肖福壽
(上海大學(xué) 外國語學(xué)院,上海 200444)
長期以來,公式化語言(formulaic language)研究一直是應(yīng)用語言學(xué)界的研究焦點(diǎn)之一。自20世紀(jì)90年代開始,公式化語言研究向語料庫驅(qū)動下的固定搭配研究轉(zhuǎn)向。(Sinclair,1991;Biber et al.,1999,2007,2009;Cortes,2004,2006)通過分析大量的口語/筆語語料,語言學(xué)家運(yùn)用基于頻率的方法發(fā)現(xiàn)了大量語言單位是共現(xiàn)的這一語言現(xiàn)象,深入考察了語言的規(guī)律。
在國內(nèi),基于語料庫的研究主要集中在不同語料庫的比較(尤其是本族語者與中國學(xué)習(xí)者語料庫的比較),借此探討中國大學(xué)生的公式化語言的習(xí)得和使用情況(濮建忠,2003;丁言仁、戚焱,2005;王立非、張巖,2006;鄭超、袁石紅,2011)。應(yīng)該說,國內(nèi)的研究起步較晚,而且研究者對于語料庫驅(qū)動下的公式化語言研究的認(rèn)識不一,得出的結(jié)論有時相互矛盾。
鑒于此,本文通過深入分析語料庫語言學(xué)的鼻祖John Sinclair(1991)對公式化語言研究的貢獻(xiàn),提出了語料庫驅(qū)動下的公式化語言研究必須遵循的六大原則。這些原則的提出,對于促進(jìn)語料庫研究,尤其是公式化語言研究,具有一定的指導(dǎo)和借鑒意義。
Sinclair(1991)認(rèn)為,要發(fā)現(xiàn)人們實(shí)際使用語言的真相,就必須觀察人們實(shí)際使用的語言。因此,語言學(xué)研究所使用的語料必須是真實(shí)的語言,即大量的自然發(fā)生的語料,而不是通過內(nèi)省(introspection)和直覺(intuition)獲得的語料。他寫道(1991:4):“...the contrast exposed between the impressions of language detail noted by people,and the evidence compiled objectively from texts is huge and systematic.It leads one to suppose that human intuition about language is highly specific,and not at all a good guide to what actually happens when the same people actually use the language.”
根據(jù) Sinclair的語料觀,我們可以得到以下啟示:
(1)選擇某種語料要根據(jù)這些文本扮演的某種社會角色,而不是根據(jù)這些語料是否可以說明某個語言點(diǎn)。遺憾的是,目前有不少語法學(xué)家或其他語言學(xué)家,他們選擇語料,其目的是為了驗(yàn)證某一語言現(xiàn)象。換言之,如果他們發(fā)覺某種語言現(xiàn)象非常有趣,就會選擇圍繞該現(xiàn)象的各種用法來分析。這是不可取的,因?yàn)槿绻覀冎粚W⒂谟⒄Z中異常的東西,就有可能忽略一些更為常規(guī)的、單調(diào)的語言型式。
(2)研究的語料量要大。語料庫越大,就越能精確地描述經(jīng)常出現(xiàn)的詞項(xiàng)。語料越多,對于核心表達(dá)的認(rèn)識越會改變。原來重要的東西,經(jīng)過語料庫的篩選可能變得不太重要。大型語料庫可以發(fā)現(xiàn)核心而典型的東西,可以區(qū)別典型的與非常見的用法,區(qū)別典型與可能的用法。那么,普通的語料庫至少該多大呢?一般來說,至少包含一百萬字。根據(jù)Leech(1991)的發(fā)現(xiàn),最早期的語料庫大概包含了約一百萬字,遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超出了語言學(xué)家的實(shí)際使用量。Sinclair(1991)在Corpus,Concordance,Collocations一書中描述的語料庫包含約七百多萬字,而1997年的Bank of English語料庫則包含了3億多字。由此可見,語料庫越大,我們就越容易發(fā)現(xiàn)人們的語言使用規(guī)律。
(3)觀察大量的語料,可以從各個角度分析語言的方方面面,其中頻率(frequency)對于研究語言至關(guān)重要。沒有頻率方面的信息,就無法研究語言。頻率研究發(fā)現(xiàn),一些詞串出奇地經(jīng)常共現(xiàn),即使所謂的固定表達(dá)法也表現(xiàn)了出奇的可變度。
(4)使用的語料必須經(jīng)過系統(tǒng)性排列。語料越多,越需要進(jìn)行組織。如果沒有系統(tǒng)組織的話,要找出詞語搭配的頻率是困難的。以詞形(wordform)為單位設(shè)計(jì)出的軟件,可以幫助我們查找到某一詞形的所有例子,也可以同時呈現(xiàn)那些出現(xiàn)在該詞形前后左右的一些詞語,對這些句子進(jìn)行字母順序排列,發(fā)現(xiàn)其中的型式。正如Sinclair(1991:4)所說:“...the ability to examine large text corpora in a systematic manner allows access to a quality of evidence that has been available before.”
