探析“NP了”的语法、语义、语用特征

名词性词语后边加“了”构成“NP了”格式,在句中可以作谓语,也可以单独成句;前面可以加副词状语;在语义上具有“推移性”的特征,在语用上有一定的价值,且有简洁明了的特点。     

Ambiguity and Cooperation in the Implementation of Adult Protection Policy

Using a classification of public policy developed by Matland, we examine implementation of policy on adult protection as outlined in ‘No Secrets’, the government's guidance to local agencies. This policy appears to exemplify a ‘high‐ambiguity/low‐conflict’ model. Detailed interviews with staff charged with developing multi‐agency procedures, in local authority departments, health authorities, the police and the voluntary sector, confirmed the ambiguity of the policy and the uncertainty experienced by staff as a consequence. However, the interviews also revealed a number of areas of conflict, particularly as people gave precedence to their own professional norms and organizational priorities over partnership working.     

文学作品中颜色词的模糊性及其翻译研究

俄罗斯文学作品中颜色词的语义和语用意义有时很难确定,具有模糊性。其模糊性主要体现在三个方面:多义项颜色词、单一颜色词、非概念意义颜色词。从语言模糊性的视角探讨文学作品中颜色词及其翻译策略具有一定现实意义。     

英语弹性思维探讨

针对英语弹性思维 ,以心理学、语言学为基础 ,运用了“黑箱”理论和功能模拟方法 ,对英语语言弹性现象进行分析。笔者认为 ,英语思维的弹性主要产生或存在于歧义、同一词义的语义特征变化、故事情节、变异结构、弯曲和摆动、“省略”句、数量、模糊语言、艺术语言、人思维强烈的模糊性和心物场中的力等方面。     

语法隐喻的语篇功能分析模式

基于Halliday的系统功能语言学语法隐喻理论建构语法隐喻的语篇功能分析模式。运用该模式,从小句内和小句间两个层级探讨三种主要语法隐喻类型的语篇功能变化。语义邻近性、时间顺序性等认知机制,以及语言的类型是导致语篇功能发生变化的内在动因。     

从语法角度和主题结构角度谈英汉主语比较

本文从语法主语和主题主语两个角度对英汉主语进行比较,指出英语注重主语,要求主谓一致,适合用传统语法进行分析。汉语注重话题,习惯把句子谈论的对象提前。主题结构在汉语中属正常结构,用正常语序;而英语中主题结构分无标记和有标记两类,无标记类主题大部分不是句子谈论的对象,有标记类在英语中属非正常结构,使用倒装语序。     

言语交际中的蓄意歧义现象及其解读

蓄意歧义是一种独特的语言艺术,为语言研究提供了新的语料,它体现了语音、词汇、语法、语用等规则。通过分析言语交际过程中产生的蓄意歧义现象及其制造的不同效果,可以促进语言使用者更好地了解整个语言体系,以及包含语用学、词汇学、语音学和语法在内的语言体系分支之间的关系。     

歧义容忍度对外语语言水平和外语阅读成绩的影响

为探讨歧义容忍度对外语语言水平和外语阅读成绩的影响,对高、低歧义容忍度组在外语语言水平和外语阅读成绩上的差异进行了比较。结果表明：歧义容忍度直接影响外语语言水平和外语阅读成绩,还通过外语语言水平间接影响外语阅读成绩;高、低歧义容忍度纽的学生在外语语言水平和外语阅读成绩上均有显著性差异。     

英语语法歧义及其根源探究

英语中最常见的歧义即语法歧义包括句法功能歧义、修饰语歧义和并列结构歧义,是由句子的语法结构引起的.根据转换生成语法,句子有深层、表层两层结构,二者通过转换规则联系起来,它们与语义都有关系.本质上,任何一种语法歧义都是由句子深、表层结构的多对一关系引起的.所以,语法歧义根源在于句子结构层次的不一致性,即深层结构不同而表层结构相同.     

Ambiguity and risk taking in organizations

Kunreuther, Meszaros, and Hogarth (1993) argue that insurers are risk averse and ambiguity averse, and that they use cognitive reference points and constraints in making pricing decisions. They further claim that insurer ambiguity may be a factor that has a role in market failure at the industry level. Arguably, ambiguity may be an important aspect of decision behavior. In this article, research on managerial risk taking is reviewed with a focus on the relationship between ambiguity and risk taking. In particular, the effects of the organizational and institutional context are highlighted. It is argued that the political aspects of insurer decision behavior should be considered as well. Implications for further study and understanding of decision making are discussed.