《从合作原则角度分析《生活大爆炸》中的对话幽默英语论文.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《从合作原则角度分析《生活大爆炸》中的对话幽默英语论文.doc（38页珍藏版）》请在taowenge.com淘文阁网|工程机械CAD图纸|机械工程制图|CAD装配图下载|SolidWorks_CaTia_CAD_UG_PROE_设计图分享下载上搜索。
1、本科生毕业论文（设计）册 学院 XXX学院 专业 XX 班级 XXXX级笔译X班 学生 XXX 指导教师 XXX XXXX大学本科毕业论文（设计）任务书编 号： 论文（设计）题目： 从合作原则角度分析生活大爆炸中的对话幽默 学院： XXX学院 专业： 笔译 班级： 2XXXX级笔译X班 学生姓名： XXX 学号： XXXXXX 指导教师： XXX 职称：XX 1、 论文（设计）研究目标及主要任务本论文的研究目标是探讨合作原则在情景喜剧生活大爆炸中的应用及产生的幽默效果。其主要任务是通过分析合作原则的应用提高我们沟通、交流能力 。2、论文（设计）的主要内容 本论文分为四章，第一章介绍合作原则、幽
2、默的定义及其分类，第二章介绍中外语言学家关于言语幽默的语言学研究成果，第三章分析生活大爆炸中由于违背合作原则而产生的众多幽默效果，第四章探讨研究合作原则的重要意义。 3、论文（设计）的基础条件及研究路线 本论文的基础条件是不同的语言学家关于言语幽默的研究结果。研究路线是对生活大爆炸中的幽默对话进行整理归类，并运用合作原则进行分析阐述。 4、主要参考文献Attardo, S. 1994. Linguistic Theories of Humor. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Grice, H.P. 1975. “Logic and Conversation”. Synt
3、ax and Semantics: Speech Acts No. 3, 41-58. Hu, Zhuanglin. 2006. Linguistics: A Course Book. Beijing: Beijing UP.Zhang, Yan. 2002. “The Violation of the Cooperative Principles in Catch-22.” Diss. Hebei Normal University.5、计划进度阶段起止日期1确定初步论文题目3月14日前2与导师见面，确定大致范围，填开题报告和任务书，导师签字3月14日-3月19日3提交论文提纲3月19日-3
4、月28日4交初稿和文献综述3月28日-4月18日5交终稿和评议书5月8日前指 导 教师： 年 月 日教研室主任： 年 月 注：一式三份，学院（系）、指导教师、学生各一份XXXX大学本科生毕业论文（设计）开题报告书 XXX 学院 XX 专业 XXXX 届学生姓名XXX论文（设计）题目 从合作原则角度分析生活大爆炸中的对话幽默指导教师XXX专业职称 XX所属教研室英语基础教研室研究方向语言学课题论证：从违背格莱斯合作原则角度论证情景喜剧生活大爆炸中的幽默对话效果。方案设计：第一章介绍合作原则、幽默的定义及其分类，第二章介绍中外语言学家关于言语幽默的语言学研究成果， 第三章分析生活大爆炸中由于违背合
5、作原则而产生的众多幽默效果， 第四章研究合作原则的重要意义。 进度计划：3月14日前确定初步论文题目 3月19日前写开题报告、任务书3月28日前提交论文提纲4月18日前提交初稿和文献综述5月8日前交终稿和评议书指导教师意见： 指导教师签名： 年 月 日教研室意见： 教研室主任签名： 年 月 日XXXX大学本科生毕业论文（设计）评议书姓 名XXX学院XXX学院专业XX年级（班）XXXX级笔译X班论 文 题 目 从合作原则角度分析生活大爆炸中的对话幽默完成时间2013/5/4论文内容摘要本论文主要以情景喜剧生活大爆炸中的对话为例，分析由于违背格赖斯的合作原则而产生的众多幽默效果。第一章主要对合作原
6、则及其会话含义，幽默的定义及其分类作简要概述。第二章主要讨论中外语言学家关于言语幽默的语言学研究成果。 第三章从四个角度分析在生活大爆炸中通过违反合作原则所产生的幽默效果。第四章讲述研究合作原则的重要意义。因为它不仅可以帮助我们更好的欣赏电视节目，还可以提高我们理解他人，与他人交流的能力，从而使我们更好的享受生活。 指导教师评语 年 月 日指 导 教 师职称初评成绩答辩小组姓名职称教研室组长成员答辩记录： 记录人签字： 年 月 日答辩小组意见： 组长签字： 年 月 日学院意见： 评定成绩： 签章 年 月 日XXXX大学本科生毕业论文（设计）文献综述Literature Review1.Ling
7、uistic Approaches on Verbal Humor Study AbroadHumor research has a long and glorious history. However, linguistics held an assured position in the late 1970s among the central player of humor research, which was traditionally psychology, sociology, and philosophy (Attardo, 1997: 395). Linguistic stu
8、dy on humor is concerning with linguistic devices such as exaggeration, ambiguity, pun etc is very common. Pepicello in his work The Language of Riddles (1984) pointed out that humor had a close relationship with ambiguity , and humor depended on the indecipherable ambiguity until the punch line res
9、olved it in an unexpected way.Raskins the Semantic Script Theory of Humor (SSTH for short) (1985) is the semantic theory on verbal humor from the point of cognitive linguistics. The aim of the SSHT is, “ideally, a linguistic theory of humor should determine and formulate the necessary and sufficient
10、 linguistic conditions for the text to be funny”( Raskin, 1985:47). A text can be characterized as a single-joke-carrying text if both of the conditions are satisfied:”the text is compatible, fully or in part, with two different scripts and, the two scripts with which the text is compatible are oppo
11、site” (Raskin, 1985:81). Here the script refers to a large chunk of semantic information surrounding the word or evoked by it. Therefore the “script” here contains more meanings than the lexical meanings offered by the dictionary. The opposition of the script is the most important element to influen
12、ce a joke. Attardo and Raskin cooperate with each other and set up a new theory named the “General Theory of Verbal Humor” (GTVH for short), which is a revision of Raskins SSHT. As Attardo puts forward:” whereas the SSHT was a semantic theory of humor, the GTVH is a linguistic theory for it includes
13、 other areas of linguistics as well, including , most notably, textual linguistics, the theory of narrativity, and pragmatics”(Attardo, 1994:222). Comparatively speaking, the GTVH contains more linguistics knowledge than the SSHT. Raskins Semantic Script Theory of Humor and its further developed ver
