论文部分内容阅读
本文运用功能主义的理论和方法,主要从“有准备/无准备”这一新的角度将汉语语体分为典型口语语体、边际性语体和典型书面语体三种,通过相关三种语料对汉语主题句在三种语体中的表现进行了考察,并参考了俄语口语中主题句的相关表现,得出结论:1.汉语主题句存在显著语体差异,在典型口语语体中,主要使用主题句;在典型书面语体中主要使用主语句;在边际性语体中使用主题句少于典型口语,使用主语句少于典型书面语。2.主题句的语体差异并非汉语独有,在公认的重视主语的语言——俄语中仍然存在。3.Li&Thompson不考虑语体差异而将重视主语和重视主题作为划分标准的语言类型学理论存在瑕疵。
This paper uses the functionalist theories and methods to divide the Chinese language into three types: typical spoken language, marginalized language and typical written language from the new perspective of “preparedness / unpreparedness” The corpus investigates the performance of the Chinese thematic sentences in the three kinds of style, and makes reference to the related expressions of the thematic sentences in the Russian spoken language. The conclusion is drawn as follows: 1. There is a significant difference between the Chinese theme sentences and the typical spoken language style The main sentence is used; the main sentence is mainly used in the typical written style; the topic sentence is used less than the typical spoken language in the marginalized style, and the main sentence is used less than the typical written language. 2. Thematic differences between Chinese and English are not unique to Chinese, but are still found in Russian, the accepted language that emphasizes on the subject. 3.Li & Thompson does not consider the difference between the two languages, but the subject of language typology, which emphasizes the subject and the subject of attention, has flaws.