cultural context. And she regards cognitive context an abstract form of abov</p><p>　　Xiong Xueliang(2004:115) claims that the inference of the overloaded part of i

39、nformation by language users does not always rely on the concrete context, because language users, through experience, have internalized the relevant context. That is to say, the main part of context is the cognitive con

40、text that contains the pragmatic knowledge that has been systemized by language users. When the specific physical environment is not clear, language users can consciously or subconsciously infer with hi</p><p&

41、gt;　　To sum up, language users concrete context that has already been internalized is cognitive context. Such conceptual representation about the world is stored in our mind, and is used in communication when activated b

42、y utterance.</p><p>　　2.2.2 Characteristics of cognitive context</p><p>　　Cognitive context refers to the information which is relevant to the participators of a communication. And the participa

43、tors rely on this information to produce and to interpret each other’s utterances and the intensions conveyed by the utterances. According to the definition of cognitive context and the analysis of its role in verbal com

44、munication, the thesis concludes two distinct features of cognitive context, which are quite different from the traditional views: the dynamic nature and the ps</p><p>　　Firstly, Context is a dynamic and dev

45、elopmental concept rather than a static and freezing. Communication itself is a dynamic concept, and context will change with the process of communication. (He Zhaoxiong，2009: 21-22)Communication needs some sets of infor

46、mation. With the utterance proceeding, previous information, which is stored in the memory of deductive devices as new contextual assumption for the interpretation of the next utterance, becomes old information. In this

47、process, context is cho</p><p>　　In this study the dynamic nature of cognitive context is adopted and observed because it is believed by the author that only a dynamic cognitive context can explain the proce

48、ss of utterance communication more easily. Because communication is an ever-developing interactive process and it is highly context-dependent, the study of the dynamic properties of cognitive context is to analyze cognit

49、ive context in the dynamic process of communication. Cognitive context is generated in language use and ke</p><p>　　Another obvious feature of cognitive context is the psychological nature. Sperter and Wilso

50、n both believe that cognitive context is a psychological notion, a psychological construct and a subset of the hearer’s assumptions about the world. Or we can say that cognitive context is a deductive process to select b

51、ackground assumptions. The context included the organization of the individual’s long or short memory and physical activity. That is to say, the expectations about the unknown feature, the </p><p>　　In verba

52、l communication, hearer may makes mistakes when he doesn’t bear these two features of cognitive context in mind. Though he is in front of the object, he will not finish what the speaker wants him to do, especially in a v

53、erbal communication. The hearer and speaker may have the total different religious beliefs, general customs, common sense, so mistakes are frequently made, and how to say and to do properly seems very difficult.</p>

54、;<p>　　2.2.3 Relevance Theory and cognitive context</p><p>　　According to Sperber and Wilson’s Relevance Theory, human being’s verbal communication is a process maneuvered by the elements of cognitive

55、 context. In Relevance Theory, as mentioned above, cognitive context refers to a kind of psychological construct, namely, a subset of the hearer’s assumption about the world. As cognitive context is put forward under the

56、 Relevance Theory, of course they are closely related to each other.</p><p>　　Relevance Theory is the interplay of two factors: contextual effects and processing effort, and both these factors are context-de

57、pendent. Sperber and Wilson reject the idea of a context given to communicator beforehand and opt for a more dynamic view of context as selected and constructed in the course of interaction and they regard the relevance

58、of an utterance as the relation of proposition and the collection of contexts. While the central claim of the Relevance Theory is that human communicat</p><p>　　3. Cognitive context of language inference in

59、verbal communication</p><p>　　Verbal communication</p><p>　　Common forms of human communication include sign language, speaking, writing, gestures and broadcasting. Communication can be interact

60、ive, transitive, intentional or unintentional; it can also be verbal and nonverbal. Plentiful researches have been done to explore the nature of communication and how to achieve successful communication.</p><p

61、>　　In this thesis, verbal communication is explored from the speaker’s ostension and the hearer’s inference. According to the ostensive-inferential communicative model which is put forward within the Relevance Theory,

62、 verbal communication is a kind of activity with ostension and inference. Verbal communication is a kind of two-side activity with purpose and intentions. In the process of communication, the speaker conveys his or her i

63、ntention to inform the hearer of some state of affairs; the hearer</p><p>　　Speaking of intention, our discussion of it is mainly based on what S&W point out: informative intention and communicative inte

64、ntion. Informative intention is the basis of communicative intention. That is to say, it is very important for the speaker’s ostension be identified by the hearer, because they have shared common knowledge of cognitive c

65、ontext. Any utterance may have a number of possible interpretations. However, only one of them is most accessible to the hearer because the utterance bea</p><p>　　(1) Lin’s American neighbor Tom is in Lin’s

66、home. They have a happy conversation during the whole afternoon. Time flies, now it is time for dinner, so Lin wants to end the talking:</p><p>　　Lin: Tom, it is really happy to have a chat with you. Time is

67、 late, so how about having dinner with me? </p><p>　　Tom: Really? I like Chinese food so much. I am glad to have supper with you. Thank you.</p><p>　　Now Lin is very embarrassed, because today h

68、e doesn’t have enough food to treat a visitor. We know invitation for a dinner in China sometimes is just a polite formula. It not really means inviting you to have dinner with him or her. Sometime people use it to short

69、en the distance between each other, sometime it is just a way of greeting. Here Lin only wants to use it to end the talking, but in Tom’s cognitive context it means an invitation, so Tom’s language inference result is no