(5)采用“問題導(dǎo)向”(problem-oriented)的研究方法。這種基于語料來解決問題的研究被Tognini-Bonelli(2001)稱之為“基于語料”(corpus-based)的研究,與“語料驅(qū)動”(corpus-driven)形成對比。
(6)對語料庫進(jìn)行加注,使軟件可以查閱到某一范疇(如被動語態(tài)、不定式從句、補(bǔ)足語),而不是某一詞形。比如,Biber等 (1994)計(jì)算了“that-”和“wh-”引導(dǎo)的從句的使用頻率,Halliday(1993)通過大型語料庫計(jì)算了肯定與否定從句的頻率,Kettermann(1997)用加注語料庫回答語言習(xí)得的相關(guān)問題。
Sinclair(1991)認(rèn)為,有些詞出現(xiàn)在短語中,其意義會發(fā)生變化。比如:“have a baby”(生小孩)、“have a bath”(洗澡)、“have a cigarette”(抽一支香煙)、“have such conduct”(容忍這種行為)、“have a meal”(用餐)、“have a severe headache”(頭疼得厲害)、“have a walk”(散步)中的“have”是一個頻繁使用的動詞,但在這個詞組中則失去了原來的多數(shù)意義,意義不是限于這個詞,而是擴(kuò)展到整個詞組。這種現(xiàn)象叫做“漸進(jìn)的去詞匯化”(progressive delexicalization)。
根據(jù)Sinclair的“意義單位描述”觀,我們可以得到以下啟示:
(1)在描述語言單位過程中,必須充分考慮到受限制的語境;
(2)在研究公式化語言中,注重同一語塊在不同上下文中發(fā)生的意義變化。
就拿“naked eye”(肉眼)來說。British National Corpus出現(xiàn)了148個含有“naked eye”的例子。通過分析這些例子,我們可以看出“naked eye”通常所處的語境不是固定的,而是受到限制的,具體如下:
語境1“naked eye”與“the”共現(xiàn),如:We merely became accustomed to the general life of the common birds and animals,and to the appearances of trees and clouds and everything upon the surface that showed itself to the naked eye.
語境 2“the naked eye”與“to”共現(xiàn),如:The legs are flailing wildly—tiny stretches of insect flesh—no thicker than a hair to my naked eye,but obviously larger than life to this poor,wretched creature...
語境3“the naked eye”與“with”共現(xiàn),如:The interesting point is that the Greeks were certainly able to see Merope with the naked eye,whereas today this is virtually impossible.
語境 4“the naked eye”與“by”共現(xiàn),如:It would have been no use asking him whether he thought there was a unifying purpose in life,whether it could really be chance that an animal so small that it couldn’t be seen by the naked eye could die millions of years ago in the depths of the sea and be resurrected by science to prove a man innocent or guilty.
語境5“the naked eye”與“via”共現(xiàn),如:It is known more usually under the name Gill-maggot,because of the length and shape of the female’s egg-sacs which look like miniature white maggots when viewed via the naked eye.
語境6“the naked eye”與“visible”共現(xiàn),如:The mite is just visible to the naked eye and feeds on honey bees and their grubs by sucking their body fluids.
語境7“the naked eye”與“invisible”共現(xiàn),如:Through his telescope Galileo observed more things in the heavens than had ever been dreamed of:moons of Jupiter and myriads of stars invisible to the naked eye.
