转摘More and more scholars are now showing an interest in adopting linguistic approaches to translation studies. Between 1949 and 1989, an incomplete survey by the author revealed that there were only about 30 textbook passages discussing the relationship between linguistics and translation, including aspects of general linguistics, pragmatics, stylistics, text linguistics, rhetoric and machine translation. From 1990 to 1994, there was an incredible increase in the number of passages looking at translation from a linguistic point of view. Almost 160 articles published over these five years concerned translation and general linguistics, stylistics, comparative linguistics, semantics, pragmatics, sociolinguistics, text linguistics, rhetoric, etc. New terms such as discourse analysis, hermeneutics, dynamic equivalence, deep structure and surface structure, context, theme and rheme, cooperative principles, to mention just a few, appeared in the field of translation studies. We can definitely identify a trend of applying linguistics theories to translation studies in these years. Today, we are at the point of questioning whether linguistics is a necessary part of translation. In recent years, some scholars who are in favour of free translation, have repeatedly raised this question to the public and appealed for an end to the linguistic approach to translation. Some firmly believe that translation is an art and that therefore linguistics is neither useful nor helpful. Such a claim is wrong if we look at translation as a whole, including scientific translation where meanings are rigid and restricted and the degree of freedom is limited. Flexibility, in this case, is neither required nor appreciated. But even in literary translation, linguistics is hardly a burden. Wang Zongyan pointed out that « If one sees linguistics as a body of rules regulating language, translators most probably will yawn with boredom. If it signifies the use of words and locutions to fit an occasion, there is nothing to stop translators from embracing linguistics » (Wang 1991: 38). The controversy over « literal » versus « free » translation has a long history, with convincing supporters on each side. For example, ancient Western scholars like Erasmus, Augustine, and others were in favour of literal translation. Among early Chinese translators, Kumarajiva is considered to be of the free school, while Xuan Zuang appears as literal and inflexible. In modern China, Yan Fu advocated hermeneutic translation, while Lu Xun preferred a clumsy version to one that was free but inexact. There is nothing wrong in any of these stances. When these translators emphasized free translation they never denied the possibility of literal translation, and vice versa. Problems only arise when the discussion turns to equivalent translations. The problem of equivalence has caused much controversy. Some people believed that there could be an equivalence of language elements independent of the setting in which they of occurred. Based on this assumption, some « literal » translators tried to decompose a text into single elements in hopes of finding equivalents in the target language. This is a naive idea. Jakobson (1971: 262) notes that « Equivalence in difference is the cardinal problem of language and the pivotal concern of linguistics. » He does not refer to « equivalence » but to « equivalence in difference » as the cardinal problem. Nida was also misunderstood by many for his notion of « equivalence, » which he took to mean that « Translating consists in reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source-language message, first in terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style » (1969: 12). He further concluded that « Absolute equivalence in translating is never possible » (1984: 14). De Beaugrande and Dressler believed that the success or failure of either free or literal approaches was uncertain: an unduly « literal » translation might be awkward or even unintelligible, while an unduly « free » one might make the original text disintegrate and disappear altogether. To them, equivalence between a translation and an original can only be realized in the experience of the participants (cf. de Beaugrande and Dressler 1981: 216-217). Catford (1965: 27) expressed the same concern that equivalent translation is only « an empirical phenomenon, discovered by comparing SL and TL texts. » In citing the above examples, I have absolutely no intention of insisting on untranslatability. What I mean is that a translator should incorporate his or her own experience and processing activities into the text: solving the problems, reducing polyvalence, explaining away any discrepancies or discontinuities. Linguistic knowledge can help us treat different genres in different ways, always with an awareness that there are never exact equivalences but only approximations. Therefore, amplification and simplification become acceptable. If we agree that texts can be translated, then, in what way does linguistics contribute to translation? To answer this question, we must look at the acceptance of western linguistics in China and its influence on translation. Systematic and scientific study of the Chinese language came into being only at the end of the last century, when Ma Jianzhong published a grammar book Mashi Wentong «马氏文通» in 1898, which was the first in China and took the grammar of Indo-European languages as its model. The study of language was, in turn, influenced by translation studies in China. In Mashi Wenton, the main emphasis is on the use of morphology, which takes up six-sevenths of the book. Influenced by the dominant trend of morphological studies, a word was regarded as the minimum meaningful unit, and a sentence was therefore the logical combination of words of various specific types. Translation was, then, principally based on the unit of the word. In the West, Biblical translation provided a very good example, just as the translation of Buddhist scriptures did in China. Not until the end of the 19th century did some linguists come to realize that sentences were not just the summary of the sequenced words they contained. The Prague School, founded in the 1920s, made a considerable contribution to the study of syntax. According to the analytic approach of the Functional Perspective of the Prague School, a sentence can be broken down into two parts: theme and rheme. Theme is opposed to rheme in a manner similar to the distinction between topic and comment, and is defined as the part of a sentence which contributes least to advancing the process of communication. Rheme, on the other hand, is the part of a sentence which adds most to advancing the process of communication and has the highest degree of communicative dynamism. These two terms help enlighten the process of translating Chinese into English. In the mid-1950s, the study of syntax peaked with the Chomsky's establishment of transformational-generative grammar. This theory of the deep structure and surface structure of language influenced translation tremendously. Nida relied heavily on this theory in developing his « analyzing-transfering-reconstructing » pattern for translation. Some Chinese linguists, in the meantime, tried to raise language studies to a higher plane. Li Jinxi (1982) enlarged the role of sentence studies in his book A New Chinese Grammar, two thirds of which was devoted to discussing sentence formation or syntax. He writes that « No words can be identified except in the context of a sentence. » The study was then improved by other grammarians, including Lu Shuxiang, Wang Li. With the development of linguistic studies, translation based on the unit of the sentence was put forward by some scholars. It was Lin Yu-Tang who first applied the theory to translation in his article « On Translation. » He claimed that « translation should be done on the basis of the sentence [...] What a translator should be faithful to is not the individual words but the meaning conveyed by them » (Lin 1984: r 3). The importance of context in the understanding of a sentence was therefore emphasized. Chao Yuanren, a Chinese scholar and professor at Harvard University, criticized scholars and translators who tended to forget this point and take language for something independent and self-sufficient. In fact, it is obvious that when we translate a sentence, we depend on its context; when we interpret an utterance we rely on the context of the speech (cf. Chao 1967). When a sentence is removed from the text, it usually becomes ambiguous due to the lack of context. Therefore, translation becomes difficult. In the 1960s, people began to realize that the study of language based on sentences was not even sufficient. A complete study should be made of the whole text. A simple sentence like « George passed » may have different interpretations in different contexts. If the context is that of an examination, it means George did well on a test; in a card game it would indicate that George declined his chance to bid; in sports it would mean the ball reached another player. Without a context, how could we decide on a translation? Linguists therefore shifted their attention to the study of texts and to discourse analysis. Text linguistics have become increasingly popular since that time. Van Dijk was a pioneer in this field, and his four-volume edition of the Handbook of Discourse Analysis is of great value. Halliday's Cohesion in English and Introduction to Functional Grammar help us to better understand the English language on a textual level. It is worth noting that de Beaugrande and Dressler (1981) provided an overall and systematic study of text, which is useful to translation studies. De Beaugrande actually wrote a book called Factors in a Theory of Poetic Translating in 1978. The book did not become very popular as it confined the discussion to translating poetry. At the same time, books on a linguistic approach to translation were introduced into China, such as the works of Eugene Nida, Peter Newmarks, J.C. Catford, Georges Mounin, and others. These books gave a great push to the application of linguistic theories to translation studies in China. Textual or discoursive approaches to the study of translation could not keep pace with the development of text linguistics. Some studies remained on the syntactic or semantic level, though even there textual devices were employed. In talking about the translation units of word and text, Nida wrote: ... average person naively thinks that language is words, the common tacit assumption results that translation involves replacing a word in language A with a word in language B. And the more « conscientious » this sort of translation is, the more acute. In other words, the traditional focus of attention in translation was on the word. It was recognized that that was not a sufficiently large unit, and therefore the focus shifted to the sentence. But again, expert translators and linguists have been able to demonstrate that individual sentences, in turn, are not enough. The focus should be on the paragraph, and to some extent on the total discourse. (Nida and Tabber 1969: 152) From that statement we can see that Nida regards a discourse as something larger than a paragraph, as an article with a beginning and an ending. Nida himself never applied text linguistics to translation, and there might be some confusion if we use his term in our interpretation of discourse, because discourse analysis is not merely a study based on a larger language structure. Some Chinese scholars did make the effort to apply text linguistics to the theory and practice of translation. Wang Bingqin's article (1987) was the first academic paper of this sort. He stated his aim to study and discover the rules governing the internal structure of a text in light of text linguistics. He analyzed numerous examples using textual analysis, but unfortunately, all the samples he collected were descriptions of scenery or quotations from the books of great scholars--no dialogue, no illocutionary or perlocutionary forces in the language. He failed to provide a variety of examples. For this reason, his research findings are largely restricted to rhetorical texts in ancient China (cf. Wang 1981; Luo 1994). Scholars like He Ziran applied pragamatics to translation. He's article (1992) put forth two new terms, « pragmalinguistics » and « socio-pragmatics » which, in translation, refer respectively to « the study of pragmatic force or language use from the viewpoint of linguistic sources » and to « the pragmatic studies which examine the conditions on language use that derive from the social and cultural situation. » He discusses the possibility of applying the pragmatic approach to translation in order to achieve a pragmatic equivalent effect between source and target texts; that is, to reproduce the message carried by the source language itself, as well as the meaning carried by the source language within its context and culture. In this article he tries to distinguish « pragma-linguistics » from « socio-pragmatics » but finally admits that « Actually, a clear line between pragma-linguistics and socio-pragmatics may sometimes be difficult to draw. » Still he insists that the application of the pragmatic approach to translation is helpful and even necessary. Ke Wenli (1992) argued that semantics, which in a broad sense combines semantics and pragmatics, should be studied to help understand, explain and solve some of the problems encountered in translation. In this article, he examines four semantic terms--« sense and reference, » « hyponomy, » « changes of meaning » and « context »--giving many examples to illusrate the importance of having some general knowledge of semantics and of understanding the relationship between semantics and translation. This article is clearly written and readers can easily draw inspiration from it. These linguistics approaches shed new lights on the criteria of « faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance » defined by Yan Fu. Chinese scholars began to criticize the vagueness of these three criteria and endeavored to give them concrete significance through the theories of western linguistics. The result is that the content of these three traditional criteria has been greatly enriched, especially by the effect equivalence theory, which in a broad sense means that the target language should be equivalent to the source language from a semantic, pragmatic, and stylistic point of view. But we are still unable to evaluate translations in a very scientific way. Therefore, Chinese scholars like Fan Shouyi, Xu Shenghuan and Mu Lei embarked on quantitative analyses of translations and used the fuzzy set theory of mathematics in accomplishing their analysis. Fan published several articles on this field of study. His 1987 and 1990 articles evaluate translations according to a numerical quantity of faithfulness. Xu's article « A Mathematical Model for Evaluating a Translation's Quality » presents a normal mathematical model. He states that it is difficult to produce an absolutely accurate evaluation of translations with this model because of the uncertainty and randomness of man's thought process. Making such analysis more accurate and objective would require further research. The unit in translation is a hard nut to crack. Without solving this problem, no research in translation studies will ever be sufficient. To date, very few people have focused their research on this area. Nida holds that the unit should be the sentence, and in a certain sense, the discourse. Barkhudarov (1993: 40), Soviet linguist and translation theorist, suggests that: translation is the process of transforming a speech product (or text) produced in one language into a speech product (or text) in another language. [...] It follows that the most important task of the translator who carries out the process of transformation, and of the theorist who describes or creates a model for that process, is to establish the minimal unit of translation, as it is generally called, the unit of translation in the source text. Though he notes the importance of the unit of translation in a text and considers that this unit can be a unit on any level of language, he fails to point out what a text is and how it might be measured in translation. Halliday's notion of the clause might be significant in this case. To him, a clause is a basic unit. He distinguishes three functions of a clause: textual, interpersonal and ideational. According to Halliday, these functions are not possessed by word or phrase. But he is not quite successful in analyzing the relationship between clause and text (cf. Halliday 1985). In China, some people have tried to solve this problem. Wang Dechun (1987: 10) more or less shares Bakhudarov's view that the translation unit cannot be confined just to sentences. In some ways, the phoneme, word, phrase, sentence, paragraph, or even text can all serve as a unit. At this point, we cannot find anything special in treating text translation except for having text as the highest level among translation units. This is not the aim of text linguistics or discourse analysis. If we want to apply these to the theory and practice of translation, we will require a textual approach.