14、sion General Theory of Verbal humor are the two most influential theories on humor study from the perspective of linguistics.Coulson is the initiator who employs conceptual blending theory to study humor. In his paper” whats so funny? Conceptual integration in humorous examples” (2002), he paid much
15、 attention to the humorous examples from political cartoons, and aimed to explore the role of Conceptual integration in these examples. He focused on the cultural concepts involved in these examples, and examined how conceptual blending works. There is a special topic on humor study from the cogniti
16、ve linguistic way on the eighth International Cognitive Linguistics Association conference in 2003. G. Rithchies the Linguistic Analysis of Joke (2004) and Alan Partingtons the Linguistic of Laughter (2006) are the masterpieces of humor study in this field. G. Rithchie takes one subclass of joke-pun
17、- as example, aims to discover the inner generation mechanism of jokes. Partingtons work examines the phenomenon of “laughter-talk” with the assistance of language corpora. The author tries to investigate “what speakers try to achieve by engaging in laughter-talk and what both speakers and hearers m
18、at be signaling when then produce laughter” ( Partington, 2006:1)2.Linguistic Approaches on Verbal Humor Study at Home It was Lin Yutang, a great writer, who introduced the word “humor” for its current meaning in 1923. So humor study at home is relatively new, and scholars began to study language hu
19、mor from linguistic aspects in 1980s. From that time on, theories on humor take on a new look, and the studies on humors go further. Around the 1990s, humor studies concentrated on rhetoric. Hus Linguistics of Humor (1987) and Tans Humor and Language Humor (1997) are the representatives; both of the
20、 works are analyzing humor from the viewpoint of rhetoric. They take humor as a kind of rhetoric, and pay a lot attention to the rhetorical structures and techniques of humor; however, they overlook the internal mechanism, causation and process of humor. Many scholars pay attention to how the humor
21、comes into being. Yuan (2002) studies how the humor efforts are produced from the perspective of language deviation. Her paper, the humorous effect of language deviation, shows the efforts are produced from the perspective of language deviation. Her paper, the Humorous Effect of Language Deviation,
22、shows the formation of language deviation and its humorous effect by taking different deviations and the humorous effect as examples, such vocabulary deviation and humorous effect, grammar deviation and humorous effect, semantic deviation and humorous effect, etc. Zhang (1993) and Cai (2001) do that
23、 research on humor from the ambiguity and misunderstanding respectively.Study on humor from pragmatics is popular recently. Duan (2002) applies conversational maxims, Politeness principle, Deixis, and Pragmatic Vagueness to study the humor in Chinese. Wu (2005) wrote a paper named The Cooperative Pr
24、inciple and Humor in Sit-coms. She used Cooperative Principle to show that how the humorous effect was achieved due to the violation of a certain maxim of the Cooperative Principle. Compared with humor study abroad, the humor study at home is not sufficient enough whether in scope or in depth. Not s
25、o much interest is invested in this field; articles on humor published on the journals and works on humor study are rare, so more emphasis should be put on humor research.本科生毕业论文设计题目： 从合作原则角度分析生活大爆炸中的对话幽默作者姓名： XXX 指导教师： XXXX 所在学院： XXX学院 专业（系）： XX系XX专业 班级（届）： XXX届 完成日期 XXX 年 5 月 4 日On Verbal Humor in
26、 the Big Bang Theory From the Perspective of Cooperative Principle BYXXX Fu XXX, TutorA Thesis Submitted to Department of English Language and Literature in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of B.A. in English At XXXXUniversityMay 4th,XXXXAbstractThis thesis mainly aims to explo
27、re the numerous humorous effects brought about by violating Grices Cooperative Principle (CP) with examples from the dialogues of the sitcom the Big Bang Theory. The first chapter gives a brief introduction about the CP, its implicatures, and humor. The second chapter presents the previous researche