語境8“the naked eye”與“obvious”共現(xiàn),如:The Small Cloud is very obvious with the naked eye,and binoculars show it well,though admittedly it cannot rival the splendour of the Large Cloud;it has no well-defined shape,but is easy to resolve,at least in part.
語境9“the naked eye”與“separable”共現(xiàn),如:These pairs are separable with the naked eye,but closer binaries—or,of course,optical doubles—require binoculars or a telescope.
語境10“the naked eye”與“make out”共現(xiàn),如:The body louse may lay its eggs in clothing or bedding,while the head louse,like the crab louse,cements its eggs on to hairs forming‘nits’,which are the size of a pin-head and can just be made out with the naked eye.
語境11“the naked eye”與“see”共現(xiàn),如:The whiskers were too small to see with the naked eye and nobody could possibly make a testing machine on that scale.
語境12“the naked eye”與“split”共現(xiàn),如:I have never been confident that I can split them with the naked eye,but 7 × 50 binoculars make it easy enough
語境 13“the naked eye”與“beat”共現(xiàn),如:Don’t forget,if ever you’re in doubt about what processor you’ve actually got,it’s hard to beat the naked eye!
本文發(fā)現(xiàn),“naked eye”在BNC中出現(xiàn)的語境多達(dá)近30種。這些語境表明,“naked eye”作為一個單位出現(xiàn),但具體意義是通過其他與之搭配的詞語來實(shí)現(xiàn)。這個單位不是句法單位,也不是“固定詞組”,可與不同的詞語共現(xiàn),形成“意義單位”(meaning unit)。如果根據(jù)習(xí)語原則來分析語言,意義單位將是主要的分析單位。
Sinclair(1991)和 Sinclair& Renouf(1991)認(rèn)為,短語或意義單位不是集中在具有詞匯意義的詞語上,而是最經(jīng)常出現(xiàn)在語法詞(如:“of”、“the”、“be”)之間,并通過語法詞構(gòu)成“搭配框架”(collocational frameworks),如“too+?+to”、“a/n+?+of”、“be+?+to”、“for+?+of”、“had+?+of”等等。
Sinclair和Renouf(1991)發(fā)現(xiàn),搭配框架在語料庫中的詞語搭配中占了很大比重,某個詞(如“series”)對于某個框架(如:“a+?+of”)是重要的,而這個框架對于該詞來說同樣是重要的。例如,“a series of”是“a+?+of”這個框架中第七大最為頻繁出現(xiàn)的搭配。在所有“series”的搭配中,“a series of”達(dá)到57%,而在所有搭配詞中,“series”在語料庫的出現(xiàn)頻率僅為17位。不僅如此,出現(xiàn)在框架里的詞語不是隨意選擇的,而是根據(jù)某種歸類或范疇搭配的。比如,出現(xiàn)在“an+?+of”框架中的名詞可以歸納為以下類別(Sinclair&Renouf,1991:136-137):
(1)測量與量詞 (如:army,average,inch,ounce);
(2)表示事物的部分(如:edge,end,evening,hour,part);
(3)表明一種屬性(如:array,index);
(4)支持“of”后面的名詞(如:act,example,expression,inkling,object);
(5)表示一項(xiàng)活動(如:extension,explanation,invasion,upsurge);
(6)表示一種素質(zhì)或情形(如:absence,awareness);
(7)表示一種關(guān)系(如:enemy,officer)。
根據(jù)Sinclair(1991)的“搭配框架”觀,我們可以得到以下啟示:
(1)描寫語言中的相同現(xiàn)象可有許多不同方法。一方面,語言使用者可以通過不同角度獲取描述語言的方法;另一方面,任何一種描述都不完整,必須不斷尋找新的視角。就拿Sinclair&Renouf(1991)對“an examination of”的描述來說。雖然“examination”經(jīng)常出現(xiàn)在“an+?+of”這個框架中,但這并不能給我們提供有關(guān)這個詞的完整信息。在1997版的Bank of English中,“examination”出現(xiàn)了7327次,但只有408次出現(xiàn)在“an+?+of”框架中;“examination of”出現(xiàn)了2031 次,大約有400次是與其他限定詞(如:his/its/the examination of)共現(xiàn),另外有400次是框架的“an”后面帶有形容詞(如:a detailed examination of)。由此可見,“examination”的核心用法是后面緊跟“of”引導(dǎo)的介詞短語,前面的限定詞通常是“a”或“an”,也可以是別的修飾詞。
(2)借助搭配框架,可以展示實(shí)際語言使用的次數(shù),而且可以獲得描述語言的新視角,這樣就可以不用抽象語言范疇的傳統(tǒng)方法。其實(shí),學(xué)習(xí)者更感興趣的不是“an+?+of”這個框架,而是有關(guān)“examination”的全部信息。根據(jù)British National Corpus,“an+examination+of”出現(xiàn)了 384 次,其中至少包含了以下信息:
信息1“an examination of+N”作為主語,如:None the less an examination of the special reasons why the Plowden proposition is accepted as a truism in general but treated as an abominable heresy in particular may be worthwhile.
