A study of hedging devices in conversations in Gone with the wind by Margaret Mitchell

6 494 2
A study of hedging devices in conversations in Gone with the wind by Margaret Mitchell

Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)

Thông tin tài liệu

A study of hedging devices in conversations in Gone with the wind by Margaret Mitchell Nghiên cứu các phương tiện rào đón trong các cuộc hội thoại của tác phẩm Cuốn theo chiều gió của nhà văn Margaret Mitchell Nguyễn Thị Thanh Huyền University of Languages and International Studies M.A. Thesis. Linguistics: 60 22 15 Supervisor : Assoc. Prof. Dr. Trần Xuân Điệp Năm bảo vệ: 2012 Abstract. The objectives of the research were to investigate the linguistic devices of hedges and major pragmatic functions of identified hedges in the conversations in the novel of Gone with the Wind by Margaret Mitchell. Two levels of linguistic descriptions – the quantitative and pragmatic analysis mainly based on taxonomy of hedging devices by Yu (2009) and polypragmatic paradigm of hedges by Hyland (1998) – revealed that there are four main hedging categories used in the conversations in the novel, namely, modal hedges, performative hedges, quantificational hedges and pragmatic-marker hedges, in which quantificational hedges (43.8%) are employed with the highest frequency, followed by modal hedges (34.8%), performative hedges (8.2%) and other minor types of tag questions, subjunctives, and depersonalization (5.7%). The research findings also pointed out that speaker-orientation, accuracy- orientation and hearer-orientation are three main functions that identified hedging devices fulfill. Among these types of function, speaker-oriented hedges (48.1%) emerge to be the most prominent, preceding accuracy-oriented hedges (45.7%) and hearer-oriented hedges (6.2%). Keywords. Tiếng Anh; Hội thoại; Ngôn ngữ Content. The study is designed to include three main parts. Part 1: Introduction, presenting the research rationale, aims of the study, research questions, implications of the research, study scope, methodology and the structure of the paper. Part 2: Development Chapter1: Theoretical Background, including definitions of hedge, hedging taxonomies, relationship between hedges and conversational maxims and politeness strategies, and general information on Gone with the Wind. Chapter 2: Findings and Discussions, describing major hedging devices, their linguistic realization and pragmatic functions in Gone with the Wind. Part 3: Conclusion, summarizing the major points, limitations, and suggestions for further studies. References. Adams-Smith, D. (1984). Medical discourse: Aspects of author's comment. English for Special Purposes, 3, 25-36. Bashanova, E.Y. (2012). Hedging in online news writing. National Taiwan University of Science and Technology. Brown, G., & Levinson, S. (1978). Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In E. N. Goody (Ed.), Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction (pp. 56-310). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brown, G., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Channell, J. (1990). Precise and vague expressions in writing on economics. In W. Nash (Ed.), The Writing Scholar: Studies in Academic Discourse. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Clemen, G. (1997). The concept of hedging: Origins, approaches and definitions. In R. Markkanen & H. Schroder (Eds.), Hedging and discourse: approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts. Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter. Coates, J. (1988). Women’s Speech, Women Strength? In York Papers in Linguistics 13: selected papers from the sociolinguistics symposium. Crompton, P. (1997). Hedging in academic writing: Some theoretical problems. English for Specific Purposes, 16 (4), 271-287. Edmondson, W. (1981). Spoken Discourse: A Model for Analysis. London/New York: Longman. Fahnestock, J. (1986). Accommodating science: The rhetorical life of scientific facts. Written Communication, 3(3), 275-296. Fauziyah, N. (2007). The Flouting and Hedging maxims Used by the Main Characters in William Gibson’s “The Miracle Worker”. English Letters and Language Department, Faculty of Humanity and Culture, the State Islamic University of Malang. Fraser, B. (1975). Hedge performatives. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics (Vol. 3: Speech acts): 187-210. New York: Academic Press. Fraser, B. (1988). Types of English discourse markers. Acta Linguistica Hungarica, 38, 19-33. Grice, H.P. (1975). Logic and Conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (eds). Syntax & Semantics 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, pp. 41 – 58 Holmes, J. (1984). Hedging your bets and sitting on the fence: some evidence for hedges as support structures. Te Reo, 27, 47-62. Holmes, J. (1988). Doubt and certainty in ESL textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 9, 20- 44. Holmes, J. (1995). Women, Men, and Politeness. London: Longman. Holmes, J. (1995). Women, Men, and Politeness. London: Longman. Hyland, K. (1994). Hedging in academic writing and EAP textbooks. English for Special Purposes, 13(3), 239-256. Hyland, K. (1996a). Writing without conviction? Hedging in science research articles. Applied Linguistics, 17(4), 433-454. Hyland, K. (1996b). Talking to the academy: Forms of hedging in science research articles. Written Communication, 13, 251-281. Hyland, K. (1998). Hedging in scientific research articles. