Basic approaches to text linguistics
ý TEXT LINGUISTICS is a branch of LINGUISTICS that deals with texts as communication systems. Its original aims lay in uncovering and describing text grammars. The application of text linguistics has, however, evolved from this approach to a point in which text is viewed in much broader terms that go beyond a mere extension of traditional grammar towards an entire text.
ý TEXT LINGUISTICS as a sub-branch of LINGUISTICS did not really develop until the early 1970s, until linguistics itself began to be less concerned with the SENTENCE as the prime unit of analysis; or at least until it began to be felt that some special discipline should take care of potential units larger than a sentence, or of intra-sentence relations.
According to K.A. Filippov, "after decades of enthusiastic study of well-known structures of language units linguists suddenly faced with a completely new area of scientific interest. They looked beyond the borders of a sentence and saw the new, bright world of meaningful relationships and structural texture of a speech entity". Linguists faced inability to adequately explain some linguistic phenomena by relying on the traditional conceptual apparatus that focuses exclusively on the analysis of the sentences.
It is believed that the appearance of text linguistics as an independent scientific discipline is justified by internal linguistic properties and external, extralinguistic properties and external action on the part of other scientific disciplines, immediately adjacent to linguistics - literature, psychology, sociology, etc. As acknowledged by O.I. Moskalskaya, “in this situation, the whole speech product - text appeared as the focus, which interlaced all of these approaches to language”.
The period (1960-70s) witnessed the formation of Western European linguistic theory of text by its brightest representatives as E.Agricola, R., W. Dressler, Robert-Alain de Beaugrande, T.A. Van Dijk, and others. Text linguistics was initially characterized by structural methods. Thus, the object of the analysis was to identify the typed opening and closing text phrases. Depending on the lexical composition communicative-strong and communicative-weak sentences were identified. The latter contain anaphoric means (pronouns, definite article), and therefore, according to the findings cannot open grammatically well-formed text; there can only be a strong communicative proposal, which does not demonstrate any signs of lack of independence.
|
|
|
A significant contribution to the development of Russian linguistics of the text was made by I.R. Galperin. He managed to allocate the main categories of the text: informativeness, dividedness, cohesion (inline connection), continuum (temporal and spatial), retrospection and prospection, autosemantics, integration, completeness, modality, the subtext. Subsequently this list was added by such categories of text as tension and emotiveness. Today the list includes the category of intertextuality.
ý One major concern is the definition of TEXTUALITY; and also the classification or typology of texts according to their GENRE characteristics. Under the influence of PRAGMATICS and PSYCHOLOGY, more attention is being focused on the production or processing and reception of texts, and on their social function in society.
Dressler and de Beaugrande “Introduction to text linguistics” (1981): In Europe and in the United States sentence linguistics had come a long way: initially, formal methods were rejected. Later, linguistics recuperated them in the algebraic approach (Harris and Chomsky), and then in a logical approach (generative semantics and Montague). Then formalization took hold of linguistics. Dressler and de Beaugrande argued that text linguistics is closer to the cognitive science as the processes of production and reception of texts can be observed in the framework of general cognitive science and communication theory. They opposed the use of logical and mathematical formalism and try to focus on the actual use of language, syntax, semantics and pragmatics. The approach to text studies suggested by Dressler and de Beaugrande avoids the use of logical bases, and the point of view they propose is close to that of the cognitive science.
Dressler and de Beaugrande affirm the need to study texts in human communication using the procedural approach. It does not bother to identify structural units; it focuses on the operations that regulate the units when language systems are implemented. From a procedural perspective, the text is defined as a result of the operations regulating the units in the use of a system.
|
|
|
· Accordingly, TEXT LINGUISTICS can be defined as the study of text as a product (text grammar) or as a process (theory of text). The text-as-a-product approach is focused on the text cohesion, coherence, topical organization, illocutionary structure and communicative functions; the text-as-a-process approach studies the text production, reception and interpretation.
ý In focusing on the TEXT itself, as an object of study, it overlaps in many ways with aspects of DISCOURSE ANALYSIS, STYLISTICS, PRAGMATICS, SOCIOLINGUISTICS and NARRATOLOGY.
Discourse and pragmatics
Paltridge (2012) defines pragmatics as the study of how the meaning of spoken and written discourse is related to the context in which that speech and writing occurs. Context here is taken to be the particular social situation that the discourse takes place in, the other text or speech it is situated with, and any background knowledge that it relies upon.
One of the foundational concepts in pragmatics is speech act theory, which is the idea that words do things in the world. Words have a literal meaning that can be analyzed for its truth or falsehood. But words also can be used to effect change in the word, to perform actions. Searle distinguished between these two types of acts as locutionary and illocutionary acts. And the actual action that is caused by the words is the perlocutionary act.
