大学思辨英语教程精读1unit3Word格式文档下载.docx

1、re Wearing THAT?: Understanding Mothers and Daughters in Conversation spent ten weeks on the New York Times best seller list; Talking from 9 to 5: Women and Men at Work was a New York Times Business best seller; The Argument Culture: Stopping Americas War of Words received the Common Ground Book Awa

2、rd; and I Only Say This Because I Love You: Talking to Your Parents, Partner, Sibs, and Kids When Youre All Adults received a Books for a Better Life Award. In addition to her seven books for general audiences, Tannen is author or editor of sixteen books and over one hundred articles for scholarly a

3、udiences. She has also published poems, short stories, plays and personal essays.Academic interests: gender and language, interactional sociolinguistics, conversational interaction, cross-cultural communication, frames theory, conversational vs. literary discourse, and new media discourse.Main publi

4、cations: You Just Dont Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. New York: Morrow, 1990.Thats Not What I Meant! How Conversational Style Makes or Breaks Relationships. NY: William Morrow, 1986.Gender and Discourse. NY & Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994.2）Edward SapirEdward Sapir （/spr/; 188419

5、39） was an American anthropologist-linguist, who is widely considered to be one of the most important figures in the early development of the discipline of linguistics. Sapir studied the ways in which language and culture influence each other, and he was interested in the relation between linguistic

6、 differences, and differences in cultural world views. This part of his thinking was developed by his student Benjamin Lee Whorf into the principle of linguistic relativity or the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.2） John Joseph GumperzJohn Joseph Gumperz （January 9, 1922 March 29, 2013） was an American lingui

7、st and academic. Gumperz was, for most of his career, a professor at the University of California in Berkeley. His research on the languages of India, on code-switching in Norway, and on conversational interaction, has benefitted the study of sociolinguistics, discourse analysis, linguistic anthropo

8、logy, and urban anthropology.2） E. M. ForsterE.M. Forster,in full Edward Morgan Forster （born January 1, 1879,London, Englanddied June 7, 1970,Coventry, Warwickshire）,British novelist, essayist, and social and literary critic. His fame rests largely on his novels Howards End （霍华德庄园）（1910） and A Pass

9、age to India （印度之旅）（1924） and on a large body of criticism. He is known best for his ironic and well-plotted novels examining class difference and hypocrisy in early 20th-century British society. He was nominated for the Nobel Prize in Literature in 13 different years.2） Robert KaplanAmericanapplied

10、 linguist. His research area covers applied linguistics, discourse analysis, language policy, language planning, and ESL/EFL Teaching. He is most famous for his contribution in Contrastive Rhetoric（对比修辞）, a term he first coined in 1966. Kaplan has authored or edited 32 books, more than 130 articles

11、in scholarly journals and chapters in books, and more than 85 book reviews and other ephemeral（short-lived） pieces in various newsletters（时事通讯）, as well as 9 special reports to the U.S. government and to governments elsewhere.3） pragmaticsPragmatics is a systematic way of explaining language use in

12、context. It seeks to explain aspects of meaning which cannot be found in the plain sense of words or structures, as explained by semantics. As a field of language study, pragmatics is fairly new. Its origins lie in philosophy of language and the American philosophical school of pragmatism. As a disc

13、ipline within language science, its roots lie in the work of （Herbert） Paul Grice on conversational implicature（会话含义） and the cooperative principle（合作原则）, J. L. Austin and John Searle on speech act（言语行为）, and on the work of Stephen Levinson, Penelope Brown and Geoff Leech on politeness.4） Cohesion r

14、efers to the use of various phonological, grammatical, and/or lexical means to link sentences or utterances into a well-connected, larger linguistic unit such as a paragraph or a chapter. In other words, cohesion achieves well-connectedness by means of linguistic forms. Example: Mary is a secretary.

