會話含義與英語中的勸說語功能分析【畢業(yè)設計】

1、<p><b>　　本科畢業(yè)設計</b></p><p><b>　　（20 屆）</b></p><p>　　會話含義與英語中的勸說語功能分析</p><p>　　A Study on the English Persuasive Language: From the Conversational Impli

2、cature Perspective</p><p>　　所在學院 </p><p>　　專業(yè)班級 英語 </p><p>　　學生姓名 學號 </p><p>　　指導教師

3、 職稱 </p><p>　　完成日期 年 月 </p><p>　　【ABSTRACT】This thesis intends to study English persuasive language in terms of its persuasive implicature from the perspective of

4、conversational implicature theory. As a powerful means of communication, persuasion bares the characteristics of extensiveness, complexity and diversity. This thesis carries out a pragmatic analysis of persuasive languag

5、e by resorting to the conversational implicature theory proposed by Grice, as the theoretical guidance in an attempt to study how the speaker succeeds</p><p>　　【KEYWORDS】English persuasive language; Conversa

6、tional implicature; Cooperative principle; Context</p><p>　　【摘要】本文旨在以會話含義理論為指導，分析勸說語如何成功實現(xiàn)勸說功能。勸說語作為一種強有力的溝通工具，具有廣泛性、復雜性和多樣性的特點。語言學理論為研究勸說語提供了新的視角。本文運用語用學基本原理會話含義理論分析勸說語，集中探討格萊斯的會話含義理論在勸說語應用中的具體體現(xiàn)和特征；通過商業(yè)領域和

7、生活中收集的案例研究勸說者如何違反合作原則以成功實現(xiàn)勸說。最后揭示本研究在勸說活動中的實踐意義和在語言學領域的意義并綜述本文研究的局限性。</p><p>　　【關鍵詞】勸說語；會話含義；合作原則；語境。</p><p><b>　　目　錄</b></p><p>　　1. Introduction1</p><p>

8、　　1.1 Definition of persuasion1</p><p>　　1.2 Rationale and significance of the study1</p><p>　　1.3 Methodology of the study2</p><p>　　1.4 Organization of the thesis3</p>

9、<p>　　2. Theoretical Foundation of the Study3</p><p>　　2.1 Conversational implicature theory3</p><p>　　2.2 The cooperative principle4</p><p>　　2.2.1 The maxims of cooperativ

10、e principle4</p><p>　　2.2.2 Violation of the maxims5</p><p>　　2.3 Classification of implicature6</p><p>　　2.3.1 Generalized implicature6</p><p>　　2.3.2 Particulariz

11、ed implicature7</p><p>　　3. Conversational implicature analysis of English persuasive language8</p><p>　　3.1 Violation of the Qunatity Maxim8</p><p>　　3.1.1 Giving Less informati

12、on8</p><p>　　3.1.2 Giving More information9</p><p>　　3.2 Violation of the Quality Maxim10</p><p>　　3.3 Violation of the Relation Maxim11</p><p>　　3.4 Violation of t

13、he Manner Maxim11</p><p>　　3.5 Summary12</p><p>　　4. Conclusion14</p><p>　　4.1 Summary14</p><p>　　4.2 Limitations14</p><p>　　References15</p>

14、<p>　　1. Introduction</p><p>　　The human society is a combination of cooperation and competition, and persuasion plays an indispensable role in both aspects. As a powerful means of communication, persua

15、sion is an effective way to eliminate obstacles between the persuader and the audience and it can also influence the motivation, cognition, emotion, and attitude of the listener. Persuasion has great impact on the develo

16、pment of our human society in areas such as business, politics, and culture. Hence it is of practical importa</p><p>　　1.1 Definition of persuasive language</p><p>　　It is a common way to clari

17、fy a concept by providing a definition, for a definition makes some sets of instances specified to which the concept applies. However, the definitions of persuasion given by researchers at home and abroad are various. Am

18、ong these definitions, some regard persuasion as a way of communication designed to affect the autonomous judgments on action of others (Herbert, 1986). Another definition proposed by Oxford Advanced Learner’s English-Ch

19、inese Dictionary is that persuasi</p><p>　　The former definition sees “persuasion” as a practice which implies that the persuader makes the others do something by arguing or reasoning with him. The latter on

20、e regards “persuasion” as an effect, as it means persuasion is to make someone to believe what the persuader says and convince him (Simons, 2001: 238). Nevertheless, most concepts have fuzzy edges, which means in some gr

21、ay areas application of the concept is arguable. Therefore, others think that a definition of persuasion is not nece</p><p>　　This thesis agrees with Bernard’s opinion. She claims that persuasion is to persu