One practical example of this is the act of saying “I do” in a marriage ceremony. The words have a literal meaning, and perform the action of becoming legally married. They are also tied to the social situation in which they occur, the marriage ceremony, their partners speech and the speech of the marriage official. This example also highlights how various conditions can influence whether a specific speech act works or not. Austin called these felicity conditions, which Searle interpreted somewhat rigidly as rules.
Pragmatics is also specifically concerned with the theoretical perspective of the cooperative principle: that discourse is a function of participants having a shared interest or purpose, which provides a unifying shape to the discourse, which prevents it from just being a series of random and disconnected topics. This idea was introduced by Grice (1975) in which he provides four categories or maxims that help identify the operation of the cooperative principle in discourse:
|
|
|
- quantity: make contribution informative, but not more informative than needed
- quality: try to make a contribution that is true (not false, or lacking in evidence)
- relation: moves in topic need to fit certain parameters
- manner: how something is said (not what)
Grice uses these maxims in order to show how speech and language do not simply fit into either a formal (scientific) or informal (humanistic) analysis. To do this he introduces the idea of the implicature which is a meaning that is not explicitly provided in the literal analysis of the words in discourse, but can be ascertained by looking at how speech interacts with the four maxims in various ways:
- when a maxim is quietly violated
- when a participant explicitly opts-out from a maxim
- when the fulfillment of one maxim is in contradiction, tension with another maxim: a clash
- when a maxim is openly disregarded or flouted
Grice uses very short snippets of conversation, mostly just paired statements: A says this, B says this in response. He uses these snippets to illustrate the fulfillment of the four maxims, and how this can give rise to implicatures, or meanings that are not explicitly provided in the literal text.
In contrast Kasper (2006) also looks at pragmatics but uses much longer sequences of conversation. This makes sense because Kasper uses the lens of Conversation Analysis to examine pragmatics, or meaning making. CA requires looking at more than just pairs of utterances at conversations. Kasper critiques the rationalist foundations of Speech Act theory, by questioning the idea that the meaning of an utterance is related to the internal state of the speaker, and that in turn, the listener receives and internalizes that meaning. This telementation model, where meaning is being transmitted from speaker to listener does not, in Kasper’s eyes, sufficiently describe the way that meaning is arrived at or generated. For Kasper meaning is co-constructed by participants, and rather than being transmitted it is emergent and highly contextual. Conversation Analysis’ attention to the specific details of full conversations allows meaning and context to be understood in its specificity as collaborative ventures, where the whole can be larger than the sum of its parts.
|
|
|
Taguchi (2015) provides an example of using cross-cultural speech act theory to look at competencies of language learners. Culture is an important dimension to understanding the speech acts because the mechanics of speech and the significance of particular word choices are not necessarily portable across cultures. Taguchi is specifically interested in how spending a year abroad can change the learners cultural awareness and their ability to general speech acts, or their language competency. The specific research question was to see if cultural adjustment is correlated with language skill.
To achieve this Taguchi measures intercultural competence and pragmatic competence in a group of 20 Japanese language learners before and after their semester abroad. Intercultural competence is measured using a tool called the Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory, which is essentially a survey of 50 questions that measures several factors using a Likert scale. Pragmatic competence is measures using an oral discourse complete test (DCT). This test collects what language learners think they would say in a particular situation, and the responses were then evaluated by Japanese speakers with respect to the speech style and speech act using a six point scale. The results were then analyzed statistically using the t-test to see if there was any correlation between changes in cultural adaptability and language use. They found that intercultural competence was correlated with appropriate speech acts, but not with speech style. The authors conjectured that this could be the failing of the DCT, or perhaps with their relatively small sample size.
Билет 12
Types of discourse
-narrative
descriptive
-procedural
-expository
-persuasive
- argumentative
-conversational
Narration, or narrative, unlike description is always dynamic in character. It tells a story by giving an account of happenings, and is a major tool of plot development. Mind that the tem "narration" can have a more general meaning synonymous to "story-telling". The main purpose and distinguishing factor of this writing is to explain some concept according to a given time sequence. The Narration type of discourse tells your readers about a certain event. It informed them what happened and how it happened. It further gives your readers with the impression of the particular event. Narration type of discourse gives your readers the sense of witnessing a certain situation. It narrates the story or a certain events to the readers
Description is a "picture in words". As such, it is usually static in that there is no movement of fictitious time within a descriptive passage. In case a process is being described, however, we would deal with a specific form of "dynamic description". Yet, its function is similar to that of a simple description: it serves as a means of portrayal and does not accelerate the movement of the plot.