步骤一：选题 英语专业的论文的选题很重要，选对了题，接下来的写作就会很顺利，否则不然。 步骤二：开题报告 要给自己的论文拟定一个标题，然后给这个标题构思一个主题，也就是整篇论文到底在讲什么，要论述什么英语专业本科毕业论文怎么写英语专业本科毕业论文怎么写。接着，构思自己文章的大致框架，也就是提纲。 步骤三：正文(重点) 1.开题报告确定之后，就要开始论文正文部分的写作了。开始写正文之前还有一个小插曲，那就是摘要部分的写作。 2.英语论文写作对原创性有一定的要求，一般是直接引用的内容不得超过30% 论文一定要自己动手写，不然答辩的时候就会一头雾水。
：现在本科学历，如果能找人进事业单位，还是可以的，如果是到普通公司打工，基本老板看的都是实际能力，能为公司带来什么效益，对学历要求不是那么严格。
先不要着急。 论文答辩的时候，给5分钟自述只是一个形式上的要求。通常不会有人非得要求你一定要讲足5分钟的。那些老师通常不会太认真听滴...:) 非要凑够5分钟的话，就说你的写作原由，内容提要，主要观点什么的，最重要的是，你要说说文中你认为的亮点。
我发表英文文章的个人经验 （1）多看专业核心外文期刊的相关文章，向别人学习相关的写作，包括单词、语句，甚至是段落和文章结构。比如老外写的前言部分，往往都进行了综合归纳，如果我们看到这样的文章，一定要多多拜读。 （2）注意文章的逻辑性，打算投往高级别的国际期刊更是如此。一些国外编辑和审稿人对中国人写的文章存在一种怀疑的态度，因此我们自身的文章必须具有足够的事实证据，推理严密，只有这样才能够“打动”编辑和审稿人的心。 （4）写文章一定要有自己的新观点或者新的idea，不能是大量实验数据的堆砌。老外一般喜欢对数据进行深入分析。记住文章是交流学术思想的，不是交流实验工作量的。 （5）注意英语语言。这不可能在一夜之间有质的飞越，但是平时多积累是绝对有益处的，当然如果请国外的朋友或者在国外留学多年的朋友帮着修改语言，那是最好不过的了。 （6）其他需要注意的小地方： A:严格遵循“作者须知”的规定，尊重拟投稿期刊所惯用的论文结构，特别注意图表的位置（一些期刊要求图表在文中，一些则要求图表放在文字部分之后），投稿的份数要足够，重视稿件给编辑和审稿人的“第一印象”。 B:核对通讯作者详细的通信地址、E-mail地址、电话号码、传真号码等。 C:务必遵照期刊的要求将稿件投寄给指定的收稿人或收稿单位（期刊的编辑部、编委会、主编、执行编委或助理编辑）。 D:与编辑部联系的所有信件（包括磁盘、打印稿或复印件等），都应标注联系作者的姓名。
专业原创代写，需要联系
自考本科段英语论文的标准应该和全日制英语本科论文相同，但老师会酌情放宽给分，毕竟自考和全日制水平会有点差别。 中英文题目，中英文摘要，中英文关键词， 英文正文， 7000字以上。加reference。 具体格式可参考网上的MIA论文格式。
我不是自己写的，找脚印论文网写的，又不贵，还能节约点时间泡妞呢。哈哈
有文学方面，翻译学方面，教学法方面的。自己选一个方向，再定题目，写开提报告，再找资料啥的。
有五个方向 英语教学方向 语言学方向 英美文学 英美文化 翻译方向
毕业论文无论在内容或形式上都有一定的要求，这也是考核论文成绩的基本依据之一。关于毕业论文写作的具体要求，在以后的有关章节中将作详细论述，这里先说说毕业论文写作的一些原则要求。 一、坚持理论联系实际的原则 撰写毕业论文必须坚持理论联系实际的原则。理论研究，特别是社会科学的研究必须为现实服务，为社会主义现代化建设服务，为两个文明建设服务。理论来源于实践，又反作用于实践。科学的理论对实践有指导作用，能通过人们的实践活动转化为巨大的物质力量。科学研究的任务就在于揭示事物运动的规律性，并用这种规律性的认识指导人们的实践，推动社会的进步和发展。因此，毕业论文在选题和观点上都必须注重联系社会主义现代化建设的实际，密切注视社会生活中出现的新情况、新问题。 坚持理论研究的现实性，做到理论联系实际，就必须迈开双脚，深入实际，进行社会调查研究。这也是我们正确认识社会的基本途径。人们只有深入到实际中去，同客观事物广泛接触，获得大量的感性材料，然后运用科学的逻辑思维方法，对这些材料进行去粗取精，去伪存真，由此及彼，由表及里的加工制作，才能从中发现有现实意义而又适合自己研究的新课题。在我国改革开放的实践中，新情况、新问题、新经验层出不穷，需要研究的问题遍布社会的方方面面，只要我们对现实问题有浓厚的兴趣和高度的敏感性，善于捕捉那些生动而具有典型性的现实材料，通过深入的思考和研究，就能从中引出有利于社会主义现代化建设的规律性认识，提高毕业论文的价值。当然撰写毕业论文可选择的课题十分广泛，并不只限于现实生活中的问题，也可以研究专业基本理论，中西方比较研究等。但无论选择什么研究课题，都必须贯彻理论联系实际的原则，做到古为今用，洋为中用，从历史的研究中吸取有益于现实社会发展的经验教训，从对外国的研究中，借鉴其成功经验和失败的教训，或为我国的对外政策提供某些依据。 贯彻理论联系实际的原则和方法，必须认真读书，掌握理论武器。 *** 同志指出：“强调联系实际，绝不意味着否定读书的重要，恰恰相反，更要认真地读，反复地读，深钻苦研，做到真正读懂弄通。否则，没有掌握理论，怎么谈得上理论联系实际?”(《求是》杂志1989年第24期)认真读书包括两个方面的内容，一是学好专业课，具备专业基础知识。这是写好毕业论文的前提和必要条件。经验告诉我们，只有具备了相应水平的知识积累，才能理解一定深度的学术问题；同时，也只有具备了某一特定的知识结构，才能对某学科中的问题进行研究。正如黑格尔所说，在讨论学术问题之前，必须“先有具备某种程度的知识”，否则，“没有凭借作为讨论出发的根据，于是他们只能徘徊于模糊空疏以及毫无意义的情况中”。(小逻辑》第三版序言)二是要认真学习马克思主义的基本原理，学会运用马克思主义的立场、观点和方法分析问题、解决问题。马克思主义正确地揭示了自然界、人类社会和思维发展的最一般规律，成为无产阶级和革命人民认识世界和改造世界的强大思想武器。马克思主义作为伟大的认识工具，虽然并不直接提供解决各种具体问题的答案，但它对我们如何正确地发现问题，分析和解决问题提供了正确的立场、观点和方法，因此，大学毕业生在撰写毕业论文时，应当努力学习和掌握马克思主义基本理论，自觉地用马克思主义的立场、观点和方法来指导毕业论文的写作。 二、立论要科学，观点要创新 (一)立论要科学 毕业论文的科学性是指文章的基本观点和内容能够反映事物发展的客观规律。文章的基本观点必须是从对具体材料的分析研究中产生出来，而不是主观臆想出来的。科学研究作用就在于揭示规律，探索真理，为人们认识世界和改造世界开拓前进的道路。判断一篇论文有无价值或价值之大小，首先是看文章观点和内容的科学性如何。 文章的科学性首先来自对客观事物的周密而详尽的调查研究。掌握大量丰富而切合实际的材料，使之成为“谋事之基，成事之道”。 2 毕业论文写作的基本要求 其次，文章的科学性通常取决于作者在观察、分析问题时能否坚持实事求是的科学态度。在科学研究中，既不容许夹杂个人的偏见，又不能人云亦云，更不能不着边际地凭空臆想，而必须从分析出发，力争做到如实反映事物的本来面目。 再次，文章是否具有科学性，还取决于作者的理论基础和专业知识。写作毕业论文是在前人成就的基础上，运用前人提出的科学理论去探索新的问题。因此，必须准确地理解和掌握前人的理论，具有广博而坚实的知识基础。如果对毕业论文所涉及领域中的科学成果一无所知，那就根本不可能写出有价值的论文。 (二)观点要创新 毕业论文的创新是其价值所在。文章的创新性，一般来说，就是要求不能简单地重复前人的观点，而必须有自己的独立见解。学术论文之所以要有创新性，这是由科学研究的目的决定的。从根本上说，人们进行科学研究就是为了认识那些尚未被人们认识的领域，学术论文的写作则是研究成果的文字表述。因此，研究和写作过程本身就是一种创造性活动。从这个意义上说，学术论文如果毫无创造性，就不成其为科学研究，因而也不能称之为学术论文。毕业论文虽然着眼于对学生科学研究能力的基本训练，但创造性仍是其着力强调的一项基本要求。 当然，对学术论文特别是毕业论文创造性的具体要求应作正确的理解。它可以表现为在前人没有探索过的新领域，前人没有做过的新题目上做出了成果；可以表现为在前人成果的基础上作进一步的研究，有新的发现或提出了新的看法，形成一家之言3也可以表现为从一个新的角度，把已有的材料或观点重新加以概括和表述。文章能对现实生活中的新问题作出科学的说明，提出解决的方案，这自然是一种创造性；即使只是提出某种新现象、新问题，能引起人们的注意和思考，这也不失为一种创造性。国家科委成果局在1983年3月发布的《发明奖励条例》中指出：“在科学技术成就中只有改造客观世界的才是发明，……至于认识客观世界的科学成就，则是发现。”条例中对“新”作了明确规定：“新”是指前人所没有的。凡是公知和公用的，都不是“新”。这些规定，可作为我们衡量毕业论文创造性的重要依据。 根据《条例》所规定的原则，结合写作实践，衡量毕业论文的创造性，可以从以下几个具体方面来考虑： (1)所提出的问题在本专业学科领域内有一定的理论意义或实际意义，并通过独立研究，提出了自己一定的认识和看法。 (2)虽是别人已研究过的问题，但作者采取了新的论证角度或新的实验方法，所提出的结论在一定程度上能够给人以启发。 (3)能够以自已有力而周密的分析，澄清在某一问题上的混乱看法。虽然没有更新的见解，但能够为别人再研究这一问题提供一些必要的条件和方法。 (4)用较新的理论、较新的方法提出并在一定程度上解决了实际生产、生活中的问题，取得一定的效果。或为实际问题的解决提供新的思路和数据等。 (5)用相关学科的理论较好地提出并在一定程度上解决本学科中的问题。 (6)用新发现的材料(数据、事实、史实、观察所得等)来证明已证明过的观点。 科学研究中的创造性要求对前人已有的结论不盲从，而要善于独立思考，敢于提出自己的独立见解，敢于否定那些陈旧过时的结论，这不仅要有勤奋的学习态度，还必须具有追求真理、勇于创新的精神。要正确处理继承与创新的关系，任何创新都不是凭空而来的，总是以前人的成果为基础。因此，我们要认真地学习、研究和吸收前人的成果。但是这种学习不是不加分析地生吞活剥，而是既要继承，又要批判和发展。 三、论据要翔实，论证要严密 (一)论据要翔实 一篇优秀的毕业论文仅有一个好的主题和观点是不够的，它还必须要有充分、翔实的论据材料作为支持。旁征博引、多方佐证，是毕业论文有别于一般性议论文的明显特点。一般性议论文，作者要证明一个观点，有时只需对一两个论据进行分析就可以了，而毕业论文则必须以大量的论据材料作为自己观点形成的基础和确立的支柱。作者每确立一个观点，必须考虑：用什么材料做主证，什么材料做旁证；对自己的观点是否会有不同的意见或反面意见，对他人持有的异议应如何进行阐释或反驳。毕业论文要求作者所提出的观点、见解切切实实是属于自己的，而要使自己的观点能够得到别人的承认，就必须有大量的、充分的、有说服力的理由来证实自己观点的正确。 3 毕业论文写作的基本要求 毕业论文的论据要充分，还须运用得当。一篇论文中不可能也没有必要把全部研究工作所得，古今中外的事实事例、精辟的论述、所有的实践数据、观察结果、调查成果等全部引用进来，而是要取其必要者，舍弃可有可无者。论据为论点服务，材料的简单堆积不仅不能证明论点，强有力地阐述论点，反而给人以一种文章拖咨、杂乱无章、不得要领的感觉。因而在已收集的大量材料中如何选择必要的论据显得十分重要。一般来说，要注意论据的新颖性、典型性、代表性，更重要的是考虑其能否有力地阐述观点。 毕业论文中引用的材料和数据，必须正确可靠，经得起推敲和验证，即论据的正确性。具体要求是，所引用的材料必须经过反复证实。第一手材料要公正，要反复核实，要去掉个人的好恶和想当然的推想，保留其客观的真实。第二手材料要究根问底，查明原始出处，并深领其意，而不得断章取义。引用别人的材料是为自己的论证服务，而不得作为篇章的点缀。在引用他人材料时，需要下一番筛选、鉴别的功夫，做到准确无误。写作毕业论文，应尽量多引用自己的实践数据、调查结果等作为佐证。如果文章论证的内容，是作者自己亲身实践所得出的结果，那么文章的价值就会增加许多倍。当然，对于掌握知识有限、实践机会较少的大学生来讲，在初次进行科学研究中难免重复别人的劳动，在毕业论文中较多地引用别人的实践结果、数据等，在所难免。但如果全篇文章的内容均是间接得来的东西的组合，很少有自己亲自动手得到的东西，那也就完全失去了写作毕业论文的意义。 (二)论证要严密 论证是用论据证明论点的方法和过程。论证要严密、富有逻辑性，这样才能使文章具有说服力。从文章全局来说，作者提出问题、分析问题和解决问题，要符合客观事物的规律，符合人们对客观事物认识的程序，使人们的逻辑程序和认识程序统一起来，全篇形成一个逻辑整体。从局部来说，对于某一问题的分析，某一现象的解释，要体现出较为完整的概念、判断、推理的过程。 毕业论文是以逻辑思维为主的文章样式，它诉诸理解大量运用科学的语体，通过概念、判断、推理来反映事物的本质或规律，从已知推测未知，各种毕业论文都是采用这种思维形式。社会科学论文往往是用已知的事实，采取归纳推理的形式，求得对未知的认识。要使论证严密，富有逻辑性，必须做到：(1)概念判断准确，这是逻辑推理的前提；(2)要有层次、有条理的阐明对客观事物的认识过程；(3)要以论为纲，虚实结合，反映出从“实”到“虚”，从“事”到“理”，即由感性认识上升到理性认识的飞跃过程。 此外，撰写毕业论文还应注意文体式样的明确性、规范性。学术论文、调查报告、科普读物、可行性报告、宣传提纲等都各有自己的特点，在写作方法上不能互相混同。
论文的结构应该包括以下几部分：介绍页封面标题页论文审查委员对论文做出贡献的（可选）知识范畴（可选）摘要题词（可选）目录表格列表（可选）符号和缩略语（可选）词汇表（可选）内容
论文选题是按一定价值标准或条件对可供选择的课题进行评价和比较并对研究方向、目标、领域和范围作出抉择的过程，是决定论文内容和价值的关键环节。这里学术堂整理了十五个论文选题供大家进行参考：1、从语用学视角看汉英口译中的语用失误2、英语心智谓词的模糊性及其语际语用发展研究3、英语科技术语的词汇特征及翻译4、Moment in Peking中异国形象之汉译5、中医典籍中“气”的源流与翻译探析6、女性主义视角下张爱玲的翻译观--以英译《海上花列传》为中心7、二语习得视觉化研究的几个关键问题8、晚清以降的中国佛典英译高潮9、基于降维法的译者风格研究10、中国英语口音研究述评11、口译中视角转换的语用原则12、模因理论指导下的汉语歇后语英译13、本土英语教学法：流派、体系与特色14、《骆驼祥子》三个英译本中叙述话语的翻译--译者风格的语料库考察15、基于语料库的“人生”隐喻英汉对比研究
题目：①实物大写（如apple ……），虚物小写（如a，an……）但是若虚物大于5个字母，则大写（如before……） ②第一个单词首字母，末单词首字母大写！ ③专有词汇大写（地名，名字，城市，宗教，书名……）
英语语言学论文题目 13论国际商务谈判中的语言交际技巧 33成人世界的童话——从文体学角度解析现今童话再度流行的现象 49论文化差异与英汉商标互译 55浅谈英汉句子结构差异 59诗意的美和喜剧性幽默 62试论广告英语的语言特点 65统觉团对英语初学者词汇学习的影响 67外语学习中应该重视中介语的作用 69新闻报道中的转述动词研究 73英汉禁忌语、委婉语的对比研究 74英汉数字习语的对比研究 76英译汉中词序的变动 78英语广告的语言特征 80英语双关语汉译的可译性限度 101词义演变的原因与方式 137从汉语中英语借词的翻译看文化交流 138从价值观转换看斯佳丽的角色特征 142从礼貌准则看中英文化的异同 146从习语看英汉民族的文化差异 149从英语人名中看性别歧视 157动词过程类型的选择和话语隐性态度的表达 161对母语在英语写作中词汇负迁移现象的思考 162对严复译作中“信”的质疑 167法律英语用词特征分析 168法律语言翻译与法律文体 177副词EVER的句法环境和语义特征 180功能语法视角下的英语报纸新闻标题的功能 183广告口号语的语言特点 189国际商务文化之对比研究 204汉语中双关语的翻译 213基于概念隐喻的诗歌解读 228论广告英语中的幽 默 265论广告英语的语言特点 268论汉英谚语的语言特征 280论清教理念与美国西进运动 282论莎士比亚十四行诗中的时间 300论英语广告中几种常用修辞格及其汉译 310论尤金?奥尼尔的表现主义手法 324名词化的语篇功能 330诺曼时期法语对英语词汇的影响 339浅谈英语虚拟语气的语用功能 340浅谈英语虚拟语气及其语用功能 345浅析二十世纪计算机英语词汇的构成特点
