메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
담화·인지언어학회 담화와인지 담화와인지 제10권 제3호
발행연도
2003.12
수록면
1 - 30 (30page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Many studies of the deictic this/that have focused on a possibility of this/that as one of the extended uses of the proximate-distant distinction or on views that relative information status and relative importance of the referents serve as the primary motivating factors behind the choice of the demonstrative forms, without any distinction between three types of deictic uses. These views are partly correct, but those factors are not crucial ones. This paper, in this context, aims to show that in largely academic written discourse, the proper use of English demonstratives this and that as discourse deixis can be effectively accounted for by introducing such concepts as discourse segments, as in Hinds 1979, Ehrich & Koster 1983, Fox 1987, McCarthy 1994, among others, and rhetorical structures inferred in the two relevant segments, as in Mann & Thompson 1988. In this paper, I suggest that the choice of this/that as discourse deixis depends on the writer's perspective, on the one hand, on the relevant discourse entities and, on the other, on the relationship of the discourse segments that precede and follow this/that. My data showed that writers prefer to use this in case that they evaluate the discourse entity it refers to as 'central' to the flow of discourse and that in case that they evaluate the discourse entity it refers to as 'peripheral' to the flow of discourse. My data also showed that writers prefer this in case that they evaluate the logical/rhetorical relation as 'canonical' (e.g., progressive, gradual) as to the flow of discourse and that in case that they evaluate the logical/rhetorical relation as 'non-canonical' (e.g., regressive, rapid) as to the flow of discourse.

목차

1. Introduction
2. Previous studies and problems
3. Discourse segmentation and connection
4. The Choice of This/That in Written Discourse
5. Conclusion
References

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-701-016224616