如何用语料库研究话语标记语discourse marker

本文由 yycc2005-09-12 发表於 "语料库与外语教学" 讨论区

  1. yycc

    yycc 初级会员

    请教 如何用语料库研究汉语话语标记语.请大家各抒己见。另外是采用话语标记语还是话语联系语?应该怎样界定它的范围?
     
  2. xujiajin

    xujiajin 管理员 Staff Member

    See my earlier post: Discourse marker revisited
    http://www.corpus4u.org/showthread.php?t=802
    现有的汉语研究文献中对术语discourse marker(通常简写为DM)有“语用标记”、“话语标记语”、“话语标记”3种译法。纵观中英文文献,将discourse marker译为“语用标记”是一种误译。“语用标记”对应的英文为“pragmatic marker”,而且现在学界越来越倾向于将“话语标记”和“语用标记”区别开来。“语用标记”主要指那些不表示或较少表示真值条件意义,基本不增加话语的命题意义主要表达情态等主观性意义的标记形式。话语标记是语用标记的一个子集。而“话语标记语”中的“语”为冗字,无需保留。所以本文中采用“话语标记”的称法。

    以上我的观点。你提到的两种翻法主要是何自然、冉永平(1999;2000)的翻法。

    我个人认为国内发表的文献中队话语标记的认识有一些偏差。
    要有一个更全面的了解:以下文献建议读一下:
    http://www.corpus4u.org/showthread.php?t=802
     
  3. xujiajin

    xujiajin 管理员 Staff Member

    First you have to make a list of disourse markers based on your own working definition.
    then use file-based concordancing in WordSmith.
    Wordsmith中file-based concordancing
    http://www.corpus4u.org/showthread.php?t=228
     
  4. xujiajin

    xujiajin 管理员 Staff Member

    请在网站首页,页面中间的搜索栏中敲入discourse marker,还可以找到一些你想要的文章。
     
  5. yycc

    yycc 初级会员

    thanks a lot
     
  6. xujiajin

    xujiajin 管理员 Staff Member

    Actually I want to listen to your views.
     
  7. xujiajin

    xujiajin 管理员 Staff Member

    我认为,所谓话语标记,主要是指出现在现场即席话语中,用以标记话语连贯,传递话语互动信息的语言及非语言手段(如,点头、身势等行为手段)。就现场即席的自然口语中的话语标记而言,韵律特征对其意义的传达有着举足轻重的作用,有时甚至会起到主导作用。从在话语中出现的位置来看,话语标记比较灵活,不依附于某一基本句法成分,从句法上来看是可以取消的。它们可以出现在话语单位内部(即话轮或韵律单位 的内部),也可以出现在话语单位外部(即话轮或韵律单位的边界上)。
     
  8. xujiajin

    xujiajin 管理员 Staff Member

    [​IMG]

    表2―2是依据Fraser(1999: 932)并结合最新文献更新而成。
     
  9. xujiajin

    xujiajin 管理员 Staff Member

    Pasted below is from Prof. Bruce Fraser of Boston University.
    Dear David:

    The terminology of this area is a huge mess. You are correct that I view DMs
    as a subclass of PM, with Basic, Commentary, and Parallel markers being the
    other three subclasses. But others use different taxonomies. Some take
    Pragmatic or Discourse Particles to be the superset, while other take DMs to
    be the same as Discourse Connectives (Blakemore). I haven't found anyone who
    has dealt successfully with this mess. Below is what I have used as a way of
    introducing a recent article. I hope it helps.

    Best regards,
    Bruce Fraser

    Particles are usually thought of as “the small words of language,” words
    which are often a members of a syntactic class, but typically in their use
    as particles does not reflect the usual function of their nominal syntax. I
    start from the observation that there are (at least) two types of particles
    in language: Sentence Particles (SP); and Discourse Particles (DP).

    Sentences Particles are typically sentence-internal and contribute to the
    semantic meaning of the sentence. Examples include Spanish clitics (e.g., te
    in Yo quiere amarte), Japanese subject marker (e.g. ga), declension and
    conjugation morphology (e.g. Cs, Cing, -ed), verb particles (e.g., up in
    look up), Modal Particles (e.g., indeed) and Focus Particles (e.g. just).