转摘More and more scholars are now showing an interest in adopting linguistic approaches to translation studies. Between 1949 and 1989, an incomplete survey by the author revealed that there were only about 30 textbook passages discussing the relationship between linguistics and translation, including aspects of general linguistics, pragmatics, stylistics, text linguistics, rhetoric and machine translation. From 1990 to 1994, there was an incredible increase in the number of passages looking at translation from a linguistic point of view. Almost 160 articles published over these five years concerned translation and general linguistics, stylistics, comparative linguistics, semantics, pragmatics, sociolinguistics, text linguistics, rhetoric, etc. New terms such as discourse analysis, hermeneutics, dynamic equivalence, deep structure and surface structure, context, theme and rheme, cooperative principles, to mention just a few, appeared in the field of translation studies. We can definitely identify a trend of applying linguistics theories to translation studies in these years. Today, we are at the point of questioning whether linguistics is a necessary part of translation. In recent years, some scholars who are in favour of free translation, have repeatedly raised this question to the public and appealed for an end to the linguistic approach to translation. Some firmly believe that translation is an art and that therefore linguistics is neither useful nor helpful. Such a claim is wrong if we look at translation as a whole, including scientific translation where meanings are rigid and restricted and the degree of freedom is limited. Flexibility, in this case, is neither required nor appreciated. But even in literary translation, linguistics is hardly a burden. Wang Zongyan pointed out that « If one sees linguistics as a body of rules regulating language, translators most probably will yawn with boredom. If it signifies the use of words and locutions to fit an occasion, there is nothing to stop translators from embracing linguistics » (Wang 1991: 38). The controversy over « literal » versus « free » translation has a long history, with convincing supporters on each side. For example, ancient Western scholars like Erasmus, Augustine, and others were in favour of literal translation. Among early Chinese translators, Kumarajiva is considered to be of the free school, while Xuan Zuang appears as literal and inflexible. In modern China, Yan Fu advocated hermeneutic translation, while Lu Xun preferred a clumsy version to one that was free but inexact. There is nothing wrong in any of these stances. When these translators emphasized free translation they never denied the possibility of literal translation, and vice versa. Problems only arise when the discussion turns to equivalent translations. The problem of equivalence has caused much controversy. Some people believed that there could be an equivalence of language elements independent of the setting in which they of occurred. Based on this assumption, some « literal » translators tried to decompose a text into single elements in hopes of finding equivalents in the target language. This is a naive idea. Jakobson (1971: 262) notes that « Equivalence in difference is the cardinal problem of language and the pivotal concern of linguistics. » He does not refer to « equivalence » but to « equivalence in difference » as the cardinal problem. Nida was also misunderstood by many for his notion of « equivalence, » which he took to mean that « Translating consists in reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source-language message, first in terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style » (1969: 12). He further concluded that « Absolute equivalence in translating is never possible » (1984: 14). De Beaugrande and Dressler believed that the success or failure of either free or literal approaches was uncertain: an unduly « literal » translation might be awkward or even unintelligible, while an unduly « free » one might make the original text disintegrate and disappear altogether. To them, equivalence between a translation and an original can only be realized in the experience of the participants (cf. de Beaugrande and Dressler 1981: 216-217). Catford (1965: 27) expressed the same concern that equivalent translation is only « an empirical phenomenon, discovered by comparing SL and TL texts. » In citing the above examples, I have absolutely no intention of insisting on untranslatability. What I mean is that a translator should incorporate his or her own experience and processing activities into the text: solving the problems, reducing polyvalence, explaining away any discrepancies or discontinuities. Linguistic knowledge can help us treat different genres in different ways, always with an awareness that there are never exact equivalences but only approximations. Therefore, amplification and simplification become acceptable. If we agree that texts can be translated, then, in what way does linguistics contribute to translation? To answer this question, we must look at the acceptance of western linguistics in China and its influence on translation. Systematic and scientific study of the Chinese language came into being only at the end of the last century, when Ma Jianzhong published a grammar book Mashi Wentong «马氏文通» in 1898, which was the first in China and took the grammar of Indo-European languages as its model. The study of language was, in turn, influenced by translation studies in China. In Mashi Wenton, the main emphasis is on the use of morphology, which takes up six-sevenths of the book. Influenced by the dominant trend of morphological studies, a word was regarded as the minimum meaningful unit, and a sentence was therefore the logical combination of words of various specific types. Translation was, then, principally based on the unit of the word. In the West, Biblical translation provided a very good example, just as the translation of Buddhist scriptures did in China. Not until the end of the 19th century did some linguists come to realize that sentences were not just the summary of the sequenced words they contained. The Prague School, founded in the 1920s, made a considerable contribution to the study of syntax. According to the analytic approach of the Functional Perspective of the Prague School, a sentence can be broken down into two parts: theme and rheme. Theme is opposed to rheme in a manner similar to the distinction between topic and comment, and is defined as the part of a sentence which contributes least to advancing the process of communication. Rheme, on the other hand, is the part of a sentence which adds most to advancing the process of communication and has the highest degree of communicative dynamism. These two terms help enlighten the process of translating Chinese into English. In the mid-1950s, the study of syntax peaked with the Chomsky's establishment of transformational-generative grammar. This theory of the deep structure and surface structure of language influenced translation tremendously. Nida relied heavily on this theory in developing his « analyzing-transfering-reconstructing » pattern for translation. Some Chinese linguists, in the meantime, tried to raise language studies to a higher plane. Li Jinxi (1982) enlarged the role of sentence studies in his book A New Chinese Grammar, two thirds of which was devoted to discussing sentence formation or syntax. He writes that « No words can be identified except in the context of a sentence. » The study was then improved by other grammarians, including Lu Shuxiang, Wang Li. With the development of linguistic studies, translation based on the unit of the sentence was put forward by some scholars. It was Lin Yu-Tang who first applied the theory to translation in his article « On Translation. » He claimed that « translation should be done on the basis of the sentence [...] What a translator should be faithful to is not the individual words but the meaning conveyed by them » (Lin 1984: r 3). The importance of context in the understanding of a sentence was therefore emphasized. Chao Yuanren, a Chinese scholar and professor at Harvard University, criticized scholars and translators who tended to forget this point and take language for something independent and self-sufficient. In fact, it is obvious that when we translate a sentence, we depend on its context; when we interpret an utterance we rely on the context of the speech (cf. Chao 1967). When a sentence is removed from the text, it usually becomes ambiguous due to the lack of context. Therefore, translation becomes difficult. In the 1960s, people began to realize that the study of language based on sentences was not even sufficient. A complete study should be made of the whole text. A simple sentence like « George passed » may have different interpretations in different contexts. If the context is that of an examination, it means George did well on a test; in a card game it would indicate that George declined his chance to bid; in sports it would mean the ball reached another player. Without a context, how could we decide on a translation? Linguists therefore shifted their