The main purpose of this type of discourse is to explain or describe some concept, person or setting, thought to be unfamiliar, to the audience. Descriptive writing uses various organizational/spatial strategies. For example in describing a house on a hill, a writer may start describing what it looks like starting from the base of the hill upwards (ground view). Another writer may start by describing how it looks from the skies going downwards to the base of the hill (aerial view).
Argumentative
Argumentation is a type of discourse whose goal is to defend an opinion and persuade a listener about it through proofs and arguments linked with: logic (the law of human thought), dialectics (procedures that are tried in order to prove or refute something) and rhetoric (the use of language tools to persuade through non-rational motivators such as affection, emotion.
The main purpose of this type of writing is to convince or influence readers to accept a particular point of view. Argumentative writing does this by appealing to readers' logic. Readers expect a strong piece of argumentative writing to be as objective and neutral as possible, and to convince them by presenting them with statistcal/scientific data, quotes, facts and other information that can be tested/substantiated. In other words, this type of writing relies heavily on technical/scientific writing.
Exposition
The main purpose of exposition is to define, inform, teach or explain some concept. As such, the expectation of expository writing is for it to be objective, precise and neutral (free from bias and prejudice). In otherwords, it mostly uses technical/scientific writing. Writers also employ a combination of varied organizational strategies in expostion, depending on their topic, audience and purpose for writing. These may include, cause and effect, comparison/contrast, definition,description/illustration
Types
-informational (delivers factual information)
-analytic ( analysis in details)
-persuasive (to use facts in order to explain smth which is written/ clarify meaning)
Persuasion (in advertisement)
The main purpose of this type of writing is to convince or influence readers to accept a particular point of view. Persuasive writing does this by mainly appealing to readers' emotions. In this type of writing you may find the use of emotive words, repitition, figurative language, opinions, biases etc. In other words, this type of writing relies heavily on artistic writing.
Procedural (manual) – it is used mostly in instructions
- follow the steps
- -important in factory construction
-gives instruction for the implementation of the task
-clear plan
- written in clear way
Written and Spoken discourse
The concept of discourse is conventionally thought of and taught in terms of written and spoken discourse (Brown and Yule 1983; Cook 1989; Nunan 1993; McCarthy and Carter 1994; Georgakopoulou and Goustos 1997; Carter et al 1998).
Nunan (1993) and Georgakopoulou and Goustos (1997) have contributed to debates on the identification and specification of the differences between spoken and written discourse along a continuum. They explain that, although both discourse types are used for basically similar functions, such as getting things done, providing information, and entertainment, the contexts for each differ. Spoken discourse is normally used in face-to-face interactions (including teleconferences), whereas written discourse is used to communicate with those who are removed in time and space or in cases where a permanent or semi-permanent record is required. It is important to note that although there are distinct features in both types of discourse, the differences are not absolute
| Differences | Written | Spoken |
| 1 Manner of production | a) Writing is a slower activity, thus authors have the time to mould their ideas into a more complex, coherent and integrated whole using complicated lexical and syntactic devices. b) Written texts are relatively permanent and this enables them to be surveyed and consulted.These texts are the products of copious drafts, which involve extensive checking and editing.The relative permanence of written texts also allows them to be portable. | a) Due to the speed and manner of production, less forethought, planning and prior organisation goes into speech. b) Spoken text is transient unless it is recorded.Therefore, it is imperfect and it is always possible to do on-line editing and negotiate meaning |
| 2 Contextual features | c) Written texts are decontextualised or autonomous as they cannot depend on the addressee’s contributions or on other contextual clues.There is no common situation, as in face-toface interaction.The situation has to be inferred from the text. Also, the words need to convey all shades of meaning, which in spoken text are relayed by paralinguistic cues. | c) The interlocutors share the same spatio-temporal context. Communication thus shows an ‘on-line’ monitoring, which benefits from the addressee’s immediate feedback and the abundance of contextual cues (visual clues such as body language and gestures; auditory clues like variation in tone of voice, hesitations, pauses, etc). |
| 3 Linguistic features | d) In written language the sentences are complete, and better structured with embedded clauses. e) Extensive use of metalingual markers to mark relationships between clauses; for example, temporal markers like when, while; logical connectors such as besides, moreover, however, etc. | d) The syntax in spoken language is typically less structured than that of written language; for example, spoken language contains incomplete sentences, fragments of speech, and little subordination. e) Rare use of metalingual markers. The markers seem to be replaced by fillers, such as ‘er’, ‘umm’,‘hmmn’, and logical connectors like and, but, then, etc. |
Difference between Writing Discourse/Text and Spoken Discourse/Text
Consistent: Written text is identical so that it can be understood by anybody who speaks the language; it can be read or spoken in any language or accent but spoken text is not identical so none can understand it properly.
Дата добавления: 2019-02-26; просмотров: 1827; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!