    Discourse Particles, in contrast, are typically sentence-initial and do not
    affect the semantic meaning of the sentence of which they are a part, hence
    do not affect the truth conditions of the sentence. They typically serve to
    conceptually organize the discourse and in many cases, though certainly not
    all, they may be omitted without a change in sequence interepretation. For
    example, now, in example (1a),

    (1) a) I think we are finished with the first matter. Now, let’s go on to
    the second matter.

    b) He should be better behaved. That is to say, he shouldn’t complain all
    the time.

    c) A: The movie is over by now. B: So, I suppose we shouldn’t go over
    there.



    serves to orient the hearer to the change of material which follows, in
    (1b), that is to say serves to notify the hearer that a reformulation is
    about to occur, while in (1c) the so signals that second segment of the
    sequence follows as a conclusion based on the content of the first.

    There are several types of DPs:



    (2) a) connective particles (e.g., and, but, so, however, furthermore, as
    a result), which signal that the speaker posits a specific relationship
    between two adjacent discourse segments, S1 and S2;

    b) orienting particles (e.g., ok, now, let’s see, I mean, y’know), which
    signal that the speaker intends to reorient the conversation;

    c) pause particles (e.g., hummm, ah, uhhhh, well), which signal that the
    speaker intend to hold the floor.



    I am interested here in the first type of Discourse Particle, Connective
    Particles, which are known as Discourse Markers (Schiffrin, 1987; Fraser,
    1989, etc.) as well as other terms such Discourse Connectives (Blakemore,
    2002), Discourse Operators (Redeker, 1992), and Cue Phrases (Knott), as well
    as discourse particles, hearsay particles, phatic connectives, pragmatic
    connectives, pragmatic particles, sentence connectives, stylistic disjuncts.
    However, with some minor variations, they are simply alternative names for
    the same functional class of formatives. I will refer to them as Discourse
    Markers (DMs).

    Discourse Markers are defined as follows (cf. Fraser 2004 for a
    detailed analysis):

    (3) For a sequence of discourse segments S1 C S2, each of which encodes a
    complete message, a lexical expression LE functions as a discourse marker
    if, when it occurs in S2-initial position (S1 C LE + S2), LE signals that a
    semantic relationship holds between S2 and S1 which is one of:

    a) elaboration, where the DM such as and, furthermore, in addition,
    moreover, for example, more precisely,...signals that S2 is an elaboration
    of some aspect of S1

    (John didn’t want to go and he was going to make everyone life
    miserable);



    b) contrast, where the DM such as but, however, nevertheless, on the
    contrary, still,... signals a contrast between S2 and some aspect of S1
    (John tried to excel in everything, but Harry didn’t even try to be
    mediocre)



    c) implicative, where the DM such as so, thus, therefore, consequently,
    because,… signals that S2 is implied by S1

    (The water won’t boil, so we definitely are not going to have tea)

    d)

    4. Temporal, where the DM signals the time of S2 relative to S1 such
    as

    then, when, before, after, now,…(We went to the movies. Then,

    we went to bed.

    In general on contrastive discourse markers (CDMs),

    The quote is in an article called "The DM "but" Across Languages" to appear
    in a volume not yet named. Just refer to it as "forthcoming."
     
  10. huihui

    huihui 初级会员

    thanks so much for doctor xu's precious information, but i want to read your ph.d thesis, where can i find it? thanks!
     
  11. 回复: 如何用语料库研究话语标记语discourse marker

    请教许博士:国内外有关于话语标记语的词表有哪些?自己根据操作定义列出的词表是否缺乏客观性呢?谢谢
     
  12. 回复: 如何用语料库研究话语标记语discourse marker

    各位老师好,我的硕士论文开题就是关于话语标记语与语料库相结合的研究,但是由于当时读书不多,所以定位到了与作文教学的结合上,看到DR.XU的观点,有感觉话语标记语貌似与口语的结合点更多一些?!脑子里没有清晰的概念,希望多看到一些这样的论文可以帮助我,也感谢大家的资料能够让我了解到更多这方面的知识
     
  13. 请问下话语标记中用到的EXMARaLDA Partitur-Editor 可以用来分析中文吗?