28、s on humor, done from foreign theories to domestic theories. The third chapter investigates the humor brought about by violating the CP from four aspects. The last chapter summarizes the significance of conducting research about CP since it could not only help us appreciate some TV programs better,
29、but also improve our ability to understand and communicate with others, and make us enjoy the life better.Key words: cooperative principle implicature humor摘要本论文主要以情景喜剧生活大爆炸中的对话为例，分析由于违背格赖斯的合作原则而产生的众多幽默效果。第一章主要对合作原则及其会话含义，幽默的定义及其分类作简要概述。第二章主要讨论中外语言学家关于言语幽默的语言学研究成果。 第三章从四个角度分析在生活大爆炸中通过违反合作原则所产生的幽默效果。
30、第四章讲述研究合作原则的重要意义。因为它不仅可以帮助我们更好的欣赏电视节目，还可以提高我们理解他人，与他人交流的能力，从而使我们更好的享受生活。关键词： 合作原则 会话含义 幽默Table of ContentsChapter1 Introduction.11.1Cooperative principle.11.2 Humor Introduction.21.2.1 Definition of Humor.21.2.2 Classifications of Humors.4 1.3 Significance of Present Research4 Chapter2 Literature Re
31、view.6 2.1 Linguistic Approaches on Verbal Humor Study Abroad6 2.2 Linguistic Approaches on Verbal Humor Study at Home.7 Chapter3 Violation of CP on Humor in the Big Bang Theory.9 3.1 Humor created by violating the maxim of Quantity.9 3.1.1 Use of repetition.9 3.1.2 Use of ellipsis.10 3.1.3 Use of r
32、oundabout sentences.11 3.2 Humor created by violating the maxim of Quality.12 3.2.1 Use of irony. 13 3.2.2 Use of metaphor.14 3.2.3 Use of rhetorical question.15 3.3 Humor crated by violating the maxim of Relation.15 3.3.1 Partial irrelevance.15 3.3.2 Complete irrelevance .17 3.4 Humor created by vi
33、olating the maxim of Manner.18 3.4.1 Use of prolix sentences.18 3.4.2 Use of hyperbole.19Chapter4. Conclusion.21Bibliography.22xivChapter1. Introduction1.1 Cooperative PrincipleCooperative Principle (CP) was proposed by an Oxford philosopher Herbert Paul Grice. It first became known to the public in
34、 1967 through the William James lectures Grice delivered at Harvard. Part of the theory was published in his Logic and Conversation in 1975. “In a conversation, a speaker and a hearer are supposed to respond to each other in their turn and exchange with needed information that benefits both of them”
35、 (Crowley and Mitchell, 1994: 140). Only through this can the participants create a successful and smooth conversation. According to Grice (Grice, 1975), to achieve such effect, people are supposed to follow a certain set of principles, that is, the Cooperative Principle.These principles are what pa
36、rticipants should follow in order to achieve a satisfactory and efficient conversation. However, Grice found that in many cases, people fail to fulfill them in various ways though they still want to create a successful communication. By violating them, people can express their deep meanings or use i
37、t as a strategy to communicate. Grice used a term “implicature” to refer to such kind of deep meaning. Generally speaking, if we study it further, we can find out that a lot of laughter and humor can be created and understood through understanding the implicature. The CP is stated as follows:“Make y
38、ou conversational contribution such as required at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged” (Grice, 1975:45). To specify the CP further, Grice introduced four categories of maxims as follows:Quality: Try to make your contributi
39、on one that is true.1. Do not say what you believe to be false.2. Do not say what for which you lack adequate evidence.Quantity:1. Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current purpose of exchange).2. Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.Relation: B
40、e relevant.Manner: Be perspicuous.1. Avoid obscurity of expression.2. Avoid ambiguity.3. Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity).4. Be orderly (Grice 45-46).People observe the Cooperative Principle consciously or even unconsciously when communicating with others. Hu Zhuanglin has pointed that the CP is meant to describe what actually happens in conversation instead of telling the speakers how they ought to behave, though it is described in the imperative (Hu, 2006:192). That is to say, people usually disobey these maxims here and there due to various purposes and such condition is cal