政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/33393

政大典藏 > College of Foreign Languages and Literature > Graduate Institute of Linguistics > Theses > Item 140.119/33393

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/33393

Title:	等待果陀的語用現象分析 A Pragmatic Analysis of Waiting for Godot
Authors:	文永立
Contributors:	尤雪瑛文永立
Keywords:	等待果陀語用學 Waiting for Godot Pragmatics
Date:	2005
Issue Date:	2009-09-17 16:28:02 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	本研究從語用學的角度探討荒謬劇「等待果陀」（Waiting for Godot）中種種的語言脫序現象。荒謬劇作家將戲劇形式以及內容結合起來表達荒謬的主題，並不再視語言為能夠承載意義的工具，因此「等待果陀」中充滿了違背一般日常語言使用規則的脫序現象。本文運用語用學理論規則來分析劇中人物的對話，並將其分門別類以及計算數量，以達到探究「等待果陀」的作者貝克特（Samuel Beckett）在劇中製造荒謬效果的主要語言策略。雖然「等待果陀」充滿了脫序的語言使用，但是讀者和觀眾們依然能夠閱讀、欣賞，進而評論以及解讀這齣荒謬劇。但是在日常對話中，脫序的語言使用卻往往意味著溝通的失敗。這顯示人們在一般日常溝通和文學批評解讀中運用不同的語用原則。然而，語用學在文學批評解讀上的著墨卻極少，也無法解釋為何讀者觀眾在面對脫序的語言對話時仍有能力解讀。因此，本文提出新的語用原則－持續原則（The persistence principle）－來解釋此一現象，並架構一個文學解讀的模型來闡述文學批評解讀與日常對話的基本差異。 The present study analyzes the language use of Waiting for Godot from the pragmatic point of view. The absurd playwrights combine the form and content of play to convey the theme of absurdity, and do not trust language as a reliable vehicle to convey meaning. Therefore, the conversations of Waiting for Godot are filled with disordered and incoherent language use. The present study analyzes the conversations of the play with pragmatic principles, and categorizes the language uses in terms of the types of violation cases. In addition, the violation cases are calculated in order to reveal the main strategy that Samuel Beckett adopts for constructing the dramatic effect of absurdity. Surprisingly, the readers and audiences of Waiting for Godot could still appreciate and interpret the play even though the play is full of nearly incomprehensible conversations. In daily life, on the contrary, communication would likely break down if the language uses are like the ones in the play. It indicates that people activate different pragmatic principles in daily communication and in literary interpretation. However, very little attention is paid to the field of literary critics and interpretation, and pragmatic principles cannot explain why the readers/audiences of Waiting for Godot could comprehend the play. Therefore, the researcher proposes the “persistence principle” to explain how the readers/audiences search for the meaning of the text. Moreover, a model of literary interpretation is constructed to illustrate the basic differences between daily communication and literature reading.
Reference:	Reference Austin, J. L. 1962. How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Benjamin, W. 1979. One-way street and other essays. New Left Books, London. Bentley, Jeremy. 1956. “Waiting for Godot”, Meanjin, pp. 216-28. Brown, G. and G. Yule. 1983. Discourse analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brown P and Levinson S C. 1987. Politeness. Some universal in language usage. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Camus, Albert. 1942. The Stranger. Vintage International, New York. Canale, M. & Swain, M. 1980. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics 1, 1-47. Chui, Kawai. 2001. Topic chain and grounding in Chinese discourse. Taipei, Taiwan: Crane publisher, Ltd. Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge: The MIT Press. Clark, Eve V. 2003. First Language Acquisition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Cohen, Ruby. 1960. “Waiting is All”, Modern Drama, pp. 162-67. Cohn, Ruby. 1965. Casebook on Waiting for Godot. Grove Press, Inc. New York. Esslin, Martin. 1969. The theater of the absurd. Woodstock, N.Y. : Overlock Press Gassner and Quinn. 