15、 She works in a law firm. 5） Pause is a temporary and brief break in the flow of speech, which is often classified into filled pause（有声停顿） and unfilled or silent pause（无声停顿）. The former is taken up or filled by a hesitation form like ah, er, and um. In contrast, the latter is not filled by a hesitat

16、ion form. In other words, a silent pause is one where there is no vocalization（发声）. Critical reading I. Comprehension CheckI. Understanding the text （1） The main purpose of this article is to illustrate eight levels of cross-cultural differences in non-verbal aspects of communication.（2） We can unde

17、rstand the nature of language by observing it in communication and in contact with other systems of communication. （3） Pacing and pausing, listenership. In deciding when to talk and what to say, the speaker usually takes a conscious speech planning, yet in pacing and pausing and in showing listeners

18、hip in a conversation, one does not need to stop and think for a decision.Section 2.1 starts with a direct thesis statement. Then the author explains it with an experts （Scollon） research findings and examples. In section 2.2 the author raises a number of questions （in paras 7, 9 and 11） and respond

19、s to them with relevant research findings （Goodys as well as hers） and her own personal experience. Section 2.3 is also organized in the order of “question-answer”. Section 2.4 illustrates cross-cultural differences in listenership with two examples, gaze （paras 21 and 22） and loud responses （para 2

20、3）, and then moves on to the conclusion （para 24）. Section 2.5: example-discussion. Section 2.6: personal experience and a very brief interpretation. Section 2.7: the thesis （para 30 “how to be indirect is culturally relative”） and discussion about the cases of American-non-American differences （Ame

21、rican men, women, Greek and Japanese）. Section 2.8: definition and illustration.（5） The experience in a dinner party in paragraph 12 indicates that （1） people from different cultures not only differ in whether compliments should be accepted, rejected or deflected, but also in which compliments shoul

22、d be accepted/rejected/deflected; and （2） every culture has its own conventions about what to say on particular occasions, and without knowledge of these conventions, we can by no means appropriately interpret the messages in cross-cultural communication. In Para. 29, Tannenrefers to her first visit

23、 to Greece to exemplify the cross-cultural difference in formulaicity, i.e., what is novel and what is conventional in different languages.（6） Generally speaking, the eight levels are arranged in the order of importance, from the core of verbal communication to more peripheral （secondary） factors. T

24、he first three levels and the fifth level belong to what is said while the last three center on how it is said. The fourth level, listenership, is the only level examined from the perspective of the hearer.（7） As has been illustrated in part II, verbal communication involves many hidden rules and co

25、nventions that vary from culture to culture. Since every individual has his/her own unique experience, education background,and beliefs, etc., no two interactants would share exactly the same communicative rules and conventions. In this sense all communication is cross-cultural.II. Evaluation and ex

26、ploration1.Evaluating the text （1）Personal experiences and anecdotes help elucidate（阐明） abstract and difficult terms and add to the vividness of the text. Controlled use of personal experience may also shorten the distance between the author and the reader. But the overuse and misuse of personal sto

27、ries can also damage the objectivity and credibility of the argumentation.（2）. Falter: to become weaker and unable to continue in an effective way （Longman）（3）Which levels of communication difference are labeled automatic processing in the text? Why?Pacing and pausing, listenership. In deciding when

28、 to talk and what to say, the speaker usually takes a conscious speech planning（section 2.1&2.2）, yet in pacing and pausing and in showing listenership in a conversation, one does not need to stop and think for a decision（para. 20）.Why pacing and pausing is automatic because we have got accustomed t

29、o it in our daily life and made it a truism or formula after practicing it again and again in our daily communication. We have remembered the subtle change of pacing and pausing（para 19）（2）Beside personal experience, Tannen mentions a lot of academic researches （e.g. in para 4, 7, 8, 10, 21, 23, 38 and 39）, which all add weight to her arguments. （3）It is obviously not an exhaustive list. Cross-cultural communication can vary at many other levels, e.g., proxemics（人际距离学/亲近学） and turn-taking（话语轮次） in a multiparty context.2.Exploring beyond the text （1）Questions for exploration