attention to the study of texts and to discourse analysis. Text linguistics have become increasingly popular since that time. Van Dijk was a pioneer in this field, and his four-volume edition of the Handbook of Discourse Analysis is of great value. Halliday's Cohesion in English and Introduction to Functional Grammar help us to better understand the English language on a textual level. It is worth noting that de Beaugrande and Dressler (1981) provided an overall and systematic study of text, which is useful to translation studies. De Beaugrande actually wrote a book called Factors in a Theory of Poetic Translating in 1978. The book did not become very popular as it confined the discussion to translating poetry. At the same time, books on a linguistic approach to translation were introduced into China, such as the works of Eugene Nida, Peter Newmarks, J.C. Catford, Georges Mounin, and others. These books gave a great push to the application of linguistic theories to translation studies in China. Textual or discoursive approaches to the study of translation could not keep pace with the development of text linguistics. Some studies remained on the syntactic or semantic level, though even there textual devices were employed. In talking about the translation units of word and text, Nida wrote: ... average person naively thinks that language is words, the common tacit assumption results that translation involves replacing a word in language A with a word in language B. And the more « conscientious » this sort of translation is, the more acute. In other words, the traditional focus of attention in translation was on the word. It was recognized that that was not a sufficiently large unit, and therefore the focus shifted to the sentence. But again, expert translators and linguists have been able to demonstrate that individual sentences, in turn, are not enough. The focus should be on the paragraph, and to some extent on the total discourse. (Nida and Tabber 1969: 152) From that statement we can see that Nida regards a discourse as something larger than a paragraph, as an article with a beginning and an ending. Nida himself never applied text linguistics to translation, and there might be some confusion if we use his term in our interpretation of discourse, because discourse analysis is not merely a study based on a larger language structure. Some Chinese scholars did make the effort to apply text linguistics to the theory and practice of translation. Wang Bingqin's article (1987) was the first academic paper of this sort. He stated his aim to study and discover the rules governing the internal structure of a text in light of text linguistics. He analyzed numerous examples using textual analysis, but unfortunately, all the samples he collected were descriptions of scenery or quotations from the books of great scholars--no dialogue, no illocutionary or perlocutionary forces in the language. He failed to provide a variety of examples. For this reason, his research findings are largely restricted to rhetorical texts in ancient China (cf. Wang 1981; Luo 1994). Scholars like He Ziran applied pragamatics to translation. He's article (1992) put forth two new terms, « pragmalinguistics » and « socio-pragmatics » which, in translation, refer respectively to « the study of pragmatic force or language use from the viewpoint of linguistic sources » and to « the pragmatic studies which examine the conditions on language use that derive from the social and cultural situation. » He discusses the possibility of applying the pragmatic approach to translation in order to achieve a pragmatic equivalent effect between source and target texts; that is, to reproduce the message carried by the source language itself, as well as the meaning carried by the source language within its context and culture. In this article he tries to distinguish « pragma-linguistics » from « socio-pragmatics » but finally admits that « Actually, a clear line between pragma-linguistics and socio-pragmatics may sometimes be difficult to draw. » Still he insists that the application of the pragmatic approach to translation is helpful and even necessary. Ke Wenli (1992) argued that semantics, which in a broad sense combines semantics and pragmatics, should be studied to help understand, explain and solve some of the problems encountered in translation. In this article, he examines four semantic terms--« sense and reference, » « hyponomy, » « changes of meaning » and « context »--giving many examples to illusrate the importance of having some general knowledge of semantics and of understanding the relationship between semantics and translation. This article is clearly written and readers can easily draw inspiration from it. These linguistics approaches shed new lights on the criteria of « faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance » defined by Yan Fu. Chinese scholars began to criticize the vagueness of these three criteria and endeavored to give them concrete significance through the theories of western linguistics. The result is that the content of these three traditional criteria has been greatly enriched, especially by the effect equivalence theory, which in a broad sense means that the target language should be equivalent to the source language from a semantic, pragmatic, and stylistic point of view. But we are still unable to evaluate translations in a very scientific way. Therefore, Chinese scholars like Fan Shouyi, Xu Shenghuan and Mu Lei embarked on quantitative analyses of translations and used the fuzzy set theory of mathematics in accomplishing their analysis. Fan published several articles on this field of study. His 1987 and 1990 articles evaluate translations according to a numerical quantity of faithfulness. Xu's article « A Mathematical Model for Evaluating a Translation's Quality » presents a normal mathematical model. He states that it is difficult to produce an absolutely accurate evaluation of translations with this model because of the uncertainty and randomness of man's thought process. Making such analysis more accurate and objective would require further research. The unit in translation is a hard nut to crack. Without solving this problem, no research in translation studies will ever be sufficient. To date, very few people have focused their research on this area. Nida holds that the unit should be the sentence, and in a certain sense, the discourse. Barkhudarov (1993: 40), Soviet linguist and translation theorist, suggests that: translation is the process of transforming a speech product (or text) produced in one language into a speech product (or text) in another language. [...] It follows that the most important task of the translator who carries out the process of transformation, and of the theorist who describes or creates a model for that process, is to establish the minimal unit of translation, as it is generally called, the unit of translation in the source text. Though he notes the importance of the unit of translation in a text and considers that this unit can be a unit on any level of language, he fails to point out what a text is and how it might be measured in translation. Halliday's notion of the clause might be significant in this case. To him, a clause is a basic unit. He distinguishes three functions of a clause: textual, interpersonal and ideational. According to Halliday, these functions are not possessed by word or phrase. But he is not quite successful in analyzing the relationship between clause and text (cf. Halliday 1985). In China, some people have tried to solve this problem. Wang Dechun (1987: 10) more or less shares Bakhudarov's view that the translation unit cannot be confined just to sentences. In some ways, the phoneme, word, phrase, sentence, paragraph, or even text can all serve as a unit. At this point, we cannot find anything special in treating text translation except for having text as the highest level among translation units. This is not the aim of text linguistics or discourse analysis. If we want to apply these to the theory and practice of translation, we will require a textual approach.
