【作者】 张丽琴；

【导师】 张剑；

【作者基本信息】 北京理工大学 ， 外国语言文学， 2018， 硕士

【摘要】 致谢语是作者、研究与被致谢者之间产生关系的桥梁,展现作者的学术圈,识别作者的职业身份和社会身份,表明作者对在论文完成期间帮助过自己的人或组织机构的态度。到目前,大多数研究以Hyland(2003,2004)研究框架为基础、从不同研究视角对不同学科的学位论文致谢语进行研究。他们关注的大多是由非英语国家的研究生所撰写的不同学科的学位论文致谢语,但是对英语国家的博士论文致谢语之间的学科差异关注较少。另外,在以英语为外语(EFL)或以英语为第二语言(ESL)的语境中的大部分高校学生体裁意识比较薄弱,对论文中“致谢语”部分不够重视,对致谢语的撰写不够认真。本文选取美国高校计算机科学和应用语言学两学科共60篇博士论文,其中57篇博士论文包含致谢语部分。因此,本次研究以此57篇致谢语作为研究语料。本文分析了致谢语篇的整体体裁结构和致谢语步中的致谢语句表达、称呼语和主位特点,旨在探究美国高校博士论文致谢语的学科差异性和相似性。本研究采用定性和定量分析法,借助软件Lab VIEW2014和SPSS20完成数据收集和统计分析。研究框架参照Hyland(2004:308)的“三级结构”模式,即“回顾语步”、“致谢语步”和“宣告语步”。其中,“致谢语步”是必要语步,“回顾语步”和“宣告语步”是选择语步。“致谢语步”包含四个步骤:介绍参与者、致谢学术帮助、致谢提供资源、致谢精神支持。“宣告语步”则由承担责任和献文两个步骤实现。研究结果表明,美国高校的博士研究生在构建致谢语时大体遵从了Hyland的“三级结构”模式。就体裁结构分析的结果来讲,计算机科学与应用语言学之间存在差异和相似。在计算机科学中,语步包括回顾语步、致谢语步(包含四个步骤,介绍被致谢人、致谢学术帮助、致谢资源支持、致谢精神支持)、称赞语步、宣告语步、结束语步和签名语步。在应用语言学中,语步结构则包括开场语步、回顾语步、致谢语步(包含五个步骤,介绍被致谢人、致谢学术帮助、致谢资源支持、致谢精神支持、致谢/赞美上帝)、宣告语步、结束语步和签名语步。二者差异性在于计算机科学致谢语中有称赞语步而应用语言学致谢语中则没有,应用语言学致谢语中有开场语步和致谢上帝步骤而计算机科学致谢语中则无。二者相似性在于:1.其致谢语均包括回顾语步、致谢语步、宣告语步、结束语步和签名语步;2.致谢语中均缺少步骤承担责任。在Hyland(2004)研究结果的基础上,本研究发现四个新语步和一个新步骤。就致谢语句表达使用来讲,两学科间差异较小。被动句型在计算机科学致谢语中缺失,在应用语言学致谢语中占据较小比例。计算机科学致谢语中使用的动词表达句型、名词表达句型和形容词表达句型的比例略高于应用语言学,使用简要提及表达句型的比例则低于应用语言学。总体来讲,美国高校博士研究生更倾向于多使用动词和名词表达句型、少使用被动表达句型来展现他们对被致谢者或机构的谢意和诚意。就称呼语来讲,全名(full name)、名字(first name)、头衔+全名(title plus full name)的使用频率排名前三。在使用频率上,两学科间存在不同。在计算机科学中,顺序为名字、全名、头衔+全名,而在应用语言学中,顺序则为全名、头衔+全名、名字。名字在计算机科学致谢语中的比例高于应用语言学致谢语中的比例。在致谢导师和其他学者方面,两学科均倾向于采用头衔+全名去表达感谢。在致谢家庭和朋友方面,两学科均倾向于采用名字表达谢意。就主位特点来讲,两学科的共性在于简单主位的出现频率大大超过多项主位,且主要由三个要素来体现(按照频次顺序)——作者本人、致谢对象、论文(研究、著作)。差异性在于以作者本人和论文(研究、著作)要素为主位的比例方面,计算机科学大于应用语言学,而以致谢对象要素为主位的比例方面,计算机科学小于应用语言学。本研究在以下方面具有一定的借鉴意义。第一,有助于体裁分析研究的深入。第二,有助于增强学生的体裁意识,增加对体裁的了解。第三,有助于提高学生撰写致谢语的能力,提高其掌握程度。第四,有助于为ESP或EAP教学老师提供教学建议。更多还原

