【作者】 蔡立予；

【导师】 何刚；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 英语语言文学， 2016， 博士

【摘要】 口误是语言生活中的常见现象,无论是谁概莫能外。口误在语言使用中产生,是一个处于动态发展进程中的话语现象；由于话语受到带有意图的言语主体,人际框架,各语境要素等参数的影响,又受到口语线性输出的压力,所以口误的出现也是话语不断选择,不停顺应的结果之一；口误虽然被认作是话语参与者互动中的副产品,但其偏离却有其规律性和制约条件；由口误造成的偏离往往能使“言后行为”充满不确定因素,并可在社会文化因子的影响下升级为公共关系的突发危机。以上所列都是历来口误研究抑或忽视,抑或从未涉及的方面。本文站在口误是一种话语现象的视角,以语用-认知相关理论概念对小型口误语料库进行过程性分析。研究起点为口误的界定,分类,再到说话人一方的口误生成机制,受话人一方的口误推理机制,直至口误的言后行为应对。通过对口误国内外研究的历时性梳理,研究发现结合语境、话语角色以及言语行为三分法等语用学基本理论概念可以对口误进行全新的界定和分类。此定义强调口误在交际意图传递中出现的偏差,强调这种偏差是话语的实际形式与话语参与者熟知的心理语境模型之间的差异；更强调口误是一种话语现象,也是实施言语行为的一种特殊状态,可使言语行为改变或者不改变性质。并由口误发生语境、包含口误的言语行为三分法、口误涉及的话语角色分类(人际框架)以及口误影响受众面等方面展开讨论,以期为下文的语用-认知分析奠定基础。根据定义,话语活动牵涉到说话人和受话人,包含口误的话语活动也就牵涉到说出口误的说话人以及对此口误做出关联性反应的受话入。本文第四章和第五章相应地讨论了口误的语用-认知生成机制和口误的语用-认知推理机制。从生成机制看,口误有其话语理据。研究发现口误是说话人实施会话策略时,突显信息偏离涌现而造成的现象。一方面来说,说话人在自觉实施会话策略(即重复、具象化以及话语重构策略)以期达成会话目标(“信息连贯”和“情感融合”)的过程中,口误会被诱发。另一方面来说,会话策略又被更为深刻的认知语用因素驱动着：即“突显”信息的不自觉“涌现”。“突显涌现”又可下分为语境信息突显涌现(包含物理和话语语境),集体信息突显涌现以及内隐信息突显涌现。口误是追求有效交际,表达意图过程中积极语用的看似偶发实则常见的结果,而不单单是传统意义上消极的语言现象。从推理机制看,口误的语用推理主要着眼于推导出说话人原本的意图或者说话人本身应该说的话语形式。以“本地解读”和“类推”为原则,以消除歧义(disambiguation),确定指称(reference assignment)以及语义充实(semantic enrichment)作为实践的三步骤,便可实现信息意图的还原,有助交际意图的达成。分析发现,口误所在语码仅为语用推理提供各种假设和证据,而没有直接决定交际成败的功能：影响信息连贯的口误仅是对认知处理努力造成“量”上的折损,而不会引起“质”变。而引起“质”变的含有口误的言语行为,并非是语用推理无法推导出信息意图,而是在交际意图的达成时损坏了会话的“情感融合”目标,使得受话方愿意或者不自觉“曲解”被偏离的意图,而造成情感冲突的“言后行为”。这一发现也为下一章“口误度”概念的提出打下理论基础。“口误度”以及口误应对研究是本研究理论创新和理论应用章节。口误度是一个基于语用偏差度的概念,意在区分口误引发的“言后行为”程度差异。高口误度意味着情感融合彻底失败,交际失败,言语行为变性。这类口误往往发生在机构性话语中；而中口误度一般引发情感融合危机,交际有失败威胁,言语行为可能变性。一般发生在半机构或者非亲密协作关系的语境中；而低口误度则不太会影响情感融合,较少引发交际的失败,言语行为变性的可能最少,一般发生在亲密且协作的语境。根据情感损耗对双方、对对方、对己方的作用,各口误度还能够继续下分高、中、低三类,形成高(高、中、低)口误度,中(高、中、低)以及低(高、中、低)口误度九大类以期展示口误的言后行为全貌。并据此根据口误度高低,对监控和补救提出相应的应对策略。本研究基于语用-认知角度对话语口误进行了初步的分析,语用-认知概念贯穿全文。在给予口误全新的定义和分类后,从说话人实施会话策略追求会话目标视角分析口误的“偶发”有其话语理据性；又从认知“突显”角度阐释了语境信息、群体共性信息、个人内隐信息如何在会话过程中能够冲破认知监控不自觉“涌现”而引发口误；还发现口误的语用推理只发生在信息连贯层面,而破坏情感融合的口误言后行为则需要用“口误度”概念加以区分和应对。在初步分析得出影响“口误度”的参数后进一步应用“口误度”概念为口误,特别是言后行为引发公共危机的口误提出具体可行的事先监控以及事后修正方案。希望这一口误过程化研究能够有助于深化其学科发展,将语言学的最新发展融入到历史悠久的口误研究中去。更多还原