1969. The reader`s encyclopedia of world drama. New York : Crowell Grice, H. P. 1975. Logic and conversation. Syntax and semantics, vol. 3: Speech acts, ed. by Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan, 41-58. New York: Academic Press. Givon. T. 1983. Topic continuity in discourse: a quantitative cross-language study. John Benjamins Publishing Company. Philadelphia. Halliday, M. A. K. 1973. Explorations in the functions of Language. London: Edward Arnold. Holtan, Orley. 1976 Introduction to Theater: a mirror to nature. Prentice-Hall., Englewood Cliffs, N.J. Hymes, Dell. 1966. On communicative competence. Paper presented at the Research Planning Conference on Language Development among Disadvantaged Children, Yeshiva University. Jefferson, G. 1972. Side sequences. Studies in social interaction, ed. by Sudnow, D. 294-338. New York: New York: Free Press. Jefferson, G. 1973. A case of precision timing in ordinary conversation: overlapped tag-positioned address terms in closing sequences. Semiotica 9:1. 47-96. Kenner, Hugh. A reader’s guide to Samuel Beckett. Syracuse University Press, 1996. Labov, W. 1970. The study of language in its social context. Studium generale 23. 30-87. Labov, W. 1972. Rules for ritual insults. Studies in social interaction, ed. by Sudnow, D. 120-169. New York: New York: Free Press. Lecercle, Jean-Jacques. 1999. Interpretation as pragmatics. Macmilian Press Ltd. London Leech, Geoffrey, N. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. Longman Inc., New York. Levinson, C. Stephen. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: The Press Syndicate of University of Cambridge. Muriel Saville-Troike and Troike, Rudolph C. 1987. "Video recording for linguistic fieldwork." Notes on Linguistics 37: 44-51. Pronko, LeonardC. 1958. “Beckett, Ionesco, Schehade: The Avant-Garde theater” Modern Language Forum. pp. 118-23. Robbe-Griliet, Alain. 1965. “Samuel Beckett or presence on the stage”, For a new Novel. Grove Press, Inc. New York. Sacks, Harvey, et. al. 1974. A simple systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50: 696-735. Saville-Troike, Muriel. 1982. The ethnography of communication. New York: Basil Blackwell Ltd. Schegloff, E. A. 1968. Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist 70: 6. 1075-1095. Schegloff, E. A. 1972. Notes on a conversational practice: formulating place. Studies in social interaction, ed. by Sudnow, D. 75-119. New York: New York: Free Press. Schiffrin, Deborah. 1987. Discourse markers. Cambridge University Press. Sperber, D., and D.Wilson. 1986. Relevance: Communicative and Cognition Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Tejera, V. 1995. Literature, criticism, and the theory of signs. Philadelphia: J. Benjamins Pub. Co., Amsterdam Wardhaugh, Ronald. 1992. An introduction to sociolinguistics, 2nd edt. Oxford: Blackwell publishers.
Description:	碩士國立政治大學語言學研究所 91555005 94
Source URI:	http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0915550051
Data Type:	thesis
Appears in Collections:	[Graduate Institute of Linguistics] Theses

Files in This Item:

File	Size	Format
55005101.pdf	41Kb	Adobe PDF2	1102	View/Open
55005102.pdf	6Kb	Adobe PDF2	693	View/Open
55005103.pdf	61Kb	Adobe PDF2	1125	View/Open
55005104.pdf	12Kb	Adobe PDF2	793	View/Open
55005105.pdf	12Kb	Adobe PDF2	951	View/Open
55005106.pdf	10Kb	Adobe PDF2	781	View/Open
55005107.pdf	10Kb	Adobe PDF2	753	View/Open
55005108.pdf	21Kb	Adobe PDF2	5341	View/Open
55005109.pdf	82Kb	Adobe PDF2	3790	View/Open
55005110.pdf	69Kb	Adobe PDF2	3243	View/Open
55005111.pdf	95Kb	Adobe PDF2	4395	View/Open
55005112.pdf	16Kb	Adobe PDF2	1362	View/Open
55005113.pdf	16Kb	Adobe PDF2	1455	View/Open
55005114.pdf	14Kb	Adobe PDF2	1790	View/Open

社群 sharing

Loading...