22、ade the audience to think or act in a particular way by using appeals to logic, values and feelings (Bernard, 1986). The essence of persuasion stands for the shrewd but diplomatic manipulation history of getting people f

23、rom the opposite side onto our side without using any force.</p><p>　　1.2 Rationale and significance of the study</p><p>　　Persuasion, a means of communication, intends to change the judgment an

24、d practice of the audience, but never deprive them of their power of making decision. Therefore, persuasion does not impose but predisposes. The subject itself is quite fascinating and due to its exploratory and primary

25、research the study may be of great theoretical and practical significance in this field. The choice of the thesis topic on English persuasive language is based on the following considerations:</p><p>　　First

26、ly, persuasion is a central feature of every aspect of daily communication. Persuasion can be found everywhere where there is human communication. It is unavoidable and pervasive. It is quite clear that persuasion is an

27、indispensable part in large numbers of occupations. Large numbers of professions, such as social work, public relations, law, politics, advertising, counseling, business management. As we can see persuasion is part and p

28、arcel in these occupations. </p><p>　　Secondly, persuasion exists in political speech and marketing communication at home and abroad. On one hand, market economy has transferred China to a market-driven soci

29、ety. Thousands of commodities make persuasive communication an essential link to win the market competition. On the other hand, persuasive language has been widely used in political speeches and quantities of them have g

30、one down in history for its persuasive impact and power. The research may analyze the reasons why some companie</p><p>　　The third consideration is rather academic. A great number of principles have somethin

31、g to say about persuasion, but analysis from the perspective of conversational implicature theory is still in its infancy. Conversational implicature theory, an important branch of pragmatics, studies linguistic phenomen

32、on from the concrete context and their usage properties (Laura, 2010:169). It is believed to provide a more comprehensive perspective in the understanding of persuasive language and deepen our u</p><p>　　Met

33、hodology of the study</p><p>　　This thesis will involve illustrative method when describing conversational implicature theory as the theoretical base. Sample analysis will also be used, with cases selected f

34、rom commercial marketing dialogues and daily communications. Collect samples from daily life in situations such as shopping mall, home daily communication and so on. This is a qualitative analysis from the approach of pr

35、agmatics (Leech, 1983:127). It aims to analyze the application of conversational implicature in some con</p><p>　　Organization of the thesis</p><p>　　The present thesis consists of four chapters

36、. Chapter one gives a brief introduction of this research, specifying the definition of English persuasive language in the present study, the research purposes, rationale, significance, methodology and organization of th

37、is thesis. Chapter two introduces the theoretical foundation of the study for the analysis of the function and effect of English persuasive language by applying the conversational implicature theory. The speaker may want

38、 to convey his o</p><p>　　2. Theoretical Framework</p><p>　　With the review of the relevant literature, this chapter introduces Grice’s conversational implicature theory as the theoretical backg

39、round for in-depth research into the persuasive language in the following chapter. 2.1 Conversational implicature theory</p><p>　　Grice says that a speaker sends more message than the literal meaning of word

40、s which is transferred not by understanding them linguistically, but by providing evidence of the intention the speaker intends to convey. Grice argues that the communicative activities of human being should be ruled by

41、principles and norms while hunting for the ways in which such evidence is offered by the addresser (Grice, 2001:321). The theory of conversational implicature attempts to provide tentative answers to que</p><p

42、>　　In the dissertation named Logic and Conversation, Grice clearly says that the rationale beneath the conversational implicature theory is the assumption that rational communication exchange is a cooperate effort. To

43、 some extent, each participant recognizes it and regards it as a same purpose or a set of purposes (Grice, 2001:350). Thus, a message sender must go beyond the semantic meaning of words to infer what the speaker intends

44、to send to really know the meaning of an utterance. This needs the</p><p>　　2.2 The cooperative principle</p><p>　　Grice develops the concept of implicature in cooperative principle. It is mainl

45、y a theory about how speakers use language in communication. He suggests that there are sets of over-arching presumptions ruling the conduct of conversation (Wu Bingzhang, 2007). As it seems that these presumptions raise

46、d from basic rational considerations and may be formulated as principles for the effective and efficient use of language in communication to further cooperative ends.</p><p>　　In order to further explain the

47、 cooperative principle, Grice proposes four maxims and several sub-maxims respectively. The cooperative principle is specified from four aspects: quantity, quality, relation and manner (Cui Wei & Xu Li, 2010). </p

48、><p>　　2.2.1 The maxims of cooperative principle</p><p>　　The maxims of quantity </p><p>　　The maxim of quality is concerned with the amount of information provided by an utterance, an