英语语言学课堂教学论文范文
1建构主义下的英语语言学课堂教学方式
建构主义下的英语语言学课堂教学是人们不断地深入认知。建构主义说明了构建学习观点的意义以及观念，建构主义是人们获取知识本质与过程的认识。在建构主义观念指导中，在习英语对老师以及学生都提出了不同的要求。从学生这一主体分析，建构主义要充分体现出学生的地位，英语教师作为课堂参与者以及组织者,应该把学生放在主体地位，同时还要密切关注学生的综合素质发展。在建构主义下开展英语语言学课堂教育可以使学生弘扬个性、充分发挥自身潜能，每一个学生学习的自身基础上提高英语能力。对英语教师来讲，作为英语课堂教学的主要组织人员，应该在课堂上充分给学生创设教学情境，给学生良好的学习环境激发学生在学习中的主动性以及积极性。同时在课堂上通过对学生适当引导，使英语课堂逐步的向着构建主义方向发展，建立互相信任的师生关系，保证提高英语课堂教学的质量。
2构建英语课堂教学的方式
在建立学习环境以及建构学习英语理论时，应该随时与学生为主体对象，在英语课堂教学中老师对学生而言是促进者、帮助者、指导者以及组织者，在课堂教学中充分调动学生学习的积极性，最终达到学生掌握知识和构建主义下学习的目的。
2.1重视学生学习的主体地位
在建构主义下学习英语可强调学生在英语学习中的主体地位，学生在建构主义中学习英语是主动的，而不是由于受到外部刺激被迫接受学习。英语教师的教学效果关键是学生学习英语的积极性以及学习英语效果，学习英语成败与否主要在于学生在学习的过程中有没有主动积极的参与学习过程。只有学生明确学习目标主动学习，才能完成对英语知识的构建。因此要在课堂中有效的教学要充分发挥学生在学习过程中的主体地位，作为老师积极主动的引导学生进行学习，只有把英语学习内容转换成学生的内在需求，变成个人积极主动的学习，学生才可以真正的把自己的潜能发展出来，建构知识体系下的学习方式。重视学生的主体地位，就要让学生积极主动的进行英语学习，作为英语教师要教会学生主动的学习并且及时的归纳英语知识，引导学生自觉的运用知识。提醒学生在学习英语的过程中要不断地自我调整和掌控。
2.2重视学生个体特征
在学习的过程中学生应该根据已有的认知行为主动的选择外部信息，对外部英语信息进行处理以及加工，英语知识是学生在学习的过程中逐步建立起来的整体内容。因为学生理解英语知识是根据已有的背景以及经验进行构建的'，所以每一个学生都会对同一知识结构有不同理解，每个学生自主学习英语的过程中都印证自我个性以及特征，以往传统的英语教学模式只会阻碍学生的创新能力，严重遏制了学生的个性。所以英语教师在讲授知识时，要以人为本，尊重每一个学生的个性发展，充分给予学生弘扬自我个性以及体现价值的空间，保证每一位学生在已有学习基础的能力上把自我个性进一步发展以及提高。教学的关键是学生之间互相合作，作为英语教师应该鼓励每一位学生都参与到学习之中，推出主动交流、合理创新的英语学习氛围。
2.3鼓励学生自主学习
学习英语的过程就是语言不停结合的过程，这是从知识理论转换到自身应用的一个过程，要想帮助学生成功的转变掌握住学习知识的技巧，就要让学生不断主动参加实践课程。建构主义下开展英语语言学课堂知识就是强调每一位学生参与性以及能动性，所以在教学的过程中应该避免对学生实施“填鸭式”教育。建构主义主要主张学生可以完成设置问题的情况下进行学习，所以作为老师可以采取任务型学习方法以及课题式学习方式进行教学，在英语教学的过程中从生活中寻找好的学习材料，让学生实时参与并且参与解决问题的过程，引发学生建构新知识的欲望。
2.4强调教学互动
学生在学习英语的过程中，教师应该选取资料应该从英语网站、专著以及期刊等专业领域中获取学生所需的资料，把这些资料以多种形式提供给学生，在给学生提供材料的同时把问题一起导入，和学生互相讨论，让学生在学习的过程中自己归纳语言。除此之外还应该及时的整理学生在阅读中所遇到的问题，保证基于建构主义下建构英语教学模式把学生的思维能力进一步提高。
3结语
总而言之，随着新课改不断的深化改革，使英语语言学教学有了更多的理论指导、英语语言教学创新科教学模式以及方法，英语教师可通过和学生之间和谐互动，与各个学科之间的教学成果相互评价，使学生可以自主学习，提高学生建构系统知识的能力。同时在建构主义下实施英语语言学教学可以开展类型多样的教学方式，促进英语教学质量稳定提升。
随着对 英语 文化 学习的不断深入,随着英语重要地位的不断确立,英语语言学的研究工作也越来越深入。下文是我为大家整理的关于英语语言学论文 范文 参考的内容，欢迎大家阅读参考! 关于英语语言学论文范文参考篇1 浅探英语语言学中的幽默话语 幽默是指在人类交际的过程中，能够引人发笑的话语、动作和表情等，其内容丰富多彩，表现形式多种多样，比例幽默话语、幽默动作、幽默音乐等等。因为人们的交际活动多依赖于语言，所以幽默也多来源于话语当中。 一、英语语言学中的幽默话语 在繁忙的生活中，幽默是一剂强力润滑剂。幽默话语是借助于语言手段来表述幽默的。它是以语言为媒介，根据特定的情境下，以轻松诙谐的语调，机智、风趣、戏谑的话语风格，通过讽刺、夸张、映射、双关等手法，来表达话语者自己的思想和观点，并使受话者不知不觉地接受，达到“随风潜入夜，润物细无声”的效果和境界。幽默话语往往带有一些意味深长的色彩，对揭露生活中的丑恶或不公平现象，还可以起到发人深省的作用。而对于受话者来说，要把话语和当时具体的语境线索结合起来，利用自己既有的语言知识和社会认知，去发现说话者的言外之意和要表达的真实意图，才能真正的理解幽默，并从中获得愉悦。 例如，“Mr Zhou have a sharp tongue，look out，it doesn’t cut your throat.”这句话看起来是像是在说舌头，但是，我们把这句话放到语境中，就可以想到，这里的“a sharp tongue”并不是什么锋利的舌头，而是牙尖嘴利、毒舌的意思，是发话者幽默、含蓄、间接的表达方式。 二、幽默话语与合作原则 (一)合作原则 胡范畴认为，所谓幽默话语是语言的各要素通过变异和创造而出来的。而美国语言哲学家Grice则认为，幽默话语的作用是为了确保交际活动顺利进行。Grice认为，在人们运用语言进行交际时，交际的双方(发话者和受话者)还要遵守一些先决条件和原则，例如使用双方都能熟练运用的语言、交谈内容是双方都熟悉的话题，还有最重要的合作原则(cooperative principle，CP)。合作原则包括四个范畴，即数量准则、质量准则、关联准则和方式准则。在合作原则下，要求发话者和受话者者要端正态度，在谈话中做到“一唱一和”，避免造成“鸡同鸭讲”“话不投机半句多”的情况。 (二)合作原则与幽默话语的关系 如果说要遵循“数量准则、质量准则、关联准则和方式准则”的合作原则是一位西装革履、步态稳健的中年人，那么幽默话语就是一位穿着休闲时尚、语态随意轻松的新新人类。合作原则与幽默话语的结合，就是传统沉稳美与时尚活力没的结合，在这种结合中，传统的合作原则难免要接受新的挑战，甚至在一定程度上被打破。以下，本文以数量准则和质量准则为例，对合作原则与幽默话语进行举例分析。 (1)幽默话语与数量准则 合作原则之质量准则要求说话者和听话者之间交谈的内容要包含适当的信息量。但是在实际的语言环境中，我们常常需要打破这一数量原则，来起到幽默话语的喜剧效果。例如： Jack：I saw Mr Green having lunch with a woman the day before yesterday. Eason：Oh my god!Is she beautiful? Jack：Yes，she is not only beautiful，but also young. Eason：Dose Mrs Green know about it? Jack：Of course.She was the young and beautiful woman. 在这段对话中，Eason理解的和Mr Green共进午餐的年轻貌美的女人应该是除了Mrs Green以外的其他女人，同时也不是Mr Green家里的其他女性亲戚。而Jack如果不想引起误会的话，应该直接说他前天看到Mr Green和Mrs Green共进午餐，但是为了引起Eason的好奇心，促使他进一步追问，就在第一句话中只说看到Mr Green与一位女性共进午餐，这虽然是违反了数量准则的，但也就此产生体现了幽默话语的有趣、逗乐原则。而Eason心理期待与实际情况之间的落差导致其认知的突然重构，给交谈双方带来乐趣，达到愉悦和反讽的效果。 (2)幽默话语与质量准则 合作原则之质量准则要求说话者不说自知是虚假的话，不说无稽之谈，但是在幽默话语中，说话者经常会采用诸如反语、夸张的休息手法。这样虽然会打破“质量准则”，但是带来的幽默效果也是非常显著的。在上世纪90年代即被引入中国并风靡十几年的美国NBC情景剧《老友记》中就存在很多这样的例子。例如： Phoebe：You do not want to wine the lottery? Rose：Uh surely I do，and I want to be the king of my own country. 通过思考并分析这段对话，我们得出Phoebe问Rose，你是否对有意买彩票，有没有兴趣去试一下自己的运气，通过片中的特点情景和人物关系，我们可以看出Rose对彩票不感兴趣，但是她没有直接了当的说“没兴趣”，而是采用了幽默话语说“想啊，我当然想，我还想当国家元首呢。”因为一个平民是几乎没有可能成为国家元首的，所以Rose的话语是违背了质量准则的。但是，这种“有意违背”和“夸大其词”正是这段对话的笑点所在。 三、幽默话语与指称语 指称语(indexicals)就是具有指称功能的语言结构形式，是日常生活中常见的语言现象。是发话人与受话人，在共同的知识环境、语言环境下，可以彼此理解的，映射出话语的，潜在的指称义和指称关系。当指称语所指示的信息不明确或者出现谬误，发话人的意思就是变得令人费解，幽默话语很可能就此产生。同时，指称语还受到人文背景、社会文化、交际距离、环境等多种因素的影响。指称语可以分为人称指称语、时间指称语、地点指称语等等，其中以人称指称语最为常见。我本文就以人称指称语为例，幽默话语和指称语之间的关系。 人称指称语可以分为第一人称、第二人称和第三人称，是对话参与者角色关系的客观体现。第一人称是发话人、第二人称是受话人、第三人称是话语谈及的对象。在话语中，如果这种规则被打破，就会出现人称指称语不相对应的现象，可能会起到幽默效果。例如： Jim was down the local pub with his mate Mark. Jim：Do you know，Mark，I never kissed my wife before we were married.What about you?” Mark：I don’t know，What was her maiden name?” 这段对话是Jim与Mark之间的酒后之言。Jim的提问，真正的意思是“Have you ever kissed your wife before you were married?” 在指称语中，第二人称是针对受话人而言的，谈及的是隐私或伤痛，所以受话人Mark就采用了幽默话语来回避问题，轻描淡写地将这一问题带过去了，其机智幽默值得我们参照和学习。 四、关联理论与幽默话语 从关联理论的角度来看，受话者会故意曲解发话者的意图，到处与发话者截然相反的信息，产生意外的幽默效果。例如： Teacher：Tom，there were three peaches，ate one，how many would you have? Tom：Three，tow outside and one inside. Tom作为孩子，其对事物的思考方式不同于成人，因为无法认清老师出题的意图，而给出出人意料的答案，起到了幽默的效果。 结语： 从上述讨论中，我们可以看出，在不同语境中，人们会对对话意义、指称语、 语言意义等的理解产生偏差或者错位。幽默话语具有深层次的、含蓄的、深沉的、巧妙的作用，避免交际中的尴尬或难堪，增强语言表达的效果，可以起到愉悦交流、点缀生活的作用。 关于英语语言学论文范文参考篇2 浅谈从建构主义角度探析英语语言学教学 21 世纪 教育 的基点是终身学习，是不断提出问题、解决问题的学习，是敢于打破狭隘的专业界限面向真实复杂任务的学习。在英语课程学习过程中，学生普遍认为英语语言学这门课更加的枯燥，无味和吃力。英语语言学课程涉及面广、内容多、概念多、理论多，理论性和实践性都很强;同时英语语言学课时少，而语言学的发展引起的教学内容不断扩充，暴露出和教学时数有限之间日益严重的矛盾。因而继续沿用传统的教学理念和教学模式进行教学已经不能适应新形势下的教学过程，必须用一种更好的教学方式，使学生和老师尽快适应新形势的要求。 随着建构主义学习理论的出现，提出了建构主义的教学设计。建构主义强调情境、协作、会话和意义建构四大要素，倡导以“学”为中心的理念。将建构主义的教学理论引入到英语语言学教学过程中，进行了许多有益的尝试，取得了显著的效果。 