【Abstract】 Acknowledgement bridges the author,the research and the people who are thanked,presents the author’s academia,professional and social identity,and shows the attitude towards the persons or organizations that assisted in the completion of dissertation.At present,many studies,based on the framework of Hyland(2003)and Hyland and Tse(2004),have been conducted on different disciplines from different perspectives,mainly focusing on probing into acknowledgements written by postgraduates of non-English-speaking countries in various disciplines.However,they paid little attention to the disciplinary differences in acknowledgements written by Ph D candidates of English-speaking countries.In addition,there is an urgent issue that most university students in the EFL(English as a foreign language)or ESL(English as a second language)context,with weak genre awareness,attach little importance to the acknowledgement section and write it not seriously.60 Ph D dissertations are collected for the study,among which there are 57 acknowledgements.With the 57 acknowledgements in the disciplines of Computer Science(CS)and Applied Linguistics(AL),this study aims to explore differences and similarities between disciplines in the aspects of generic structure,gratitude expressions,address forms,and thematic features.This study adopts both quantitative and qualitative analytic methods.With the help of software Lab VIEW2014 and SPSS20,the collection of 57 acknowledgements and statistical analysis of analyzed materials are completed.The framework utilized is the“three-tier” model proposed by Hyland(2004:308).It includes three moves: Reflecting Move,Thanking Move including four steps which are presenting participants,thanking for academic assistance,thanking for resources and thanking for moral support,and Announcing Move with two steps which are accepting responsibilities and dedicating the thesis.Thanking Move is obligatory,while Reflecting Move and Announcing Move are optional.The results indicate that in general Ph D candidates in American universities construct their acknowledgements with adherence to the “three-tier” structure.As for the results of generic structure,there are differences and similarities between CS and AL.In CS,the generic structure is composed of Reflecting Move,Thanking Move with four steps—presenting participants,thanking for academic help,thanking for providing resources,and thanking for moral support,Crediting Move,Announcing Move,Closing Move,and Signing off Move.In AL,the generic structure consists of Opening Move,Reflecting Move,Thanking Move with five steps—presenting participants,thanking for academic help,thanking for providing resources,thanking for moral support,and thanking/praising God,Announcing Move,Closing Move,and Signing off Move.The differences lie in that there is Crediting Move in CS while none in AL and that there is Opening Move and the step thanking/praising God but none in CS.The similarities lie in that both disciplines include Reflecting Move,Thanking Move,Announcing Move,Closing Move and Signing off Move and that both lack the step accepting responsibility.Therefore,four new moves and one new step are found in the present study based on the result of Hyland’s(2004)study.As for gratitude expressions,the difference between CS and AL is not that big.The pattern of passive is missing in CS,and occupies a very small proportion in AL.The proportion of verbs,nouns and adjectives in CS is higher than that in AL,while the proportion of bare mention is lower than that in AL.In general,Ph D candidates at American universities tend to use more verbs and nouns and fewer passives to express their gratitude,appreciation and thankfulness to individuals and institutions that once contributed to the study.As for the address forms,full name(FN),first name,and title plus full name(TFN)rank the top three used by acknowledgers to address the acknowledgees.However,these three forms are in different orders in two disciplines.In CS,the order is first name,full name,and title plus full name,while in AL the order is full name,title plus full name,and first name.The frequency of first name in CS is more than that in AL.In thanking advisors and other academics,both disciplines employ title plus full name to express appreciation.In thanking family and friends,both employ first name.As for the thematic features,the similarities lie in that the frequency of Simple Theme is higher than that of Multiple Theme in both disciplines,and the top three realizations of Simple Theme are the author theme “I”,the acknowledgees,and the dissertation or the research/study itself.The difference lies in that the frequency in CS is more than that in AL in the author theme “I” and dissertation/research theme,and that the frequency in CS is less than that in AL in the “acknowledgees” theme.The present study hopefully contributes to the richness of genre analysis,the enhancement of students’ genre awareness,the ability and capability of writing acknowledgement section,and pedagogical guidance or instructions for ESP or EAP teachers.更多还原