49、d there are two subordinate maxims:</p><p>　　Make your contribution as informative as is required for the current purpose of the exchange.</p><p>　　Do not make your contribution more informative

50、 than is required.</p><p>　　The maxims of quality </p><p>　　The maxim of quality is concerned with truth telling, and has two parts:</p><p>　　Do not say what you believe to be false

51、.</p><p>　　Do not say which is lack of adequate evidence</p><p>　　Under the category of Quality falls a super---maxim--- “Try to make your conversation contribution one that is true”. According

52、to Grice, if someone flouts this maxim, then he or she is telling a lie.</p><p>　　The maxims of relation</p><p>　　The maxim is very simple: Be relevant. </p><p>　　This maxim can be

53、interpreted as “make sure what you say is relevant to the conversation in the communication situation in which you are involved in”. The point of this maxim is that it is not sufficient for a statement to be true if the

54、speaker intends to constitute an acceptable conversation contribution.</p><p>　　The maxim of manner</p><p>　　Grice includes the super-maxim ---“Be perspicuous”---and four components as:</p>

55、;<p>　　1) Avoid obscurity of expression.</p><p>　　2) Avoid ambiguity.</p><p>　　3) Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity).</p><p>　　4) Be orderly.</p><p>　　(Hu Zh

56、uanglin, 2006:191)</p><p>　　In short, these maxims specify what participants have to do in order to converse in a maximally efficient, rational, cooperative way: the speaker should speak relevantly, clearly,

57、 and sincerely, while providing sufficient information.</p><p>　　2.2.2 Violation of the maxims </p><p>　　To some extent, the theory of conversational implicature may be seen as an attempt to exp

58、lain how communication succeeds or even achieves more when facing the violation of the maxims (Sadock, 1987:210). A speaker in communication exchange may fail to fulfill a maxim in the following ways.</p><p>

59、;　　The speaker may violate the cooperative principle deliberately but the hearer cannot realize it. In this case, the speaker is most likely to mislead the hearer.</p><p>　　The speaker may avoid the cooperat

60、ive principle in an explicit way by telling the hearer that he is unwilling to be cooperative.</p><p>　　The speaker may face a dilemma. For example, on the one hand, the speaker wants to hold the quality max

61、im the present stage requires, while on the other hand, there is a possibility that other maxims will be violated if the quality maxim is held. There is a crush here.</p><p>　　The speaker may deliberately vi

62、olate one of the maxims or fail to fulfill it. But this is different from the first case in which the speaker assumes that the hearer knows that he intends to do something, and the hearer still regards him being cooperat

63、ive in observing the general cooperative principle. The hearer knows that the speaker is not trying to mislead him （Grice, 2001:147）.</p><p>　　In the first case, the participant does not obs

64、erve the cooperative principle and he does not indicate or tell the listener that he is not being cooperative or less cooperative.</p><p>　　In the second case, the participant makes it clear that at the mome

65、nt he is not cooperative. In this case no misunderstanding will take place. Here it is possible that a conversational implicature will be generated.</p><p>　　In the third case, the participant faces a dilemm

66、a. For example, if someone asks this question: “what time are we going to the station?” and the speaker replies: “Sometime this afternoon”. This answer violates the quantity maxims, as at the present scene, what is requi

67、red is the exact time when we are going to the station (John, 2008:274). However, the speaker does not want to lie or give inadequate evidence and really does not know the exact time, thus he has to give up the quantity

68、maxim and i</p><p>　　In the forth case, we can most likely generate conversational implicature. On the whole, the speakers observe the cooperative principle, while in order to fulfill some conversational imp

69、licature they fail to meet certain maxims or deliberately do not obey some maxims (Jin Li, 2006).</p><p>　　The cooperativeness, or cooperation, among the participants is essentially important to the success

70、of communication. The interpersonal verbal communication is based on this theme. When people interpret the meaning they always resort to cooperative principle to work out the implied meaning. The maxims give participants

71、 the ability to interpret each other’s comments by means of conversational implicature, so that the speaker’s implied meaning is what is attended to (Hu Zhuanglin, 2006:197). </p><p>　　2.3 Classification of

72、implicature</p><p>　　The word implicature is widely used to refer to what Grice carefully designates conversational implicature. Grice actually intends this term implicature to be a general term to include a

73、ll kinds of pragmatic inference. </p><p>　　2.3.1 Conventional implicature</p><p>　　In addition to conversational implicature, which are calculated based on the maxims, Grice thinks out a totally