1 建构主义的四大要素 在 学习 方法 上建构主义提倡的是教师指导下的以学生为主体的学习,在学习环境上要求是开放的、充满意义解释和建构性的,理想的学习环境主要有情境、协作、会话和意义建构四大要素构成。 1.1“情境”：学习环境中的情境必须有利于学习者对所学内容的意义建构。这就意味着在建构主义学习环境下，要把为学生创设建构意义的情境问题看作是教学设计的主要内容之一。“在课堂教学中播放有助于理解教学内容的录像、录音、参与 社会实践 、向学生提供网络的丰富的学习资源等等，凡是有助于学习者理解掌握学习内容的情境，都属于情境创设的范畴。” 1.2“协作”：协作发生在学习过程的始终。协作在一定意义上是协商的意思。协商主要有自我协商和相互协商。 1.3“会话”：会话是协作过程中的不可缺少环节。学习小组成员之间通过会话来商讨如何完成规定的学习任务达到意义建构的目标，怎样更多地获得教师或他人的指导和帮助等等，推进学习进程。在会话的过程中，每个学习者的思维成果(智慧)为整个学习群体所共享 ，因此会话是达到意义建构的重要手段之一。 1.4“意义建构”：这是整个学习过程的最终目标。在学习过程中帮助学生建构意义就要帮助学生对当前学习的内容所反映事物的性质、规律以及该事物与其他事物之间的内在联系达到较深刻的理解。 2 建构主义环境下对英语语言学教学启示 2.1强调以学为中心的设计 在建构主义学习环境下，师生的地位、作用与传统的教学发生了很大的变化。学生由知识的被动接受者转变为信息加工的主体、知识意义的主动建构者。教师也不再是知识的灌输者，而是教学环境的设计者、学生学习的组织者和指导者、知识的管理者，是学生的学术顾问。因此，教师要从前台退到幕后，从“演员”转变为“导演”。在建构主义的语言学教学中，学习环境中要充分发挥学生的主动性，教师要为学生创设尽可能真实的情境去应用他们所学的知识。具体来说,英语英语语言学课程教学应该激发教学主体的主动性和积极性,强调教学任务的适合性和针对性,注重教学环境的互动性和趣味性。 2.2强调学习环境的设计 建构主义教学设计的重心便是学习环境的设计。这里的学习环境是一个支持和促进学习者自主探索、自主学习的场所。学习环境的设计应围绕支持学习者开展有意义的学习来创设支持条件。它主要包括基于问题的学习环境的设计、合作学习环境的设计、真实情境的设计等。建构主义学习环境的设计的宗旨是通过支持学习者的有意义学习，促进学习者的发展。 例如，在讲授语言的任意性时，不少学生对于语言中音和义之间没有必然的联系这一属性存在疑惑，原因是在语言中的确存在一些音和义有一定联系的语言现象，如拟声词，对于这种问题，教师可以在深入讲解之前，给学生布置一些任务，让他们课前收集英语中的拟声词，并让其与汉语中对应的拟声词相比较，然后以 报告 的形式在课上做出来，教师则在这一过程中起着引导、监督、组织的作用，在学生做完报告后，教师做出归纳 总结 。 2.3教学任务的适合性和针对性 语言教学中任务的设置必须以学生的实际情况为前提,任务太困难或太容易都不利于学生主动建构知识。在选择英语语言学课程教学内容时，应适当减少课堂教学内容的广度和深度。所选课堂教学内容如下:语言、语言学、语音学、音系学、句法学、语义学、语用学、二语习得、语言与文化。明确学习任务,选择训练方式,使学生有足够的机会进行练习。教师应懂得如何控制自己的情绪,并通过积极的语言来激励学生。应及时地对正确回答问题,出色完成学习任务的学生进行表扬。如:Well done!Very good!Good job! Excel lent!这些词语看似简单,却能给学生以信心和动力。同时,对学生的缺点和不足要多指导,少批评少责备。 3 建构主义的教学评价 建构主义评价观具有几个方面的特征。首先，诊断性和 反思 性是建构主义学习评价的重要组成部分。这就意味着，学习者必须从事自我监控、自我测试、自我检查等活动，以诊断和判断他们在学习中所追求的是否是自己设置的目标。其次，建构主义评价观认为评价是评价者和被评价者“协商”进行的共同心理建构过程，评价受“多元主义”价值观所支配。因此，建构主义注重评价主体的多元化和评价方式的多样化。再次，建构主义认为，评价是学习者活动过程中的一个必然组成部分，而不是教学后的评价，它是一个持续性和实时性的镶嵌过程。因此，建构主义强调过程性评价，倡导“质性”的方法。所谓过程性评价是在某项教学活动的过程中，为使活动效果更好而不断进行的评价，它能及时了解阶段教学的结果和学生学习的进展情况、存在问题等，以便及时反馈，及时调整和改进教学工作。可见，建构主义评价观提倡以学为中心的理念，更加关注学生的发展。 4 结束语 建构主义教学观为课堂教学提供了新模式,为习惯于被动式接受的学生阐释了学习的新理念,从而为英语语言学课堂的教与学带来了新的启示和体验。在英语语言学课堂教学中教授学习策略,引导学生自主学习及改进 教学方法 。这些方面有助于学生建构知识,形成能力。 参考文献 [1]陈莉.社会建构主义与外语教学[J].外语论坛, 2003(1). [2]胡壮麟.对中国英语教育的若干思考[J].外语研究, 2002(3). [3]盛群力、__强.现代教学设计论[M].浙江教育出版社，2000
像语音学，音位学，以及形态学，句法都不好下手建议写社会语言学或是心理语言学方面的，可以深入对比一下中西方思维的差异之类的，应该是一个好的论点加油~~
语言学(linguistics)是以人类语言为研究对象的学科，探索范围包括语言的性质、功能、结构、运用和历史发展，以及其他与语言有关的问题。下文是我为大家整理的关于语言学的论文的范文，欢迎大家阅读参考!
浅析语言学的发展与趋势
论文摘要：世界的全球化趋势决定了语言交际的重要性。研究语言学对于外语教学,特别是以英语为目的语的外语教学就变得越来越重要。本文立足于语言学的基础发展，着眼探讨其发展趋势，试图从其中把握其研究热点。
1 语言学的发展
语言学的前身应该可以被既定为历史比较语言学(Historical comparative linguistics), 追溯更早则称之古代语文学阶段。现代语言学是从索绪尔开始的，索绪尔开创了结构主义新时期，这一时期索绪尔(F.De.Saussure)著有《普通语言学教程》(The Course in General linguistic)。结构主义中以美国结构主义影响最大，F.Boas, E.Sapir, L.Bloomfield 三者较为出名，他们创立了新结构主义学派——美国描述语言学，三者中以后者较为出名，所以美国语言学也叫“布龙非尔德主义”。
1.1 美国的结构主义
美国结构主义的研究方法主要分为四种：替换分析法、对比分析法、分布分析法、直接成分分析法，其主要内容如下：
(1)替换分析法(Substitutional Analysis),即用一个语言单位代换另一个语言单位是否得到新的事实。
(2)对比分析法(Contrastive Analysis)是比较两个或两个以上语言单位，找出他们相同或不同部分从而确定单位性质。
(3)分布分析法 (Distribution Analysis)为研究词位出现的位置，词类(实、虚)分布的位置。
(4)直接成分分析法(Immediate constituent analysis)一个句子首先可切分成两个部分，切到词素为止。
(5)序列分析法(String analysis)是把句子带有修饰或不带有修饰的基本单位、结构成分或基本单位、修饰成分。
(6)转换分析法(Transformational analysis) 为把任何的结构看成核心句(Kernel sentence)的转换，所谓核心句是基本句型(SVO, SV等)其他是核心的拓展或是从核心句转换而来的。
1.2 系统功能语言学
系统功能语言学的创始人 M.A.K. Halliday (韩礼德) 师从伦敦学派J.R.Firth(弗斯)。后来,我国的两名学者罗常培和王力，打破传统语言或结构主义的根本，把语法形式意义、语言用法等系统地有机地连结起来。
1.3 转换生成语法
20世纪50年代Chomsky 对美国结构语言提出挑战，创立了转换生成词法或形式语言学，提出研究重点人是如何从有限的语言单位创造出无限的语用句型。这一时期的发展共经历了五个阶段：经典理论时期、标准理论时期、扩充标准理论时期、修正式扩充标准理论时期、最简的解释理论时期。这个时期Chomsky提出了两个很重要的概念：深层和表层结构。这两个概念对“同形异义、异形同义”歧义能做出科学的解释。
2 语言学的动态研究
语用学 (Pragmatics) 即语言使用学，其主要研究问题包括：指示语 (Deixis)包含人称指示、时间指示、话语指示、承接指示;前提 (Presuposition), 语用推论， 以语言结为根据，靠逻辑推论语言的前提条件;语用含义(Implicative)话语含义， 给语法事实提供重要功能解释。
2.1 语篇学
语篇学是在句法学的基础上发展起来的，也叫篇章语法或语篇分析(Discourse analysis)。上世纪70年代开始，语言学由静态到动态的大转变，由结构研究到功能研究。篇章语法主要解决篇章结构研究;篇章语义主要解决篇章意义连贯，研究篇章的层次。篇章的语用研究，重点探讨会话结构、话轮(说话顺序)邻近配对(前者说话的反应)，也解决影响会话因素(心理因素、文化)，篇章理论研究，研究篇章的产生。
2.2 社会语言学
社会于语言关系的科学，它是一门交叉科学。从社会变化与发展来研究语言变化，又由语言变化来研究社会的规律。其分为微观社会语言学与宏观社会语言学。微观是研究具体的语言与社会关系，如语言与性别、语言与民族等，也研究语言的细节，如语言世界、语言等。宏观主要是研究语言与社会中的地位和社会对语言的选择，如国际文化交流中采用哪几种语言、在本国推广哪几种语言、语言的推广和文字改革等等。
3 我国语言学研究的热点
3.1 系统功能语言学的研究
单以核心刊物《外国语》上发表有关系统功能语言学就有30多篇;《外语教育研究》上发表有10多篇;出版的重要著作有胡壮麟先生的《系统功能语法概念》于1989年在湖南教育出版社出版;上海外语教育出版社的《语篇的衔接语连贯》;程琪龙的《系统功能语法导论》。论文集有湖南教育出版社的《语言系统与功能》;清华大学出版社的《语篇·语境》;任绍鲁的《语言·系统·结构》等等。系统功能的基本概念的引进开始于上世纪80年代后期，以胡壮麟为首，系统功能的语法研究主要体现在两个方面：系统功能语法的语言观于方法论;对系统功能语篇研究理论进行实践和补充。
3.2 语用学的研究
近年来，《外国语》在语用学发表文章达30多篇;《外语教学与研究》有10多篇;出版的专著主要有：何自然的《语用学概论》;何兆熊的《新编语用学概要》。语用学在90年代最现风光，也当之无愧地成为最核心的科目，其研究有三个特点：
(1)在继续引导外国的方法的同时，通过对语言具体事实提出修正何补充。例如：何自然的《国外语言学的研究》。
(2)对语用学的内涵进行了新的开拓。比如何自然的《语用模糊》、《情态动词的语用分析》由卫国的《现在完成时的语用含义》。
(3)从翻番而论转入专题研究。把汉语与外语的研究联系起来。例如刘绍忠的《“清”字用法汉英对比》。
3.3 社会语言学的研究
《外国语》和《外语教学与研究》上共有10多篇;社会语言学的研究特点主要表现在：(1)由宏观方法转入微观具体语言现象分析，例如：《委婉语社会语言研究》、《语言变化的社会因素》。
(2)从解释的社会学角度转向心理学语言运作的社会心理机制。例如：王德青的《社会心理语言学科性质语研究对象》和素定芳的《委婉语研究》。
3.4 话语分析研究
《外国语》中有将近20多篇;《外语教学与研究》有10多篇。从80年代中期开始系统介绍西方话语分析基本概念与理论。90年代转入英汉对比分析。从话语口语转入语篇研究。近几年来，话语分析有交叉和重叠趋势。
4 我国语言学研究的趋势
(1)研究对象看，由微观转入宏观，语言本身系统转向跨学科研究，出现交叉学科，如跨文化交际学、国情语言学;由结构研究转入功能和应用研究，由静态到动态，如描写构词句法规则到句法结构的不同功能;单个词的意义到单词在特定环境中的意义;由单一语言研究转向多语言的对比研究，如对比语言学，包括双语对比、多语对比，包括同族语对比、非同族语对比，即有语言自身的对比，也有语言与文化的对比，如跨文化交际学。
(2)研究方法看，由单层次和单角度，静态研究转入多层次、多角度、动态研究。
(3)研究目的看，目标不断从窄到广，从肤浅到深度;从描写转向解释 Chomsky 试图从大脑的遗传基因来解释语言的事实;从理论的探讨转向应用价值分析，如计算机的发展离不开语言学，语用学的分析应用到法庭审讯中等。
(4)发展趋势看，语言学研究有三个：①侧重宏观语言学，语言与心理、语言与社会、语言与文化的关系;②着眼认知语言，语言与大脑关系;③鼓励用科学技术研究，如《对学者个人差异研究》。
参考文献
[1]胡壮麟.语言学教程[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2011.