【Abstract】 Slips of the tongue (SOT for short afterwards) happen as often as people talk. Even the experienced hosts can’t help making SOT in broadcasting, let alone the commoners in daily conversations. There were few academic groups and academic papers discussing SOT since the golden age for SOT studies. This study aims to look at SOT in a new angle, namely SOT in utterance in the scope of pragma-cognitive perspective which may enable a thorough expolaration of it.In the utterance, slips of the tongue can be seen as a process of being triggered, taking place, being corrected and being mended under the heavy pressure of composing linear structure of oral speech with multi-dimensional factors in certain context. The use of language is a dynamic construction constrained by the context while refreshing the context in the meantime. The process is by no means a smooth one but rather a journey with a lot of unexpectedness and setbacks. The study of SOT is to abide by the true scenario of language use and to supplement the related linguistic researches which mostly based on that of ideal language study.Slips of the tongue, under the threefold influence of intentionality, the interpersonal relations and factors related to context, occur in the language communication and interaction. Such deviation sometimes will not change the nature of speech act while sometimes derail the speech act at one go. Consequently, slips of the tongue is a lengthy issue staying close with language adaptation, pragmatic inference as well as pragmatic adaptation. Furthermore, the perlocutionary act brought in by slips of the tongue can be of uncertainty which conceives post-event escalation or conflict both at home and abroad. SOT is worth in-depth research and it may become a lively topic combining psycho-linguistics, socio-linguistics and pragmatics.SOT is by no means a sheer language issue but rather an issue related with language use. Based upon this concept, we define SOT from a pragmatic perspective: SOT is a speech event where what the speakers say deviates from what is planned under certain context. SOT is a special state in implementing speech act as it may or may not change the nature of the speech to which the audience(can be the hearers and speakers) would make relevant response. This definition supplies the key words for us to classify the SOT accordingly under the terms of context, trichotomy of speech act, speech roles and its after-event influence. Thus can we have the solid foundation for pragmatic analysis thereafter.Conversation involves speaker and listener. Hence, slips of the tongues involve the speakers who produce them and the listeners who process them accordingly. The next wo chapters discuss respectively the production mechanism of SOT and the inference nachanism in pragma-cognitive perspective. We discovered that interlocutors voluntarily carry out the conversational strategies, namely the use of repetition, detail ind imagery languages as well as reconstructed language in the hope of achieving two goal:(informative)coherence and (emotional)involvement. The twofold concepts are not >nly the goals of successful conversation, but also the outcome of that. People invite the )ccurrence of slips in the process of applying conversational strategies during which a leep pragma-cognitive root functions. We name it the emergence of salience which neans the salient information will unconsciously emerge and make it the source of SOT. Under that scope, slips wear the features of an intentional process seeking for effective communication and thereby it is a byproduct of positive pragmatics rather than a negative mistake in traditional discussion.Inference of slips is to evaluate language code which provides hypothesis and ;vidence for inference. Interlocutors estimate the speech event on line in different contexts, hoping to understand the distorted parole with minimum cognitive efforts. With he help of linguistic knowledge, logical knowledge and encyclopedic knowledge, nference takes place chronologically from disambiguation, reference assignment to semantic enrichment according to maxims of local interpretation and analogy. When only the (informative) coherence is hindered by the SOT. no serious consequence belies the intentionality. However, when the serious consequence does take effect, there is always a willful distortion on hearer’s side since the SOT destroy the possibility of emotional involvement and thus invite the conflict. The varied consequences of SOT drive us to go further to look at the different degrees of distortion they may bring in.Last chapter discusses the possible confrontational tips in dealing with SOT. The term degree of distortion is invented to show varied pragmatic deviation that various SOT may produce. This concept demonstrates the different consequence SOT may accomplish under the cooperation of context genres and communication modes. High degree of distortion, mostly in institutional context, means the failure of emotional involvement, failure of communication and the failure of speech act thereafter. Intermediate degree of distortion, mostly in half-institutional context, formal context or non-collaborative context, will threaten the achievement of communication, the fulfillment of speech act as well as the success of emotional involvement; Low degree of distortion suffers the least influence and may affect neither the speech act nor the communication goals. Accordingly, the tactics to cope with the three degrees of distortion should differ.This dissertation is a tentative exploration of SOT in the pragma-cognitive perspective. We start with the new definition and classification, then analyze the mechanism of the production and inference of SOT and lastly focus on the strategies to cope with SOT by degree of distortion. SOT, consequently is an occasional but discoursal phonemenon under the influence of emergence of salience.Hopefully the research of this unbroken contiunuum can help extend the academic field of SOT.更多还原