М. В. Ломоносова Филологический факультет Кафедра английского языкознания Когезия и когеренция в философском дискурсе на материале эссе Бертрана Расселла "О природе знакомства". Курсовая
 Скачать 1 Mb.
|
|
Московский государственный университет имени М.В. Ломоносова Филологический факультет Кафедра английского языкознания «Когезия и когеренция в философском дискурсе: на материале эссе Бертрана Расселла “О природе знакомства”». Курсовая работа Студента 2 курса отделения «Романо-германская филология» Гутника Глеба Константиновича Научный руководитель доцент, д.ф.н. Конурбаев М.Э. Москва, 2020 Contents 1.Introduction 3 2.Cohesion in English. The concept of cohesion. 4 3.The hierarchy of cohesive relations in text. 5 4.Topic-focus structure and contextual boundness. 6 1.Theoretical basis and background. 6 2.Focus paradigms. 8 5.Bridging. 9 6.Reference. 11 6.1. Endophoric and exophoric reference. 11 6.2. Types of reference. 12 6.2.1.Personal reference 13 6.2.2.Some special kinds of personal reference. 13 6.3. Substitution. 16 6.3.1.The concept of substitution. 16 6.3.2.Types of substitution. 16 6.3.3.Nominal substitution. 16 6.3.3.1.Nominal substitute one/ones. 16 6.3.3.2. Nominal substitute same (say the same, be the same, do the same). 17 6.3.4.Verbal substitution. 17 6.3.4.1.Verbal substitute do 17 6.3.5.Clausal substitution. 18 6.3.5.1.Substitution of reported clauses. 18 6.3.5.2.Substitution of conditional clauses. 19 6.3.5.3.Substitution of modalized clauses. 19 6.4.Ellipsis. 19 6.4.1.The concept of ellipsis. 19 6.4.2.Nominal ellipsis. 20 6.4.2.1.Presupposition of nominal elements. 20 6.4.2.2.Types of nominal ellipsis. 21 6.4.3.Verbal ellipsis. 22 6.4.3.1.Lexical ellipsis. 22 6.4.3.2.Operator ellipsis. 22 6.4.4.Clausal ellipsis. 22 7.Cohesion and coherence analysis as a means of interpreting philosophical texts. 23 Bibliography 29 Appendix 1 32 IntroductionThe aim of the present paper is to try and offer such strategy for the analysis of philosophical texts that would suggest the possibility of their deep hermeneutical interpretation. The theory of cohesion and local coherence of discourse developed by modern linguistics is used as the main tool for analysis. We use only the part of it that affects the construction of internal semantic connections in texts, and therefore influences the movement of meanings in it. The relevance of this study is supported by the perennial value of philosophical knowledge and the possibility of its correct and objective interpretation. The object of the study is an essay by the eminent British philosopher of the 20th century, Bertrand Russell, "On the nature of Acquaintance." The subject of the study is cohesion and coherence in this text, as well as the possibility of their interpretation in order to interpret the whole text. Cohesion in English. The concept of cohesion.As understood by Michael Halliday and Ruqaiya Hasan in the work "Cohesion in English"1, cohesion is a means of creating texture in text, a part of the language system which makes a text a unified whole. They state that cohesion is a very special type of relation between two units of text, which is semantic rather than grammatical. Cohesion has to do with the situation, when a certain unit is not understandable without a recourse to another unit, the interpretation of the former being dependent on the latter. M. K. Halliday adduces an example of a language comic situation, when a sentence is uninterpretable without any other context, being “loaded with presuppositions”: [1] So we pushed him under the other one. Here any word within the sentence cannot be understood without establishing a certain link with what comes before and what comes next, as it were, and this link is called by the authors a tie [1]. Neither of the members in a tie can be cohesive taken separately (p. 3). This means that the actual nitty-gritty of this language phenomenon exists only between textual elements, in the type of relation between them. The fact that cohesion adds to textual unity, however, doesn’t mean to say that it can be only intersentential. It occurs within one sentence as well. There is less need in intrasentential cohesion, because the sentence “hangs together” itself because of its inherent syntactic structure. Moreover, cohesion between two words (or any other units of speech) in one and the same sentence is irrevocably intertwined with syntactic structure itself. For example, one and the same means of reference (in our case reiteration) cannot be used in one and the same sentence several times: “John took John's hat off and hung John's hat on a peg” [1]. At the same time one cannot call cohesion a suprasegmental phenomena, it doesn’t function somehow above the sentence structure, any syntactic features “are simply irrelevant” to it [1]. As far semantic specific of cohesion is concerned, cohesion is by nature referential. Very briefly and generally, this means that cohesion presupposes interpretation of one element by reference to another. Another characteristic feature of cohesion is that it is a purely relational concept. This means that one and the same unit of speech can be involved in different types of ties in cohesion (“What is your favourite pastime? – Lying on the floor. What was he doing when you came in? – Lying on the floor.”). M. K. Halliday determines cohesion as a source of essential semantic relations within text. (He includes in the concept of cohesion the semantic relations which are now determined as bridging relations in a broader sense. – See [2] Clark, 1975; in cognitive linguistics they are called indirect anaphora, or associative anaphora, which is for instance “Jan sat down to rest at the foot of a huge beech-tree. Now he was so tired that he soon fell asleep; and a leaf fell on him and then another, and then another; and before long he was covered all over with leaves, yellow, golden and brown”.). |