信息2“an examination of+N”作為介詞詞組,如:This in turn will lead us to an examination of how corporate law scholars have sought to offer new ways of legitimating corporate managerial power and how these too prove to be unequal to the task.
信息3“an examination of+N”作為并列成分,如:Bearing Philo’s words in mind—in particular his characterization of the male as active/causal and the female as passive—we shall now turn to the main focus of this essay,that is,an examination of the rituals of circumcision and menstrual taboo.
信息4“an examination of+N”作為賓語,跟在動詞后面,如:North Korea responded by emphasising the extent of its existing co-operation with the IAEA,and demanding an early inspection of South Korea,and in particular an examination of the nuclear capability of the US forces stationed south of the 38th parallel.
信息5“an examination of+N”作為賓語,跟在動詞詞組后面,如:The analysis begins with an examination of turn-length,turn-taking and topic-shift before applying pragmatic theories such as Grice’s cooperative Principle,Brown and Levinson’s Politeness Phenomenon and Leech’s Politeness Principle.
信息6“an examination of+N”作為表語,如:Had I had the receiver in my hand when some break in the conversation occurred at this point,I should have explained to you that it is in fact neither;it is merely an examination of the various modes of thinking which the phrase implies—an examination which,in the tradition of British philosophical inquiry,seeks merely to study and perhaps oil the conceptual machinery and then to put it back more or less as it was.
(3)處理語料庫可以有兩套不同法則:一是完全依靠共現(xiàn)的頻率,借助于計(jì)算機(jī)軟件;二是更有解釋性的,要求研究者的輸入。這樣,我們可以避免傳統(tǒng)方法的弊端,即人工查詢語料庫、逐個找出各個詞項(xiàng)用法。傳統(tǒng)的方法既耗時,又難以處理大型語料庫,導(dǎo)致觀察出現(xiàn)偏差。
Sinclair(1991)認(rèn)為,詞語搭配的意義(sense)與結(jié)構(gòu)(structure)是相互聯(lián)系的。所謂“結(jié)構(gòu)”,就是指一個詞語及其相關(guān)的型式和搭配。有的結(jié)構(gòu)屬于詞匯性的,如:“stand a chance”(很有機(jī)會)、“stand the test of time”(經(jīng)得起時間考驗(yàn))、“stand treat”(請客)、“stand comparison with sb.”(能與某人相比)、“stand sb.a meal”(請某人吃一頓飯)、“stand idle”(閑置著)、“stand ready”(隨時待用);有的結(jié)構(gòu)屬于語法性的,如:“stand behind”(站在……后面;支持)、“stand by”(袖手旁觀;支持)、“stand clear of”(站開,避開)、“stand for”(代表;主張)、“stand in”(替代,作替身)、“stand out”(突出;杰出)、“stand up for”(維護(hù);支持)、“stand up to”(勇敢面對;經(jīng)得起)。Sinclair(1991:65)解釋說:“It seems that there is a strong tendency for sense and syntax to be associated.”
