Item Details

Exploring the relationship between grammatical metaphor and mode differentiation in Chinese political discourses

Issue: Vol 2 No. 2 (2016)

Journal: Researching and Teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language

Subject Areas:

Abstract:

In Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), the contextual research of Grammatical Metaphor (GM) is mainly examined by considering three register variables, namely, field, tenor and mode. Although there have been some studies on the relationship between GM and mode, the contribution of GM in mode differentiation has not been investigated in depth so far. This study thus aims to explore the relationship between GM and mode differentiation in Chinese political discourses through an analysis of a corpus formed by 15 texts based on Yang's GM model, and these texts construct three text types distinguished in mode, namely, political reports, political speeches and political interviews. After defining the mode scale and GM distribution scale, the study then examines how GM deployment connects with mode differentiation in two steps: (1) the establishment of mapping relationships between the lexical density scale and the ideational GM deployment scale; (2) the interpretation of the mapping relationships from functional perspectives. It is found that the lexical density scale and GM distribution scale of three text types are well mapped onto each other, which indicates that ideational GM distribution strongly correlates with the lexical density. Such mapping relationships suggest that the deployment of GM is related to mode differentiation because the use of GM has distinctive effects on the complexity, organization and ideologies of texts in different modes.

Author: Cheng Xi

View Full Text

References :

Chilton, P. and Schäffner, C. (Eds) (2002). Political as Text and Talk: Analytic Approaches to Political Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.4

Eggins, S. (2004). An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. 2nd ed.. London: Continuum.

Fetzer, A. (2014). I think, I mean and I believe in political discourse: Collocates, functions and distribution. Functions of Language 21 (1), 67–94. https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.21.1.05fet

Halliday, M. A. K. (1975). Learning how to mean. In J. J. Webster (Ed.) The Language of Early Childhood, Volume 4 of The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, 28–59. London and New York: Continuum. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-443701-2.50025-1

Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1987). Spoken and written modes of meaning. In J. J. Webster (Ed.) On Grammar, 323–351. London: Continuum.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd ed.. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1998). Things and relations: Regrammaticizing experience as technical knowledge. In J. J. Webster (Ed.) The Language of Science, 49–101. London: Continuum.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1999). The grammatical construction of scientific knowledge: the framing of the English clause. In J. J. Webster (Ed.) The Language of Science, 102–134. London: Continuum.

Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (1999). Construing Experience through Meaning. London and New York: Cassell Wellinton House.

Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C.M.I.M. (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 3rd ed.. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.

Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2008). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 3rd ed.. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.

He Qingshun and Yang Bingjun (2018). A corpus-based study of the correlation between text technicality and ideational metaphor in English. Lingua 203, 51–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2017.10.005

Kubler, C.C. (1985). A Study of Europeanized Grammar in Modern Written Chinese. Taipei: Student Book Co. Ltd.

Lakoff, G. (2003). Metaphor and war, again. UC Berkeley. Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/32b962zb

Liardét. C. L. (2016). Grammatical metaphor: Distinguishing success. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 22, 109–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2016.01.009

Martin, J. R. (1984). Language, register and genre. In F. Christie (Ed.) Children Writing: A Reader, 21–30. Geelong, Vic: Deakin University Press.

Martin, J. R. (1991). Nominalization in science and humanities: Distilling knowledge and scaffolding text. In E. Ventola (Ed.) Trends in Linguistics: Functional and Systemic Linguistics, 307–337. New York: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110883527.307

Martin, J. R. (1992). English Text: System and Structure. Philadelphia/Amsterdam: John Benjamin’s. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.59

Martin, J. R. (1993). Literacy in science: Learning to handle text as technology. In M. A. K. Halliday and J. R. Martin (Eds) Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power, 166–220. London: Falmer.

Ravelli, L. (1985). Metaphor, Mode and Complexity: An Exploration of Co-varying Patterns. (BA thesis). University of Sydney, Department of Linguistics.

Ravelli, L. (1988). Grammatical metaphor: An initial analysis. In E. Steiner and R. Velman (Eds), Pragmatics, Discourse and Text: Some Systemically-Inspired Approaches, 133–147. London: Pinter.

Ravelli, L. (2003). Renewal of connection: Integrating theory and practice in an understanding of grammatical metaphor. In A. M. Simon-Vandenbergen, et al. (Eds), Grammatical Metaphor: Views from Systematic Functional Linguistics, 37–64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.236.04rav

Van Dijk, T. A. (2008). Discourse and Power. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-07299-3

Yang Y. (2008). Typological interpretation of differences between Chinese and English in grammatical metaphor. Language Sciences 30, 450–478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2007.01.007

Yang Y. (2015). Grammatical Metaphor in Chinese. Sheffield: Equinox.

从迎旭 (Cong Yingxu). (2011). 概念语法隐喻研究的限制与扩展. 《外国语》. 5, 46–53.

丛迎旭 (Cong Yingxu). (2017). 《语法隐喻视角下汉英错位修饰现象研究》. 北京：科学出版社.

何恒幸 (He Hengxing). (2004). 综合运用一致式和隐喻式: 功能语法分析新视角. 《现代外语》. 1, 14–23.

胡壮麟 (Hu Zhuanglin). (1996). 语法隐喻. 《外语教学与研究》. 4, 1-8.

田海龙 (Tian Hailong). (2002). 政治语言研究: 评述与思考. 《外语教学》. 1, 23–29.

文旭 (Wen Xu). (2014). 政治话语与政治隐喻. 《当代外语研究》. 9, 11–16.

张德禄, 赵静 (Zhang Delu, Zhao Jing). (2010). 论汉语形似介名化产生的条件. 《外国语》. 4, 32–33.

支永碧 (Zhi Yongbi). (2011). 政治话语虚假语用预设的批评性分析. 《社会科学家》. 9, 154–158.

朱晓敏 (Zhu Xiaomin). (2011). 批评话语分析视角下的《政府工作报告》英译研究———基于语料库的第一人称代词复数考察. 《外语研究》. 2, 73–78.

朱永生 (Zhu Yongsheng). (1994). 英语中的语法比喻现象. 《外国语》. 1, 8–13.

朱永生 (Zhu Yongsheng). (2006). 名词化、动词化及语法隐喻. 《外语教学与研究》. 2, 83–90.