导　　师： 莫爱屏

学科专业： 050211

授予学位： 硕士

作　　者： ;

机构地区： 广东外语外贸大学

摘　　要： 本文以格莱斯合作原则和会话含义理论为基础，收集并分析了大量相关实例，重点探讨和研究了商务英语口译中模糊限制语的语用功能及其在实际口译活动中的使用情况。本研究是作者根据本人在读研究生期间的口译实践素材和所搜集的媒体最新相关语料展开的，研究取样对象主要分两大类别：商务口译中的商务谈判口译与商务会议口译。两大类别的语料则分别取自一个口译现场：（1）商务谈判语料来自作者读研期间的口译亲身实践中；（2）商务会议语料选自2014年3月7日的中国商务部部长高虎城在新闻发布会上的讲话。 作者梳理了国内外学者如Grice，Levinson，Giles，伍铁平，何自然，张乔等相关著名学者的观点，重点扫描了模糊限制语、合作原则和会话含义等方面的国内外研究成果。通过分析模糊限制语的分类、合作原则的四个准则和会话含义的理解与分析，建立起了本论文的理论框架。通过详细分析素材，作者有两大主要发现：第一，结合合作原则理论和会话含义理论来考察模糊限制语，其使用情况是有差异的：模糊限制语可以分为缓和型模糊限制语和变动型模糊限制语两大类，其中变动型模糊限制语在一定程度上会改变原话题的真实程度，而缓和型模糊限制语更真实；第二，针对商务口译中模糊限制语的选择，作者强调要从动态的视角来考量翻译的语境。在第四章，作者运用合作原则和会话含义理论，从“四准则的适应”和“四准则的违背”两个角度，借助鲜活的实例分析，对商务口译中模糊限制语的语用功能进行了较为清晰和比较全面的分析，以突出本文主题。 通过对相关语用理论的剖解，对搜集语料的剖析，结合自己在大量口译实践中的体验，作者得出结论：（1）在合作原则指导下，缓和型模糊限制语的使用频率较高；在会话含义理论映照下，变动型模糊限制语的使用几率较高；（2）这一区别的原因在于一般缓和型模糊限制语不会改变原文真实值，而使用变动型模糊限制语会改变；（3）商务口译中模糊限制语的使用需要考虑当时翻译语境的因素：在更为正式的场合中，缓和型模糊限制语作为首要考虑。诚然，因作者初次涉足模糊限制语在商务口译领域的研究，且口译理论研究，特别是模糊限制语在商务口译中的研究鲜有涉猎，参考资料稀缺，尽管作者对此领域非常感兴趣，但思考稚嫩似在情理之中。希望此研究能够引起译者们和从事口译研究的同仁们对于模糊限制语在商务口译中的重视，本文不求立异标新，但求抛砖引玉。 This paper is a pragmatic study of hedges in business interpreting. It is a qualitativestudy based on Grice’s Co-operative Principle Theory and Conversational ImplicatureTheory. Two types of business interpreting--business negotiation interpreting and businessconference interpreting are chosen to be analyzed and two interpreting recordings have beencollected as the analytical materials, one of which is from the author’s own interpretingexperience, the other from the Chinese Commerce Minister Gao Hu-cheng’s pressconference on March7th,2014. The former is used to analyze the business negotiationinterpreting, while the latter is for analyzing the business conference interpreting. This paper argues hedges use in business interpreting based on previous studies ofbusiness interpreting, hedges, co-operative principle and conversational implicatureadvanced by such famous scholars as Grice, Levinson, Gile, Wu Tie-ping, He Zi-ran, ZhangQiao, etc. Therefore the theoretical framework of this study has been built on the furtherstudy of the classifications of hedges, four maxims of co-operative principle andconversational implicature theory. Through the analysis of hedges, the author has got twomajor findings. One is that the frequency of hedges use under co-operative principle theoryand conversational implicature theory is different: shields are more often used based onco-operative principle theory, while approximators are more often used based onConversational Implicature Theory. The reason is that there is a difference between this twotheories. Approximators will change the truth value of a sentence while shields will not.Another major finding is that hedges choices in business interpreting should take the realsituation into account. The author draws conclusions: firstly, different types of hedges used differently indifferent types of business interpreting in the premise of real implicature should be paidmore attention to by interpreters, shields are more often used under Co-operative Principle while approximators are more used under Conversational Implicature Theory; secondly, thereason why there is a difference between this two theories is that approximators will changethe true value of a sentence while shields will not; thirdly, the method of hedges choice inbusiness interpreting should consider the real situation: for more standard and officialoccasions, shields are more used than approximators. As it is the first time for the author to conduct research in this field, there is no denyingthat this study can only act as a basic and preliminary research of hedges in the field ofbusiness interpreting, and the author deeply feels that it is vital and essential for usinterpreters to do further research on hedges in business interpreting.

关 键 词： 模糊限制语 商务口译 合作原则 会话含义

分 类 号： [H315.9]

领　　域： [语言文字]