根據(jù) Sinclair的形義觀,我們可以得到以下啟示:
(1)觀察一個詞的“結(jié)構(gòu)”,可以幫助人們區(qū)別多義詞的不同意思。如果一個詞是多義的,那么這個詞就會以幾種型式來使用,其中某種意思在某個型式中的出現(xiàn)頻率要高得多。因此,例子中的型式會顯示該詞的最有可能的意思。比如,“yield”一詞的意思就可以出現(xiàn)在以下型式中:
Pattern 1 YIELD+N+Prep+N,如:As 60 per cent of the cassava grown in this area is marketed in towns,a yield increase even of this order of magnitude has had a positive impact on urban food supplies.
Pattern 2 YIELD+N,如:Conventional radiocarbon dating normally requires sample sizes which will yield a minimum of 1g of carbon.
Pattern 3 V+YIELD,如:Early herbicide treatments provide the best control,because older grass weed seedlings are more difficult to kill and also compromise yield.
Pattern 4 N+YIELD,如:Kloof,benefiting from a higher gold yield,lifted net profits R4.77m to R97.7m,despite production losses over the December-January holiday period and a fall in the tonnage of ore milled.
Pattern 5 YIELD+N,如:But since their dividend growth should be ahead of the market’s,the yield premium should be slimmer.
Pattern 6 YIELD單獨(dú)使用,如:This leads to a violent tussle between them with Betty refusing to yield.
(以上例子選自British National Corpus)
(2)意義與結(jié)構(gòu)的聯(lián)系不是一對一的。一個單詞的一種意思不是只能在一種型式中出現(xiàn),一個型式不是只能用于一個單詞的一種意思。如果是一對一的聯(lián)系,就不可能出現(xiàn)歧義現(xiàn)象。事實(shí)上,歧義是可能的,許多笑話靠的就是詞的歧義。在一般交往中,歧義很少見,因?yàn)榻Y(jié)構(gòu)足以區(qū)分意義。
就拿“stand”來說。如果脫離上下文或者只開個玩笑,“Is this your stand?”是有歧義的,至少有以下6種意思:
(a)這是他的觀點(diǎn)嗎?
(b)這是他的立場嗎?
(c)這是他的態(tài)度嗎?
(d)這是他的攤位嗎?
(e)這是他的架子嗎?
(f)這是你的演出海報(bào)嗎?
不過,在正常的語言交際中,這種歧義很少發(fā)生,例如,以下句子中的“stand”的意義是顯而易見的:
(1)I can’t stand the sight of her.我很看不慣她。
(2)Business is at a stand.生意蕭條。
(3)A roar of applause erupted from the stands.看臺上爆發(fā)出一陣喝彩。
(4)The witness was put on the stand.證人被傳到證人席上。
(5)His hat was put on the hat stand.他的帽子被放在衣帽架上。
(6)He always stands first in his class.他總是全班名列第一。
Sinclair(1991)認(rèn)為,意義是由眾多語塊構(gòu)成的,而這些語塊通常是可預(yù)測的。基于這種現(xiàn)象,他(1991:110)提出了“習(xí)語原則”(idiom principle):“The principle of idiom is that a language user has available to him or her a large number of semi-preconstructed phrases that constitute single choices,even though they might appear to be analyzable into segments.”
研究固定短語的傳統(tǒng)相當(dāng)悠久,但短語常常被排除在語言的正常組織原則之外。Sinclair擴(kuò)大了語塊學(xué)的概念和研究范圍。他認(rèn)為,在某種程度上,詞語的所有意義都存在于經(jīng)常出現(xiàn)的詞素序列中,并可以通過這些序列來識別。如果這些半預(yù)制的短語在語言中屬于一般規(guī)則而不是規(guī)則的例外,他們就可以作為習(xí)語原則融入到語言正常組織原則中。
然而,習(xí)語原則不足以解釋語言使用的所有例子。于是,Sinclair(1991:109-110)又提出了“開放選擇原則”(open-choice principle),解釋道:
This is a way of seeing language as the result of a very large number of complex choices.At each point where a unit is completed(a word or a phrase or a clause),a large range of choice opens up and the only restraint is grammaticalness...Virtually all grammars are constructed on the open-choice principle.
