语言学流派论文 14页

.OnTheLondonSchoolContentsAbstract………………………………………………………………………………1摘要…………………………………………………………………………………2Introduction………………………………………………………………………3Chapter1BackgroundofTheLondonSchool……………………………………4Chapter2DevelopmentoftheLondonSchool……………………………………5Chapter3RepresentativesandTheirTheories.…………………………………6Chapter4CommentontheComparisonBetweenFirthianLinguisticsandNoamChomsky’sGenerativeGrammar…………………………………………………7..\n.AbstractComparedtootherschoolsofmodernlinguistics,theLondonSchool,foundedbyJ.R.Firth,ismoreinterestedininstrumentalityoflanguageandmeaningorfunctionincontext.InfluencedbyMalinowski'stheorizing,Firthandhisfollowersstressthefunctioningoflanguageandarguethatlanguagecannotbedisassociatedfrommeaningandshouldbelookedatfromasociologicalperspective.TheLondonSchoolandthesystemicfunctionalgrammar,whichhasdevelopedoutoftheLondonapproachtolanguage,considermeaningandfunctionasthebasisofhumanlanguageandcommunicativeactivity.ThelinguistictheorizingintheLondonstyleisofpracticalsignificanceandthereforeismorerelevanttosociolinguistics,stylistics,literarycriticismandlanguageteaching.FromthelinguisticideasofafewimportantfiguresoftheLondonSchool,wemayseethedevelopmentalstagesthisSchoolhasgonethroughandhowthetraditionhasbeenestablishedfortheacademicdisciplineoflinguisticsinBritain.Comparedtootherschoolswecanseewhatdifferencesbetweenthem.Keywords:LondonSchool;linguistictheorizing;figures..\n.摘要与其他现代语言学学派相比，由弗斯创建的伦敦学派更注重语言的机构和语境中的意义及功能。受Malinowski理论的影响，弗斯和他的跟随者都注重语言的功能，并且认为语言不能脱离意义，应该从社会的视角看待语言。伦敦派和系统功能语法的发展已经从伦敦趋向语言，认为意义和功能是人类语言及交际活动的基础。伦敦风格的语言学理论具有实际的重要性，因此，对于社会语言学、文体学、文学批判主义以及语言教学都有着重大的作用。从伦敦学派的一些重要的代表人物的理论来看，我们可以看出这一学派的发展历程以及它的传统理论是如何在英国语言学术中被创立的。把它与其他学派相比较，我们不难看出他们之间具体有何不同。关键词：伦敦学派语言学理论人物..\n.IntroductionTheLondonSchoolgenerallyreferstothekindoflinguisticscholarshipinEngland,acountrythathasbothanunusuallyinlinguisticsandpeculiarfeaturesinmodernlinguistics.AndthereisafamousscholarrepresentingtheLondonSchool’slinguisticpoints,namedJ.R.Firth,andhewasthefirstprofessorofGeneralLinguisticsinGreatBritain.J.R.FirthwasinfluencedbytheanthropologistB.Malinowski.Inturn,heinfluencedhisstudents,thewell-knownlinguistM.A.K.Halliday.Thethreemenallstressedtheimportanceofcontextofsituationandthesystemaspectoflanguage.Thus,londonschoolisalsoknownassystemiclinguisticsandfunctionallinguistics...\n.Chapter1BackgroundofTheLondonSchoolThelondonschoolisoneoftheimportantmodernlinguisticsschools.Itwasfoundedinengland,acountryinwhichcertainaspectsoflinguisticshaveanunusuallylonghistory,byjohnrupertfirth(1890-1960),thefirstgenerallinguisticsanthropologistandfatherofthelondonschool.J.R.FirthhadestablishedtheschooltogetherwithsomecolleaguesandapprenticeintheuniversityofLondonandtheAfricaninstitutespeechdepartment,sincethe1930s.In1960,afterthedeathofJ.R.Firth,theyscatteredintheU.K.andAustraliaandtheuniversityiesacrosstheUnitedStatestowork.Comparedtootherschoolsofmodernlinguistics,theLondonSchool,foundedbyJ.R.Firth,ismoreinterestedininstrumentalityoflanguageandmeaningorfunctionincontext.From17to19century,theBritishempirewasexpandingterritoryandthelanguages,becameincreasinglycomplex.ItneededtoestablishthestandardEnglish,whichcouldbeunderstoodbyallofpeopleandneededtobefamiliarwiththelanguageofpeoplewhosenationallanguageisnotEnglish.Therefore,theBritishresearchofthelanguagehaditsdefinitepracticalpurpose.TheBritishhadmadegreateffortonorthoepy,lexicography,stenographyandspellingreform.BeforeJ.R.Firth,HenrySweetandDanialJonesofhadmadegreatcontributiontophonetics...\n.Chapter2DevelopmentoftheLondonSchoolthedevelopmentofthelondonschoolwasconnectedwithseveralrepresentatives.Theirideasaboutlinguisticshadinheritanceanddevelopment,whichrepresentedthegermination,establishmentanddevelopmentandsooneachstageoftheLondonschool.Malinowski’s“meaningasfounctionsinthecontextofsituation”wasitssourceofideas.J.R.Firth’s“typicalcontextofsituation”wasthefoundationofit.AndHalliday’s“systemic-functionalgrammar”wasthedevelopmentofitsthought.Then“CognitiveGrammar”ofmatthiessen,fawcettandotherswasitstopofdevelopment,whichledtheresearchofthefunctionoflanguagetoturntothecognition.Thisisalinkprocess,evenisadifficultprocessoflanguagestudieshaveapproachedthenatureoflanguage,whichrepresentsitsthewholecontextoflinguisticsdevelopmentofthought.Inotherwords,theseseveralrepresentativefigureshavemadecontributionstothewholeLondonschoollinguistics,andthetrainofthoughtofthestudycanbetracedtoitstraditionalthought...