摘要
言语行为转喻理论有两方面不足:仅考虑脚本及其成分(分别相当于话语的施事用意和话语本身)的关系,没有述及成分的字面和隐含脚本之间和成分的字面与隐含命题内容之间的联系,更没有触及它们的推理机制;想当然地认为脚本及其成分所构成的整体-部分关系是即时语用推理迅捷性的保证,没有说明推理的语境依赖性.解决办法有两点:(1)明确字面和隐含施事用意没有转喻联系.隐含施事用意的获取首要取决于命题内容,其次是语境、相邻对和会话的协商性等.(2)隐含命题内容需要通过溯果推理获得,即字面和隐含命题内容之间均可以构成松散的因果关系,是转喻的体现.结论是:即时语用推理涉及转喻,但它只存在于对命题内容的推理之中,所以本文言及的转喻机制和Panther&Thornburg的有本质不同.
Abstract
Speech act metonymy theory has two drawbacks.First,it only takes into account the relationship between a scenario and its components(respectively equivalent to illocutionary force of an utterance and the utterance itself),but does not address how literal scenario of a component is related to its implicit scenario,and how literal propositional content of a component is related its implicit counterpart,let alone the inference mechanism behind them.Second,it claims the fallacy that the whole-part relationship between a scenario and its components is the automatic guarantee of spontaneous pragmatic inference,without considering its context dependence.Two solutions are put forward to remedy the two drawbacks.First,the inference of the implicit illocutionary force is not metonymically determined by the literal counterpart,but predominantly by propositional content,and secondarily by context,adjacency pairs and the negotiability of human communication.Second,the implicit propositional content is obtained by effect-cause deductive inference.That is,there exists a loose effect-cause relationship between literal and implicit propositional content,and such relationship is of typical metonymy.To sum up,spontaneous pragmatic inference involves metonymy,but it only plays a role in the inference of propositional contents.Therefore,the metonymic mechanisms discussed in this study are fundamentally different from those of Panther&Thornburg's.
NETL
NSTL
万方数据