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Hyland, K., & Milton, J. (1997). Qualification and certainty in L1 and L2 students' writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 6(2), 183-205. Lakoff, G. (1972). Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Chicago Linguistic Society Papers, 8, 183-228. Reprinted as in Lakoff (1973). Lakoff, G. (1973). Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2, 458-508. Markkanen, R., & Schröder, H. (1997). Hedging: A challenge for pragmatics and discourse analysis. In Markkanen, R., & Schröder, H. (Eds.). Hedging and discourse: approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts. (pp. 3-18). Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter. Myers, G. (1989). The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied Linguistics, 10(1), 1-35. Myers, G. (1992). Textbooks and the sociology of scientific knowledge. English for Special Purposes, 11(3-17). Paloma P. (2007). A contrastive analysis of hedging in English and Spanish architecture project descriptions. Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics, 20, 139- 158. Pindi, M., & Bloor, T. (1986). Playing safe with predictions: Hedging, attribution and conditions in economic forecasting. Written Language, BAAL. 2. CILT. Powell, M. (1985). Purposive vagueness: An evaluation dimension of vague quantifying expressions. Journal of Linguistics, 21, 31-50. Prince, E., Frader, J., & Bosk, C. (1982). On Hedging in physician-phycisian discourse. In R. D. Pietro (Ed.), Linguistics and the Professions (pp. 83-97). Hillsdale, NJ: Ablex. Riekkinen, N. (2009). Softening criticism: The use of lexical hedges in academic spoken interaction. (Unpublished MA Thesis). University of Helsinki. Retrieved August, 1, 2012, from http://www.helsinki.fi/englanti/elfa/ Riekkinen, N. (2009). Softening criticism: The use of lexical hedges in academic spoken interaction. (Unpublished MA Thesis). University of Helsinki. Retrieved August, 1, 2012, from http://www.helsinki.fi/englanti/elfa/ Salager-Meyer, F. (1991). Hedging in medical discourse: 1980-1990. Interface, 6(1), 33-54. Salager-Meyer, F. (1993). Imprecision and vagueness (hedging) in today's medical discourse: courtesy, coyness or necessity? The ESPecialist, 14(1), 1-15. Salager-Meyer, F. (1994). Hedges and textual communicative funstion in medical English written discourse. English for Special Purposes, 13, 149-170. Skelton, J. (1997). How to tell the truth in The British Medical Journal: Patterns of judgement in the 19th and 20th Centuries. Vande Kopple, W. (1985). Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. Colleg Composition and Communication, 36, 82-93. Varttala, T. (1999). Remarks on the communicative functions of hedging in popular scientific and specialist research articles on medicine. English for Specific Purposes, 18 (2), 177-200. Vass, H. (2004). Socio-cognitive aspects of hedging in two legal discourse genres. IB•RICA, 7, 125-141. Retrieved August,1, 2021, from http://www.aelfe.org Wilamová, S. (2005). On Expressing Negative Politeness in English Fictional Discourse. Spisy filozofické fakulty Ostravské univerzity, Ostrava. Ostravská univerzita. Yu, S. (2009). The pragmatic development of hedging in EFL learners. Hong Kong University. Retrieved August, 1, 2012, from http://dspace.cityu.edu.hk/handle/2031/5731 Zuck, J. G., & Zuck, L. V. (1986). Hedging in news writing. In A M. Cornu, J. Van Parjis, M. Delahaye & L. Baten (Eds.), Beads or bracelets? How do we approach LSP, Selected papers from the fifth European symposium on LSP (pp. 172-180). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Zuck, J. G., & Zuck, L. V. (1987). Hedging in newswriting. In A M. Cornu, J. Vanparijs & M. Delahaye (Eds.), Beads or bracelets: How do we approach LSP? (pp. 171-181). Leuven, Belgium: Oxford University Press. . with the Wind by Margaret Mitchell. Two levels of linguistic descriptions – the quantitative and pragmatic analysis mainly based on taxonomy of hedging devices by Yu (2009) and polypragmatic paradigm. Abstract. The objectives of the research were to investigate the linguistic devices of hedges and major pragmatic functions of identified hedges in the conversations in the novel of Gone with. paradigm of hedges by Hyland (1998) – revealed that there are four main hedging categories used in the conversations in the novel, namely, modal hedges, performative hedges, quantificational

Ngày đăng: 10/08/2015, 19:47

Từ khóa liên quan

Tài liệu cùng người dùng

Tài liệu liên quan