70、t fit the Lin’s </p><p>　　Cognitive context consists of situational knowledge involved in language use, linguistic contextual knowledge and background knowledge and collective consciousness shared by languag

71、e communities. For example, when we meet or see goodbye to others, more or less we will see some polite formulas, while how much and how to answer should limited by cognitive context. (Xiong Xueliang，2008:22) From the gi

72、ven view that successful verbal communication depends greatly on whether the communicators’ primary</p><p>　　Roles of the speaker’s cognitive context</p><p>　　Verbal communication is a human enh

73、ancement of ostensive-inferential and a two-side communication, which means an interaction between speaker and hearer. Both of them play a crucial role in verbal communication. Context determines the speaker’s use of lan

74、guage and also the hearer’s interpretation of what is said to him. Without such knowledge, linguistic communication would not be possible, and without considering such knowledge, linguistic communication cannot be satisf

75、actorily accounted for in</p><p>　　3.2.1 Guiding the appropriateness of presentation</p><p>　　According to Relevance Theory, the speaker always manifests his or her intention to the hearer in or

76、der that the hearer can easily comprehend his utterance. In order to do so, the speaker needs an appropriate presentation. The speaker’s cognitive context plays an important role in an appropriate presentation of his or

77、her intention. So the speaker usually makes use of the information existed in his or her cognitive context in combination with his cognitive ability to choose different utterance t</p><p>　　Here is an exampl

78、e:</p><p>　　(2)Situation: A Chinese sees a foreigner who is lost in the street in China. Being willing to offer help to the foreign tourist, the Chinese who doesn’t know much English has a simple dialogue wi

79、th the tourist.</p><p>　　Chinese: “What’s your name? What are you doing now? Where are you going? Follow me!”</p><p>　　The foreign tourist is confused. The way the Chinese speak to him is just l

80、ike a policeman, so he believes the Chinese could be a policeman.</p><p>　　The appropriate way of offering help to the foreign tourist should be expressed in the following way: May I know you name, please? I

81、 think you are rather in a difficulty. Can I do something to help you?</p><p>　　The pragmatic failure in this verbal communication is due to the lack of knowledge in culture in the speaker’s cognitive contex

82、t, or to put it another way, this Chinese doesn’t have such cognitive context of the western culture. The Chinese knows English language and is able to say some English sentences. What he does not know is how to express

83、his words in a proper way. So the hearer misunderstands the meaning that the speaker wants to convey, thus the communication fails.</p><p>　　Another example:</p><p>　　(3)When you are having dinn

84、er with others and want someone to pass you the salt, you may say:</p><p>　　A. Excuse me, could you pass me the salt, please?</p><p>　　B. Pass me the salt, please?</p><p><b>　

85、　C. Salt!</b></p><p>　　Utterance A, B and C can all be used in this condition. But when speaking to different hearers, we should consider the subtle difference among these utterances. That is, utteranc

86、e A is the most formal one, which can be used between strangers but not between close friends or relatives; utterance B can be used between common friends or colleagues but not between people with formal relationship; ut

87、terance C is commonly used between close friends or relatives. These principles are already stored in </p><p>　　From the analysis of the examples given above, we can hold the view that the speaker’s appropri

88、ateness of the presentation to reach his or her communicative goal is closely related with cognitive context.</p><p>　　3.2.2 Enhancement of ostension</p><p>　　In this thesis, we narrow the conce

89、pt of ostension down to the linguistic action in expressing oneself. We know that in a successful verbal communication, an ostension is an act of making clear one’s intention to express something. It can be achieved by s

90、uch different means as facial expressions, gestures, intonation and tone, and some certain utterances and so on. Here in this thesis we will mainly talk about the ostension realized by means of utterances.</p><

91、;p>　　According to Relevance Theory, in successful verbal communication, the speaker tries to convey his or her communicative intention on the basis of mutual manifestness and the optimal relevance. And as we discussed

92、 before, different utterances can indicate the same intention and same utterance can also imply some different intentions. Therefore the speaker’s ostension is of great importance in conveying his or her communicative in

93、tention and his cognitive context can enhance the ostension in the c</p><p>　　(4) Tom: I do love Henry James’s works. I mean the great novel.</p><p>　　Lin: Oh, which novel do you like most?</

94、p><p>　　In this brief conversation, Tom showed clearly to Lin that Henry James’s works are the novels by using the second statement: “I mean the great novel.” That is, the speaker makes use of his cognitive con

95、text to show that there is a person named Henry James who writes novels in this conversation. As a result, the hearer could infer from the speaker’s ostension that Henry James is a novelist with the help of the speaker’s

96、 second statement to carry out the communication even though the hearer did no</p><p>　　(5) Two university classmates meet each other after separating for decades. There is a conversation between them:</p

97、><p>　　A: Do you remember Anna, the monitor of our class? She is also working in this city!</p><p>　　B: Really?</p><p>　　In this example, in order to make the hearer understand which “

98、Anna” refers to, he uses the utterance “the monitor of our class” to constrain “Anna” and the hearer’s choice of cognitive context thereby. The more explicit of the utterance the stronger the hearer will be constrained i

99、n choosing cognitive context in the communication. By constraining the hearer’s cognitive context, the hearer will be easy to achieve the speaker’s communicative intention with least efforts.</p><p>　　Here w

100、e shed light on how the speaker adopts linguistic means stored in his or her cognitive context to help the hearer understand his communicative intentions, but that is not to say the speaker must put information as many a