Conditions for Text Coherence
Conditions for Text Coherence
复制标题
文本连贯性的条件
作者：
T. Reinhart
试图定义文本连贯的第一个问题是我们到底想要定义什么。就像语言学或文本分析的许多其他领域一样，在这个问题上有两种立场：首先，我们想要定义所有由说话者产生或产生的文本集合，这些文本在他们的话语环境中通常是可理解的或起作用的，其次，我们想要定义一套规范或条件，这些规范或条件适用于可理解的、实际的或可产生的文本集合中的一个（可能是理想化的）子集这些文本最大限度地或理想地遵守理性和合作的要求，或者反映出说话者对完整连贯文本的认识。我支持第二种立场。这两种方法之间的冲突是关于规范和越轨概念的熟悉辩论的一个方面。这一问题的一个被广泛讨论的方面是关于语法和语义偏差的争论，特别是在隐喻的处理上。持第一种立场的人的核心信念是，语法和非语法平行之间的区别，是由有意义或可理解与无意义或不可理解之间的区别决定的。乔姆斯基（例如，1965年）的第二种观点是，这是两种截然不同的现象。语法性是由语法规则定义的，这些规则与意义无关。非语法结构可以是有意义的，反之也是可能的；语法结构可以是无意义的。在这一框架下，语法或语义形式良好的表达与异常语言表达之间的区别不在于它们的可理解性，而在于赋予它们意义的过程中所需的操作类型。虽然语法表达式是通过将表面结构映射为语义表示的函数直接解释的，
The first question in attempting to define text-coherence is what it is exactly we want to define. As in many other areas of linguistics or textual analysis there are two stands on this issue: The first is that we want to define the set of all texts which have been produced or are producible by speakers and are generally comprehensible or functional in their context of utterances, and the second is that we want to define a set of norms or conditions which apply to a (perhaps idealized) subset of the set of comprehensible actual or producible texts those texts which observe maximally, or ideally, the requirements of rationality and cooperation, or that reflect the speaker's knowledge of what counts as a fully coherent text. I am taking the second stand. The conflict between the two approaches is an aspect of the familiar debate concerning the notions of norm and deviance. The aspect of this problem that has been widely discussed is the debate concerning grammaticality and semantic deviance, particularly in the treatment of metaphor. The central belief of those holding the first stand is that the distinction between grammatical and ungrammatical parallels, and is determined by, the distinction between meaningful or comprehensible and meaningless or incomprehensible. The second stand, taken by Chomsky (e.g., 1965), is that these are two distinct phenomena. Grammaticality is defined by the rules of the grammar, which are independent of meaning. Ungrammatical constructions can be meaningful and the converse is also possible grammatical constructions can be meaningless. Within this framework the difference between grammatically or semantically well-formed expressions and deviant linguistic expressions lies not in their comprehensibility, but in the types of operation required in the procedure of assigning meaning to them. While a grammatical expression is interpreted directly by a function mapping surface structures into semantic representations,