[2]何自然.新编语用学概论[M].北京大学出版社,2009.
浅议对比语言学
摘 要：对比比较是人类认识事物、了解事物、研究事物的最常用方法，其也是语言学研究的一种基本方法。对比语言学作为语言学研究的重要一支，发展于上世纪五十年代。本文仅就对比语言学的定义、分类、历史发展、原则与程序做一简单概述。
关键词：对比;对比语言学;定义;分类;历史发展;原理与方法
一、对比语言学的定义及分类
对比语言学是语言学中的一个分支，其任务是对两种或两种以上的语言进行共时的对比研究，描述它们之间的异同，特别是其中的不同之处，并将这类研究应用于其他有关领域(许余龙1992/2008)。对于这一定义，我们可以理解如下：首先，对比语言学是语言学中的一个分支，它和其他分支密切联系、相互补充、相互促进。其次，对比语言学是两种或两种以上语言的对比描述，而普通语言学则是对某一种语言的普遍描述。再次，对比语言学是在共时理论的框架下发展的，也就是说其研究的对象，是语言的发展状态，而不是其演变。最后，对比语言学虽然研究描述语言之间的异同，但重点却在不同的方面。
对比语言学可划分为理论对比语言学和应用对比语言学两大类。理论对比语言学又由一般理论对比语言学和具体理论对比语言学构成。一般对比语言学是一般语言学的一个分支，它旨在研究对比语言学的理论和方法。具体对比语言学是具体语言学的一个分支，它旨在运用对比语言学的原理和其他语言学的相关知识，对两种或两种以上的语言进行具体的对比描述。应用对比语言写属于应用语言学的范畴，其也可以划分为两类，即一般应用对比语言学，它旨在研究如何将对比语言学的理论成果应用于语言外语教学活动中去。另一类是具体应用对比语言学，其任务是对两种语言进行具体的对比描述，以便为某一具体的应用活动服务。
二、对比语言学的起源与历史发展
自从人类产生了语言后，语言之间的比较与研究便蓬勃发展起来，对比语言学学科作为现代语言学的一个分支有两个渊源，一是起源于欧洲，其二是起源于美国。欧洲的对比语言学学科始于19世纪末，发展于20世纪初，其理论框架为对比型理论性的共时语言分析，而后由布拉格学派的语言学家继承发展。美国的对比语言学发展于二战期间，对比语言学的英文名称contrastive linguistics一词，由语言学家Whorf于1941年在其著作《语言与逻辑》一书中首次提出。而与欧洲传统的对比语言学特点不同，美国对比语言学的研究主要是应用性的。表现在运用语言对比的方法进行语言接触和双语现象研究等理论方面的探索，另外还运用对比语言学研究为外语教学服务。但20世纪60年代以后，对比分析的两个理论基础：行为主义心理学与结构主义语言学受到极其严厉的批判，对比语言学也开始走下坡路，从此一蹶不振。而与此同时，对比语言学在欧洲却持续发展，大部分的语言学家则采用转换生成语法作为对比描述的语言学框架。在此后的30多年中，理论对比语言学在欧美越来越受到了关注，学科地位得到提高，学术界对对比语言学本身的一些理论、方法问题的探讨也逐渐深入。我国国内的对比研究学者有严复，此外还有马建忠、黎锦熙、赵元任、王力和吕叔湘等都对汉外对比研究做出了重要贡献。
三、对比语言学的原则与研究程序
(一)对比语言学的一般原则：共时对比原则和同语体对比原则。
共时对比原则：对比研究是一种共时比较，当我们对两种或两种以上语言状态进行对比描述时，不能拿不同时代的语言现象进行对比。
同语体对比原则：语言作为交际工具，具有不同的功能语体，不同的语言拥有不同的选择、使用、组织语言单位的规范和规则。书面语与书面语对比，口语与口语对比，即相同的语体进行对比。
(二)对比研究的程序：
1、确定对比范围。首先确定对比的范围，即描述的对比层面是什么。比如在音、词、句、篇章、语用等选择一个层面来进行比较。其次需要进一步确定其具体对比描述对象是什么，也就是对比的语言单位。例如，在语法层面上，可以选择词组或句子结构等单位作为对比的对象。最后就是对比的语言学内容。
2、文献搜集与研究。首先先要搜集某一对比范围内已有的对比研究，这样可以使我们避免重复做别人做过的工作。其次就要搜集出这个研究范围内对两种语言分别所作的分析研究。
3、确定理论框架。对比研究的理论框架是指以某一种语言分析研究的理论或模式为基础的对比描述方法。选择一个统一的理论框架的主要原因是为了确保语言描述的可比性。我们常用的对比描述方法有中心词分析法和层次分析法，近年来，转换生成语法，格语法等也被许多研究学者所采用。而对比研究的理论框架的选择取决于对比研究的目的和范围。
4、搜集语言材料。语料可以分为实例语料和内省语料。而内省语料又可以分为自我内省语料和实验内省语料。选择语料我们需要考虑对比研究的性质和目的、理论框架、描述内容这些因素。
5、分析对比。对比分析是指在已有研究的基础上，以某一确定的理论框架对搜集的语言材料作某一方面的分析和对比。
6、总结。分析对比后，我们要总结这一对比的成果是什么，讨论其意义和价值。同时，也可以找出其局限性，提出自己的设想和建议。
四、总结
对比语言学作为现代语言学的一个重要分支，其目的殊途同归是为了解决教学或翻译问题而对比两种语言的异同。对比可以在语音、语法、词汇、语义、语用等层次进行，也可以从语言的文化、心理、民族角度进行对比研究。随着全球一体化的发展，对比语言学这一学科越来越受到专家学者的重视和青睐。
参考文献：
1、 许余龙.对比语言学(第2版)[M].上海：上海外语教学出版社，2010
2、王利众.对比语言学综述[J].黑龙江教育学院学报，2006
Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition Strategies 二语词汇习得策略 [摘 要] 词汇是构成语言的基本单位，词汇习得在语言学习中占有重要地位。英国著名语言学家D.A. Wilkins (1972) 说过：“没有语法，人们不能表达很多东西；而没有词汇，人们则无法表达任何东西。”这就说明了词汇在学习中的重要性。本文旨在分析二语词汇习得策略并应用于不同水平的学习者。学习者根据自己的水平选择正确的习得方法和策略学习词汇，从而提高学习效率和习得效果。 关键字： 二语词汇习得 词汇习得策略 元认知策略 认知策略 Abstract Vocabulary is the basic unit of a language. Language acquisition plays an important role in language learning. Famous linguistics D. A. Wilkins said, “Without grammar, very little can be conveyed, without vocabulary, nothing can be conveyed (Lewis, 1993:16).” It speaks volumes for the importance of vocabulary in language learning. This paper aims to analysis the second language acquisition strategies and applies to different levels of learners. According to the different levels, the learners should choose the proper methods and strategies to promote learning efficiency and acquisition effect. Key words: Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition； Vocabulary Acquisition Strategies； Metacognitive strategy； Cognitive strategy Introduction With economic globalization and multi-polarization of the world, especially the population of the internet, English becomes more and more important, because it is considered as the tool for absorbing and communicating information. As we all known, vocabulary acquisition is one of the most noticed-question of the second language learners. “Vocabulary” appears in the area of linguists’ study. Nowadays, researchers still can not give a complete and reasonable definition of vocabulary. Since 1970s, the second language vocabulary acquisition research has gradually become the hot point and important subject in the second language vocabulary acquisition research area. These researches aim to discuss the efficiency vocabulary memory strategies to promote the memory skills and vocabulary levels. Then how to acquire vocabulary become popular among the researchers. Wenden &Rubin (1987), O’Malley& Chamot (1990) refer to the content of vocabulary acquisition strategies; Rubin (1987) and Oxford (1990) classify the memory strategy to the direct cognitive strategies. Especially, CohenAphek (1981), Porte (1988), O’Malley (1990), Vann (90), Cohen (1990), etc made a basic searching of vocabulary acquisition. In a word, there are various opinions in how to acquire vocabulary. Firstly, it talks about the importance of vocabulary. Secondly, what does it mean to “acquire” a word? This paper mainly aims to the detail analysis of the vocabulary acquisition from three aspects：Meta-cognitive Strategy; Cognitive Strategy and Social or Affective Strategy. Especially, it highlights the effect of the context and rending to vocabulary acquisition. This paper talks about the applications of the vocabulary acquisition strategies. And it puts forward some problems and difficulties of vocabulary acquisition. This paper also discusses the influencing factors to the acquisition. It includes the mother tongue, age, language contact, logical thinking ability, identity degree, and academic motivation . The purpose of this paper is to rise the awareness of English learners that the importance of vocabulary in language learning and the vocabulary acquisition strategies can not be neglected, and each strategies is deeply rooted in its language. Through the analysis of the theory of study, the paper tries to draw the learner’s attention to the strategies of the second language vocabulary acquisition and using the vocabulary in communication. In order to improve the acquisition efficiency, some strategies put into practice are introduced. The first presents the importance of vocabulary, some basic concepts of vocabulary and vocabulary learning, the second part tells what does it mean to know a word, the third part deals with the theory of vocabulary acquisition and presents the factors and differences influencing the vocabulary acquisition. The fourth part is detailed discussion of vocabulary acquisition strategies in different levels of learners. The last part is conclusion. Literature review 1. The importance of vocabulary As the first time, when we go to school and our English teacher will tell us that vocabulary is of great importance in learning English. After several years, we understand words gradually, especially when we study in high school. If we know a little about vocabulary, we may have poor English. That is because the listening, speaking, reading and writing show the necessary of learning vocabulary. Many researchers agree that lexis is at least as important as structure, because it is using wrong words and not wrong grammar that usually breaks down communication. Mistakes in lexis much more often lead to misunderstanding and may be less generously tolerated outside classroom than mistakes in syntax. (Carter, 1987). As Stephen Krashen remarked, “When students travel, they don’t carry grammar books, they carry dictionaries. A significant role of vocabulary in both teaching and learning processes was first stated by Stephen Krashen in The Natural Approach (1985): “Vocabulary is basic for communication. If acquirers do not recognize the meaning of the key words used by those who address them they will be unable to participate in the conversation.” Words are basic tools in human communication; therefore they determine the main part of people’s life-relationships between people and associations with the surrounding world that people live in. The larger one’s vocabulary, the easier it is to express one’s thoughts and feelings. In real communication, correctly and idiomatically used vocabulary can even decrease some structural inaccuracy and grammar errors. (Zhang Jiying, 2002). So learners should enrich and expand their knowledge of words as much as possible in order to communicate effectively in a foreign language. 