74、 different kind of non-truth-conditional inferences, namely, conventional implicature (Zhou Jianan, 1997). </p><p>　　Conventional implicature is not developed from super ordinate pragmatic principles like th

75、e maxims of cooperative principle, but it is attached by the conventionally expressed lexical items and words. They are always carried by particles like “a” “well” or “and”. Look at this example “He walked into a house a

76、nd found a rabbit behind the chair”. By using the particle “a”, this sentence implicates that this house is not his and neither is the rabbit. From the above example we can see that this imp</p><p>　　He is p

77、oor and honest.</p><p>　　He is poor but honest.</p><p>　　The two sentences both convey that the person “he” is poor and meanwhile honest. There is only a difference between them. The second sent

78、ence carries an implicature that a person who is poor is not supposed to be honest while the subject is different.</p><p>　　2.3.2 Generalized implicature and particularized implicature</p><p>　　

79、Grice also makes a difference between two kinds of conversational implicature: generalized implicature and particularized implicature.</p><p>　　Generalized implicature is gained by the assumption that the sp

80、eaker is noticing the cooperative principle maxims and the prior sentence of his uttering will carry some implicature. It happens with no particular context or special scene being necessary. The following examples have i

81、mplicature.</p><p>　　A tiger is larger than a golden fish. </p><p>　　Does she have any child?</p><p>　　The implicature of the first sentence is that I believe and have adequate evid

82、ence that a tiger is larger than a golden fish. The second sentence implies that I do not know whether she has child or not and I want to know. In daily communication, if someone makes a statement one believes it is true

83、 and if someone asks a question he is regarded as sincerely requesting the answer. </p><p>　　2.3.3 Particularized implicature</p><p>　　Particularized implicature is generated in conversations in

84、 communication by violating some maxims of cooperative principle for some communicative purposes. They are particularly based on the specific people, time, and place (Adrian, 2001:238). Let us see this example：</p>

85、<p>　　1. Open the door.</p><p>　　2. Go to the door, put the key into the lock, turn the key clockwise two times and then push. </p><p>　　When the second sentence is used it is implicated

86、that the speaker knows the listener has no idea of how to open the door. The speaker in this situation follows the general maxims of cooperative principle, but violates the subordinate maxim of manner maxim “to be brief”

87、.</p><p>　　In order to better understand the difference and relationship between these meanings, classifications of the meaning can be summarized in the following diagram (Levinson, 2000:241):</p><

88、;p><b>　　Meaning</b></p><p>　　Said Implicated</p><p>　　Conventionally Non-Conventionally</p><p>　　Non-conversationally Conversationally</p>

89、<p>　　Generally Particularly </p><p>　　Conversational Implicature analysis</p><p>　　of English persuasive language</p><p>　　English persuasive language provides an excel

90、lent context for the case analysis of conversational implicature. Chapter three concentrates on the analysis of conversational implicature by using carefully chosen cases of English persuasive language. Persuasive action

91、 widely exists in commercial fields, such as advertisement and marketing. We can say that most advertisement and promoting logos is an action of persuasion to persuade consumers to buy their products. In daily life, we a

92、re unconsciousl</p><p>　　3.1 Violation of the Quantity Maxim.</p><p>　　Grice holds the view that all the participants are supposed to cooperate with each other in a conversation if they want the

93、 talk to go smoothly. In daily life, there might always be cases in which the massager sender violates the cooperative principle maxims. By speaking less or more than is required, the quantity maxims are flouted and it m

94、ight motivate the listener to consider why with a combination of what he has already known and by analyzing and observing the participants or setting. By the</p><p>　　3.1.1 Giving Less information</p>

95、<p>　　The interlocutor violates the first subordinate maxim of quantity consciously: making your contribution as informative as is required in a conversation. That is to say, a speaker deliberately gives less infor

96、mation than is required. If a speaker does not give enough information as is required purposely, he might try to hide something or to reveal more. The following example is an extreme example of flouting of the first maxi

97、m of quantity maxim.</p><p>　　Example one:</p><p>　　Context of situation: The buyer is planning to buy a printer for working. He has compared different brands and finally a Hewlett Packard print

98、er takes his fancy.</p><p>　　Customer: Why do you think your product would be of great help to my work?</p><p>　　Saleswoman: This is a best seller of all types of printer in our shop. Many purc

99、hasers have come back to buy a second one even a third one. (From the writer’s real shopping experience)</p><p>　　By answering with a simple answer, the saleswoman seems not to give enough informa

100、tion. She is supposed to answer the reasons why this type of printer is helpful to the work of the buyer, such as the function of this printer, how convenient it is and so on. Actually she is revealing, what the implicat