根據(jù)Sinclair(1991)的“雙原則”觀,我們可以得到以下啟示:
(1)兩種原則均可同時被用作觀察語言和解釋語言的方法。在使用語言時,語言使用者必須決定是否將此解釋為一個語塊還是一個系列的單個詞項(xiàng)。就拿“I must confess”來說。根據(jù)“習(xí)語原則”,“I must confess”可作為一個詞項(xiàng),其中的任何一個詞都不能用其他詞來代替。我們可以解釋為“我將講述一件讓你感到不悅或?qū)擂蔚氖虑椤?,如“I must confess I lost your car key”。如果將“I must confess”換成“he must confess”或“I must not confess”,則意思又變了;根據(jù)“開放選擇原則”,“I must confess”當(dāng)中可用其它詞來代替,如“he must confess”、“I must not confess”和“I must run away”。這個語塊可解釋為“我有義務(wù)承認(rèn)自己作錯了一件事”(如:I drove through a red light that night,I must confess)。
(2)在實(shí)際交際中,先用“習(xí)語原則”來解釋一個短語,然后再用“開放選擇原則”。盡管任何時候都可以同時用這兩種原則解釋同一短語,但不能在同一語境下同時使用兩種原則來解釋,通常是有輕重先后之分的,以習(xí)語原則為優(yōu)先,正如Sinclair(1991:114)所說:
For normal texts,we can put forward the proposal that the first mode to be applied is the idiom principle,since most of the text will be applied by this principle.Whenever there is good reason,the interpretative process switches to the open-choice principle,and quickly back again.Lexical choices which are unexpected in their environment will presumably occasion a switch;choice which,if grammatically interpreted,would be unusual are an affirmation of the operation of the idiom principle.
傳統(tǒng)的語言描述方法是將詞匯與語法區(qū)別對待。這種方法并非毫無根據(jù),因?yàn)檎Z言使用中的一些詞項(xiàng)在從句中明顯是沒有意義的,但從語法上判斷是正確的,如Chomsky提出的不可思議的句子“Colorless green ideas sleep furiously”。
Sinclair(1991)認(rèn)為,區(qū)分詞匯和語法是錯誤的,兩者應(yīng)該是個統(tǒng)一體,即Halliday(1993)所指的“詞匯語法”(lexicogrammar)概念。這個概念表明,詞匯和語法在現(xiàn)實(shí)生活中是密不可分的。Sinclair(1991)是根據(jù)語料庫語言學(xué)的證據(jù)提出這一觀點(diǎn)的,認(rèn)為詞匯和語法只有在開放選擇原則下才是分開的。如果把兩者的區(qū)分看作語言的核心組織特征,那么所有習(xí)語性、搭配性的表達(dá)法都成了異常的變體,這種描述明顯是錯誤的。Sinclair(1991:103-4)對此進(jìn)行了闡述:
The description of lexis and syntax leads to the creation of a rubbish dump that is called“idiom”,“phraseology”,“collocation”,and the like.If two systems are held to vary independently of each other,then any instances of one constraining the other will be consigned to a limbo for odd features,occasional observations,usage notes,etc.But if evidence accumulates to suggest that a substantial proportion of the language description is of this mixed nature,then the original decoupling must be called into question.The evidence now becoming available casts grave doubts on the wisdom of postulating separate domains of lexis and syntax.
