社会科学论文中的人际意义研究
1970-1
复旦大学出版社
袁邦株
334
袁邦株是我在河北师范大学任教时指导的一名硕士学生，他勤奋好学，非常用功，课下喜欢与老师交流，善于思考和钻研。当时，我们邀请我的导师北京大学英语系胡壮麟教授为河北师范大学外国语学院的研究生开设了“功能语言学”课程，学生们都很兴奋和高兴，形成了浓厚的学习和钻研功能语言学的氛围。邦株就是其中之一，他领悟事情敏捷，善于抓住机遇，他执著认真的治学态度和充分利用各种机会不断进取的精神给我留下了深刻的印象。邦株2002年考入北京师范大学外文学院，成为我招收的首批博士生之一，研究方向是“语篇分析”。现在，他的博士毕业论文即将付梓出版，作为他在北师大攻读博士学位期间的指导教师，我感到非常高兴。我有幸目睹作者的成长和本书的完成过程，愿与读者分享内心的激动和喜悦。 邦株的博士论文研究的是社会科学论文中的人际意义。语言的人际意义来自功能语言学对语言功能的划分。在韩礼德（M．A．K．Halliday）的系统功能语言学理论中，语言有概念、人际和语篇三种元功能。与传统语言学主要关注语言的形式和语义关系不同，功能语言学强调语言的社会的、人际的以及动态的意义。邦株发现人际功能或人际意义的研究中，关注文学语篇、应用语篇或具体语言交际的为多，对学术语篇，尤其是社会科学语篇的研究尚未引起语言学界足够重视。他选择了探究社会科学论文中人际意义的题目，具体地说，就是探究：（1）社会科学工作者在撰写学术论文过程中如何处理与以往研究理论和观点的关系，如何对他人的研究成果和观点进行介绍、参照和评价；（2）如何处理作者和读者的关系，如何提出自己的新观点；（3）如何处理作者自己和研究内容的关系。
《社会科学论文中的人际意义研究：体裁视角分析》从跨学科的角度研究社会科学论文体裁中的人际意义，以功能语言学对人际意义的研究为基本框架，融合体裁分析、语用学、修辞学、批评话语分析、巴赫金对话理论和社会建构理论，建立了一个社会科学论文人际意义的分析模式。
Acknowledgements序摘要Chapter One Introduction1.1 Notions of IP， SSRA and Genre1.2 Status Quo of Current Research1.3 Significance of the Study1.4 Corpus and Method1.4.1 The Journal Corpus1.4.2 Methods of Analyses1.5 Organization of the DissertationChapter Two Critical Literature Review on the Studies of IP in SSRA2.1 Interpersonal Meaning in Functional Grammar and Beyond2.1.1 IP Study in the Framework of Functional Grammar2.1.2 IP in Other Disciplines2.2 Study of Social Science Research Articles2.2.1 Scientific Research Papers in Applied Linguistic Perspective2.2.1.1 IP at Micro-level in Research Papers： A Fragmental Exploration2.2.1.2 Move Analysis of Genres in Academic Papers2.2.1.3 Study of Social Science Research Articles2.2.2 Academic Paper as Textual Constructs： A Social Constructivism Perspective2.3 Summary of the Literature ReviewChapter Three An Integrated Model in IP Analysis of SSRA3.1 Theoretical Background3.1.1 Functional Linguistics Perspective3.1.2 Pragmatic and Philosophical Perspectives3.1.3 Critical Discourse Analysis Perspective3.1.4 Academic Discourse Community and Genre Analysis3.1.5 Social Constructivism Perspective3.2 An Integrated Model for the Analysis of IP in SSRA3.2.1 An Integrated IP Analyzing Model3.2.2 IP features in SSRA and Key Realizing Devices3. E. 2.1 The Major Relationships Involved in SSRA3.2.2.2 Global IP Features and Key Realizing Devices3.2.3 Illumination of Analysing Model3.3 SummaryChapter Four Schematic Structures as Interaction in SSRA4.1 Schematic Structure in Different Perspectives4.2 Schematic Structures in Introduction and Discussion and Their IP4.2.1 Schematic Structure in Introduction4.2.2 Schematic Structure in Discussion4.3 Persons and Tenses and Their IP4.3.1 Personal Pronoun "We"4.3.2 Simple Present Tense4.4 SummaryChapter Five Modal Expressions as Heteroglossia in SSRA5.1 Classification of Modality and Modal Expressions5.2 Modal Expressions and Their IP in SSRA5.2.1 Epistemic Modal Expressions5.2.2 Deontic Modal Expressions5.3 Distribution of Modal Expressions in Four Sections of SSRA5.3.1 Procedures and Results5.3.2 Discussion5.4 SummaryChapter Six Hedges as Persuasion in SSRA6.1 Hedges and Their Classification6.2 Hedges and Their IP6.2.1 Writer-oriented Hedges6.2.2 Reader-oriented Hedges6.3 Distribution of Hedges among Four Disciplines：A Comparison6.3.1 Procedures and Results6.3.2 Discussion6.4 SummaryChapter Seven Reporting Verbs as Evaluation in SSRA7.1 Classification of Reporting Verbs7.2 Reporting Verbs and Their IP7.2.1 Research Act Reporting Verbs7.2.2 Discourse Act Reporting Verbs7.2.3 Cognitive Act Reporting Verbs7.3 Distribution of Reporting Verbs in Three Subsections7.3.1 Procedures of Collecting Reporting Verbs7.3.2 Results and Discussion7.4 SummaryChapter Eight Conclusion8.1 A Summary of Previous Research8.2 Pedagogical Implications8.3 Limitations and Future ResearchReferencesAppendix： Corpus of Journal Artides
Beyond functional grammar， voices from other fields call ourattention to the significance of studying interpersonal meaning，though this significance is perceived and emphasized from differentperspectives in different theories. Therefore， in the subsequentsection， study of IP from the perspective of rhetoric， pragmatics，philosophy， discourse analysis， and literary criticism is presented.It should be noted here that the foregoing discussion ofinterpersonal meaning in various areas can not be divided asexplicitly as it looks in the next section.Overlapping seemsinevitable. The division into several parts is only for the sake ofconvenience in discussion. At the end of the next section， weargue that an interdisciplinary approach is needed in the discussionof interpersonal meaning in SSRA. This is the place whence westart to do. 2.1.2IP in Other Disciplines Rhetoric，either classicalor new rhetoric，is mainlyconcerned with the logic of argument and its persuasiveness：making a point and winning over an audience through coherent，convincing presentations. It focuses on the achievement of aparticular effect on the audience or the readers， which evidentlyillustratestheirconsiderationofinterpersonalmeaningindiscourse. Rhetorical studies have always kept the reader in mind.Speaker credibility and the stance one takes in relating himself ofhis message to audience are critical concepts today， as they werein ancient times.