\n.Chapter3RepresentativesandTheirTheoriesFirth,ayorkshireman,readhistoryasanundergraduate.hewasprofessorofenglishattheuniversityofthepunjabfrom1919to1928,andreturnedinthelatteryeartoapostinthephoneticsdepartmentofuniversitycollege,london.in1938firthmovedtothelinguisticdepartmentoftheschooloforientalandafricanstudies,wherein1944hebecamethefirstprofessorofgenerallinguisticsingreatbritain.untilveryrecently,themajorityofuniversityteachersoflinguisticsinbritainwerepeoplewhohadtrainedunderfirth’saegisandwhoseworkreflectedhisideas.therearemanyotherbritishlinguistsinthisschool,suchasf.palmer,johnlyons,r.h.robinsandm.a.k.halliday.Firth’stheory:1)analysisoflanguage:structure/system;2)hearguesnotonlysocialprocessbutalsoindividualhumanbeingsareinvolvedinthedevelopmentoflanguage.heemphasisthepersonalsideofhumanbeing.hedidnotagreesaussurandictum,langueandparole,languageisasetofcommensions,andmodeofaction.3)speechistheessenceoflanguage.4)languageisdevelopedasaresultofinter-natureandnurture.people’slearningprocessoflanguagethetargetlanguageusedbypeopleinreality.Duringthedevelopment,thereweretwooutstandingaspectsthatarealwaysassociatedwiththenameoffirth:contextofsituationtheoryandprosody.thecontextofsituationtheoryisthefoundationoflinguistics.firthinsistedthatsoundandmeaninginlanguageweremoredirectlyrelatedthantheyareusuallytakentobe...\n.meaningisthefocusoflinguisticstudy;contextmaybeemployedtobethetheoryandapproachofanalysis.meaningdoesnotcomefromtheideaofthewordcomprisedthesituationby,orfromtherelation.Malinowski’stheories:(1)professorofanthropologyatthelondonschoolofeconomicsfrom1927onward.Themostimportantaspectofhistheoriesconcernedaboutthefunctioningoflanguage.languageisregardedtobeamodeofaction.(2)basedontwokindsofobservations:first,inprimitivecommunitiesthereisnowriting,andlanguagehasonlyonetypeofuse.Second,inallsocieties,childrenlearntheirlanguagesinthisway.(3)utterancesandsituationareboundupwitheachotherandthecontextofsituationisindispensablefortheunderstandingofwords.HallidayhasdevelopedtheideasstemmingfromFirth’stheoriesinthelondonschool.Hissystemic-functionalgrammarisasociologicallyorientedfunctionallinguisticapproachandoneofthemostinfluentiallinguistictheoriesinthetwentiethcentury.systemic-functionalgrammarcontainstwocomponents:systemicgrammarandfunctionalgrammar.Systemicgrammaraimstoexplaintheinternalrelationsinlanguageasasystemnetwork,ormeaningpotential.Functionalgrammaraimstorevealthatlanguageisameansofsocialinteraction...\n.Chapter4CommentontheComparisonBetweenFirthianLinguisticsandNoamChomsky’sGenerativeGrammarSyntacticanalysisinthelondonstyleiscommonlycalled“systemicgrammar”(other,lesssignificanttermshavealsobeenused).a“system”infirthianlanguage,remembers,isasetofmutuallyexclusiveoptionsthatcomeintoplayatsomepointinalinguisticstructure.thisisthecluetolondonschoolsyntax:likefirthanphonology,itisprimarilyconcernedwiththenatureandimportofthevariouschoiceswhichonemakes(consciouslyorunconsciously)indecidingtoutteroneparticularsentenceoutoftheinfinitelynumeroussentencesthatone’slanguagemakesavailable.Tomakethisclearer,wemaycontrastthesystemicapproachwithchomsky’sapproachtogrammar.achomskyangrammardefinestheclassofwell-formedsentencesinalanguagebyprovidingasetofrulesforrewritingsymbolsasothersymbols,suchthatifonebeginswiththespecifiedinitialsymbolsandappliestherulesrepeatedlytheend-resultwillbeoneofthetargetsentences.suchagrammarcansucceedindefiningarangeofdifferentsentences,clearly,onlybecauseinapplyingtherulesoneisoftenfacedwithchoices.butinachomskygrammarthechoice-pointsarediffusedthroughoutthedescription,andnospecialattentionisdrawntothem.manychoicesaremadeintheconstituencybase:agivencategorysymbolisexpandedbymeansofbracesorcommasintoalternativerewriters,orbracketsareusedtoshowthatsomeelementmayormaynotoccurintherewriterofacategorysymbol.other..