2. What does it mean to “know” a word? Knowing a word is not a simple phenomenon. In fact, it is quite complex and goes far beyond the word’s meaning and pronunciation. (Zhang Jiying, 2002). Richards (1976) think knowing a word means also knowing the frequency of words and their likely collocates; being aware of the functional and situation limitations that apply; knowledge of the “syntactic behavior”; derivational forms and word class; associative and connotative knowledge; semantic value-breaking down words into minimal units as with componential analysis (see Katz&Fodor1963or Leech1974); knowing the other (possible) meaning associated. Nagy and Scott (2000) identify several dimensions that describe the complexity of what it means to know a word. First, word knowledge is incremental, which means that readers need to have many exposures to a word in different contexts before they “know” it. Second, word knowledge is multidimensional. This is because many words have multiple meanings and serve different functions in different function in different sentences, texts, and even conversations. Third, word knowledge is interrelated in that knowledge of one word connects knowledge of other words. What all of this means is that “knowing” a word is a matter of degree rather than an all-or-nothing proposition (Beck&Mckeown, 1991; Nagy&Scott, 2000). The degree of knowing a word are reflected in the precision with which we use a word, how quickly we understand a word, and how well we understand and use words in different modes and different purpose. The memory strategy, cognitive strategy, social strategy and metacognitve strategy are used more frequently than the affective strategy and compensative strategy. Conclusion This paper has attempted to provide some theories of second language vocabulary acquisition and some strategies. Such as metacognitive strategy, cognitive strategy, and social strategy. However, this paper also put forward some microcosmic strategy. As a matter of fact, vocabulary acquisition should combine the context. In addition, this paper hasn’t mentioned that culture is also an important factor in vocabulary acquisition. In the study of second language vocabulary acquisition, we should pay attention to the process and the acquiring results. This paper focuses on the study of the second language vocabulary acquisition strategies. Bibliography [1] A.U. Chamot. The Learning Strategies of ESL Students. In A. L. Wenden & J. Rubin, (eds), Learner Strategies in Language Learning, 1987. [2] Cater. R. and M. McCarthy. Vocabulary and Language Teaching. New York: Longman, 1987. [3] Nation, L. S. P. Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. New Newbury House Publishers, 1990. [4] O’Malley, J. & Chamot, A. U.. Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition [J]. Cambridge University Press, 1990:12-15. [5] 陈桦，张益芳.中国儿童英语词汇记忆策略探究[J].外语学刊,2001(4). [11] 戴曼纯. 论第二语言词汇习得研究[J]. 外语教学与研究，2002(2). [12] 徐德凯.大学英语词汇教学理论与实践[M].长春：吉林出版集团有限责任公司，2009. [6] 王文宇.观念、策略与英语词汇记忆[J].外语教学与研究，1998(1). [13] 文秋芳. 英语学习策略论.上海：上海外语教育出版社，1996. [7] 吴霞，王蔷.非英语专业本科生词汇水平研究. 外语教学与研究，1998(1). [15] 张纪英.英语词汇学教学与研究[M]. 武汉：华中科技大学出版社,2007. [16] 朱厚敏. 英语词汇学习策略研究[M] 长春：吉林大学出版社，2009.
像语音学，音位学，以及形态学，句法都不好下手建议写社会语言学或是心理语言学方面的，可以深入对比一下中西方思维的差异之类的，应该是一个好的论点加油~~
你准备写跨文化交际还是翻译，还是文学，还是其他的？
毕业 论文是高校人才培养方案中不可或缺的重要组成部分，是高校英语专业的大学生毕业前必须完成的教学任务，而论文的题目确定工作则是毕业论文管理中的首要环节。下面是我带来的关于本科英语专业毕业论文题目的内容，欢迎阅读!英语专业毕业论文题目(一) 1. 浅析 广告 翻译中的 文化 顺应处理 2. 从文化角度分析中美房地产广告的差异 3. 浅析动画《加菲猫》和《加菲猫之双猫记》中的享乐主义和利己主义 4. 圣经原型解读《弗洛斯河上的磨坊》 5. 论《卡斯特桥市长》中哈代的进化向善论思想 6. 顺从的女人——分析《荒凉山庄》中埃斯特的形象 7. 从中美传统节日对比看节日的文化内涵 8. 成人的童话——《爱丽丝漫游奇境记》中象征主义的体现 9. 简析网络时代英语全球化 10. 《查泰莱夫人的情人》的生态女性主义解读 11. 从社会文化价值方面比较中美情景喜剧差异 12. 论《喧哗与骚动》中昆丁的宿命 13. 《蝇王》的启示：理性的呼唤 14. 中文旅游文本英译中的歧义现象分析 15. 从中美婚宴差异看集体主义和个人主义 16. 影响非英语专业大一新生口语输出的因素 17. 《走出非洲》：走出迪内森的矛盾态度 18. 旅游宣传资料中的误译与解决 方法 19. 从女性主义角度解读华顿《纯真年代》中的埃伦 20. 电子词典与 英语学习 英语专业毕业论文题目(二) 1. 英语习语与 ____ 2. 《伤心咖啡馆之歌》中爱米利亚性别身份分析 3. 从关联理论的角度欣赏幽默翻译 4. 英语缩略语及其语用功能 5. 英专和非英专学生 英语 作文 中错误的对比研究 6. 武汉方言对英语语音的影响及其对教学的启示 7. 中西行星命名的文化探源 8. 英语新闻中的新词 9. 中国古典诗歌英译中对“三美”理论的探索 10. 从电影《七宗罪》浅析原罪 11. 浅论体态语的社会功能 12. 中西 思维方式 差异对中英语篇的影响 13. 中国和西方国家婚俗的比较 14. 浅析合作原则的违背在广告语言中的运用 15. 浅析电影《推手》中中美家庭的文化冲突 16. 从广告语言看中美文化价值观差异 17. 用言语行为理论浅析英语广告中的双关语 18. 论新闻英语汉译中的归化与异化策略 19. 以Of Study(《论读书》)的两个中译本为例浅析译者主体性 英语专业毕业论文题目(三) 1. 广告语言模糊性的语用研究 2. 利用美剧进行 英语听力 自主学习 3. 大学生 英语口语 学习动机研究 4. 从文化视角看中国白酒广告 5. 从功能翻译看《围城》英译本中文化信息的传递 6. 对《达罗卫夫人》中克莱丽莎和塞普提默斯形象的研究 7. 公示语汉译英错误及对策探析 8. 探究美国安利公司的 企业文化 ：基于其网站内容的文本分析 9. 运用写长法促进 英语写作 能力的提高 10. 中美“面子文化”对比分析 11. 英汉恭维语和告别语的对比分析 12. 英汉爱情隐喻的对比研究 13. 新闻英语汉译的翻译技巧浅析 14. 中美家庭文化比较 15. 从文化的角度浅析中美企业 人力资源管理 的差异 16. 华中农业大学英语专业学生高级英语学习状况调查 17. 跨文化交际中中西方馈赠礼仪刍议 18. 解读《双城记》中的人道主义思想 19. 论《了不起的盖茨比》中的消费主义 20. 从戴姆勒克莱斯勒事件看文化因素对跨国企业合并的影响 21. 对中美离岸外包过程中跨文化交际案例的分析 22. 从"老友记"中看合作原则在英语称赞语及其回应语中的应用 23. 浅论美国文化与美语词汇 24. 英汉植物词语联想意义的跨文化对比 25. 一个被忽视的“准则英雄”——论《永别了，武器》中的女主人公凯瑟琳 英语专业毕业论文题目(四) 1. 美国二十世纪六十年代反战文化研究 2. 中国英语热的真相——文化帝国主义 3. 中美恭维语对比研究 4. 论民族中心主义与美国媒体近年来涉华报道 5. 从弗大枪击案看美国的枪支问题 6. 《推销员之死》中威利与比夫的父子关系 7. 从拉康的镜像理论看杨克的悲剧根源 8. 从正负值面子理论简析中美面子差异 9. 中国菜名翻译中的文化翻译策略 10. 从旧南方到新南方——斯佳丽·奥哈拉在内战前后的成长历程 11. 探究家乐福公司的企业文化:基于其网站内容的文本分析 12. 汉语对英语写作词汇的负迁移作用 13. 《美国悲剧》的消费文化分析 14. 从二语习得角度对比分析英语习语学习中的翻译导向模式与文化导向模式 15. 礼貌原则在英文商务信函中的应用 16. 南方哥特式小说特征在《心是孤独的猎手》中的体现 17. 城市公示语的汉译英探索 18. 归化与异化理论在汉语 歇后语 翻译中的应用 19. 《婚礼的成员》中弗兰淇·亚当斯双性同体现象的研究 20. 论《喜福会》中的文化冲突与共存 猜你喜欢： 1. 英语系文化类毕业论文 2. 本科英语专业毕业论文题目 3. 英语专业毕业论文选题文化 4. 翻译英语专业毕业论文选题 5. 英语语言学论文题目参考大全
学术堂整理了十五个好写的英语专业毕业论文题目供大家进行参考：1. 英语中的性别歧视（Sex Discrimination in English Language ）2. 电影《乱世佳人》长期受到青睐的原因（Gone with the Wind – Why This Movie Has the Lasting Popularity）3. 广告英语特点分析（An Analysis of Language Features in English Advertisement）4. 美国青少年教育问题浅析（An Attempting Study of the Problems of American Adolescents）5. 简爱自我价值的实现（The Realization of Jane Eyre’s Self-Worth ）6. 自由贸易与保护主义（Free Trade Versus Protectionism）7. 如何在课堂上调动学生的积极性（How to Promote Motivation in the Classroom）8. 在英语教学中运用“交际法”提高学生的交际能力（Using CLT in English Teaching to Improve Students’ Communicative Competence）9. 文化差异对跨文化交际的影响（The Influence of Cultural Difference Upon Cross-cultural Communication）10. 论基督教对中世纪早期西欧文化的影响（On Christianity’s Influence Upon European Culture in the Early-stage Middle Ages ）11. 《哈克贝利费恩历险记》是一部种族主义小说吗？（The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn-a Racist Novel?）12. 第二语言学习中的文化学习（Culture Learning in Second Language Learning）13. 试论哈姆雷特的两个主题（On the Two Themes of Hamlet）14. 谚语中的文化差异（Cultural Differences in Proverbs）15. 浅谈电视暴力和儿童的关系（TV Violence and Children）
英语语言学论文题目有浅谈英汉句子结构差异、英汉否定问句的答句对比研究等。 扩展资料 英语语言学论文题目有很多，比如浅谈英汉句子结构差异、英汉否定问句的`答句对比研究、英汉否定问句的答句对比研究、汉英色彩词汇的对比研究及其象征意义等。