根據(jù)Sinclair(1991)的“詞匯語法”觀,我們可以得到以下啟示:
(1)在公式化語言研究中,我們不僅要考察某個語塊的形式,更要考究該語塊中包含的實(shí)義詞所表達(dá)的意義。比如,“peel a pineapple”中的“peel”和“pineapple”所表達(dá)的意義。再比如,含有“gather”的語塊就包括:“gather courage”(鼓氣勇氣)、“gather crops”(收莊稼)、“gather dust”(被擱置)、“gather experience”(逐步獲得經(jīng)驗(yàn))、“gather flowers”(采花)、“gather information”(收集情報(bào))、“gather oneself”(振作起來)、“gather roses”(尋歡作樂)、“gather speed”(逐漸加快速度)、“gather strength”(打起精神)等等。
(2)在公式化語言研究中,我們不僅要將某個語塊當(dāng)作一個整體來處理,而且還必須注重該語塊所隱含的認(rèn)知機(jī)制。比如,“invest a lot of time in sb”。其中就隱含了多種概念隱喻,其中包括:
(1)TIME IS MONEY,其中隱含的語塊就有:“spend one’s time”、“budget one’s time”、“cost a lot of time”。
(2)TIME IS A LIMITED RESOURCE,其中隱含的語塊就有:“have much time left”、“l(fā)ive on borrowed time”、“have enough time to spare”、“put aside some time”、“run out of time”;
(3)TIME IS A VALUABLE COMMODITY,其中隱含的語塊就有:“waste one’s time”、“save much time”、“l(fā)ose a lot of time”。
綜上所述,本文通過剖析Sinclair對語料庫語言學(xué)的貢獻(xiàn),提出了語料庫驅(qū)動下公式化語言研究必須遵循的六大原則:(1)注重語料新穎的原則;(2)注重意義與結(jié)構(gòu)交融的原則;(3)注重“習(xí)語原則”與“開放選擇原則”交融的原則;(4)注重意義單位描述的原則;(5)注重搭配框架的原則;(6)注重詞匯語法為統(tǒng)一體的原則。
這些原則表明,研究者不僅需要細(xì)心考察逐個詞項(xiàng)的語塊特征,而且需要借助計(jì)算機(jī)獲取頻繁出現(xiàn)的單詞序列。這些原則的提出,對于促進(jìn)公式化語言的教學(xué)與研究在我國的廣度和深度發(fā)展具有一定的借鑒與指導(dǎo)意義。
[1]Biber,D.,Conrad,S.& R.Reppen.Corpus-driven Approaches to Issues in Applied Linguistics[J].Applied Linguistics,1994(15):169-189.
[2]Biber,D.& F.Barbieri.Lexical Bundles in University Spoken and Written Registers[J].English for Specific Purposes,2007(26):263-286.
[3]Biber,D.A Corpus-driven Approach to Formulaic Language in English[J].International Journal of Corpus Linguistics,2009(14):275-311.
[4]Biber,D.,Johansson,S.,Leech,G.,Conrad,S.& E.Finegan.Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English[M].Harlow:Longman,1999.
[5]Cortes,V.Lexical Bundles in Published and Student Disciplinary Writing:Examples from History and Biology[J].English for Specific Purposes,2004(23):397-423.
[6]Cortes,V.Teaching Lexical Bundles in the Disciplines:An Example from a Writing Intensive History Class [J].Linguistics and Education,2006(17):391-406.
[7]Halliday,M.A.K.Quantitative Studies and Probabilities in Grammar[M]//M.Hoey.Data,Description,Discourse:Papers on the English Language in Honour of John McH.Sinclair.London:HarperCollins,1993:1-25.
[8]Kettermann,B.Using a Corpus to Evaluate Theories of Child Language Acquisition[M]//Wichmann A.et al..Teaching and Language Corpora. London:Longman,1997:186-194
[9] Leech,G.The State of the Art in Corpus Linguistics[M]//K.Aijmer& B.Alternberg.English Corpus Linguistics:Studies in Honour of Jan Svartik.London:Longman,1991:8-29.
[10]Sinclair,J.Corpus,Concordance,Collocation[M].Oxford:OUP,1991.
[11]Sinclair,J.M.& A.Renouf.Collocational frameworks in English[M]//Aijmer& Altenberg.English Corpus Linguistics:Studies in Honour of Jan Svartvik.London:Longman,1991:128-144.
[12]Tognini-Bonelli,E.Corpus Linguistics at Work[M].Amsterdam:John Benjamins,2001.
[13]丁言仁,戚焱.詞塊運(yùn)用與英語口語和寫作水平的相關(guān)性研究[J].解放軍外國語學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào),2005(3):28-30.
[14]濮建忠.英語詞匯教學(xué)中的類聯(lián)接、搭配及詞塊[J].外語教學(xué)與研究,2003(6):438-445.
[15]王立非,張巖.基于語料庫的大學(xué)生英語議論文中的語塊使用模式研究[J].外語電化教學(xué),2006(4):36-41.
[16]鄭超,袁石紅.從語塊類型看中國學(xué)習(xí)者“...and...”語塊的習(xí)得[J].外語教學(xué)與研究,2011(l):109-117.