\n.choicesariseinapplyingtransformations:certaintransformationsareoptional,otherscanapplyinalternativeways,and(insomeversionsoftransformationaltheory)therearealternativeordersforapplyingtransformations,withthenatureoftheultimateresultvaryingaccordingtowhichorderisselected.oftenitwouldbethecasethatsomechoiceinapplyingtransformationalrulesbecomesavailableonlyifcertainoptionshavebeenselectedintheconstituencybase,butachomskyangrammardoesnothingtomakesuchinterdependenciesbetweenchoicesexplicit–thatisnotitsaim.tociteaverysimpleexample,halliday(1967,p.40)suggestthatonesystemofchoicesoperatinginenglishmainclauses,asystemwhichhelabels“transitivity”,providesforachoicebetween“intensive”and“extensive”.inastandardtransformationalgrammar,thesyntacticdifferencesbetweentheseclauseswouldcorrelatewithchoiceofrewriteforthecategorysymbol“vp”andforcertainothersymbolsinthebase,withchoiceofwhetherornottoapplythepassivetransformation,andwithchoiceofwhetherornottoapplythetransformationwhichdeletestheby-phraseproducedbypassive.noexplicitstatementwouldbefoundinatransformationalgrammarpointingout,forexample,thatthechoiceofapplyingthepassivetransformationarisesonlyifcertainoptionsarechosenwhenrewriting“vp”inthebase,andtherearecertainlynospecialnamesgiventothealternativestructureswhichresultfromthevariouschoices.(occasionallychomskyansdouseaspecialtermstodescribesomeparticularsyntacticstructure,butusuallythisisaterminheritedfromtraditionalphilologicalvocabulary,andtraditionalterminologyprovidenamesforonlythemostelementaryamongthemanysystemsdefinedinasystemicgrammar–chomskyansdonotmakeapointofsupplementingthisdeficiency.)londonschoollinguistshavenointerestinaskingwhatparticulartypesofrulesareusedinrealizingvarioussystemicoptions,sincetheyarenotconcernedwiththequestionoflinguisticuniversals.inthecaseofsyntaxthechomskyansarelessone–sidedthaninthecaseofphonology,sincemostchomskyangrammarsincludeaconstituencybasedefiningarangeofdeepstructuresaswellasasetoftransformationalrulesconvertingdeepintosurfacestructures.alongsidethenotionof“system”,halliday(forexample,1961)introducesintosyntaxthenotions“rank”and..\n.“delicacy”:scaleofrank;scaleofdelicacyandscaleofexponence.anygrammaticalsystemwilloperateataspecificrank.ifwethinkintermsofchomskyanhierarchicaltreediagrams,hallidayissaying,asitwere,thatsentencescanberepresentednotmerelyastreesbutastreeswhichareregimentedinsuchawaythatalonganybranchtherearethesamenumberofintermediatenodesbetweenthe“root”andthe“leaf”.themostimportantviewofhallidayishisscaleandcategorygrammar,andsystemicgrammar.hesupposedthattherearefourcategoriesinlanguage:unit,class,structureandsystem.thesefourcategoriesarelinkedwithscaleofrank,scaleofdelicacyandscaleofexponence...\n.ConclusionTheLondonschoolpayattentiontopronunciation,semantics,thesocialdialectsandlocaldialect,explorelanguage,grammarsystem,apsychologicalcombiningliterarycriticism,payattentiontolanguageteaching.Forwithpracticalforthetargetlanguagelearners,theyiskeentolead...\n.尾注：本文系刘润清，崔刚及冯志伟等研究的部分成果。Bibliography[1]刘润清.《西方语言学流派》[Z].外研社，1995.[2]刘润清，崔刚.《现代语言学名著选读》[Z].外研社，2009.[3]冯志伟.《现代语言学流派》[M].陕西人民出版社，1999...\n.AcknowledgementsItisapleasuretothankthosewhomadethisthesispossible.First,IthankMrZhengforteachingusthissubjectandsharinghisknowledgewithus.ThenIcanfinishthisthesis.Second,IcantnotforgetmyparentswhogivemelifeandsupporttogivemethechancetocomeintothecollegewhereIcanlearnmore,suchasthissubjectabouttheschoolsoflinguistics.Finally,Iwouldliketoshowmygratitudetomyroomatesforgivingmesuggestandsupporttofinishthisthesis.Lastly,Ioffermyregardsandblessingstoallofthosewhosupportedmeinanyrespectduringthecompletionoftheproject...