亚洲免费av电影一区二区三区,日韩爱爱视频,51精品视频一区二区三区,91视频爱爱,日韩欧美在线播放视频,中文字幕少妇AV,亚洲电影中文字幕,久久久久亚洲av成人网址,久久综合视频网站,国产在线不卡免费播放

        ?

        Pragmatic research on Friends

        2018-05-29 09:57:02Majingyi
        校園英語·上旬 2018年3期
        關(guān)鍵詞:中央民族大學(xué)簡介外國語

        Friends first aired in the US in 1994, featuring a cast of six young men and women in New York, who were Monica, Ross, Chandler, Joey, Phoebe and Rachel. Today Id like to analyze the Speech Act and Cooperative Principles in Friends.

        In Paul Grices view, this general principle, Cooperative Principle , has four maxims—which are as follows: The maxim of quantity, The maxim of quality, The maxim of relation and The maxim of manner. I will give one example respectively used wonderful in Friends under each maxims.

        First of all, the violation of the maxim of quantity. Lets observe the following conversation:

        Janice: Oh! What is that on your finger? I am blind. So who is the lucky guy?

        Monica: Oh, it is a funny story.

        Janice asked Monica about who was her fiance. However, obviously, Monicas response concealed her fiances name and implied it was another story that was too difficult to talk about currently instead, which is an open violation of the maxim of quantity, because her fiance was Chandler who was Janices ex-boyfriend and Chandler tried his best to escape from Janice ever. So, if Monica had replied Janice directly, it would have embarrassed them both. This completely stems from the prevention embarrassment consideration. Thus Monica was withholding some of the information required at this stage of conversation and was thus flouting the maxim of quantity in order to avoid embarrassment.

        Second, the violation of the maxim of quality:

        Monica: He was my best friend in fifth grade. One day, I asked him to be my boyfriend and he said no. Do you know why?

        Chandler: Because you kept talking to him while he was trying to go to the bathroom?

        This conversation happened when Chandler was using the bathroom but Monica was keeping telling Chandler about her love stories during the school-days from the other side of the bathrooms door simultaneously. Monica intended to make Chandler guess the reason of her rejected experience. However, Chandler responded her with apparently impossible answer to remind her that it was not convenient for him to converse with her when he was using the bathroom. Obviously, Chandler did not observe the maxim of quality for he said something that he believed to be false and he also knew that Monica also knew it was false.

        Third, the violation of the maxim of relation:

        Phoebe: (to Monica) So have you decided on a band for the wedding? Because you know, I am kind of musical.

        Rachel: Phoebe, she just got engaged a couple of hours ago. I doubt she even has time for this.

        Phoebe: Speaking of chiming in, remember the time you burned down my apartment?

        Rachel: (to Monica) Yeah, you are on your own.

        Phoebe was obsessed with playing the guitar, but she is a terrible guitar player. At the time Monica announced her engagement, Phoebe was raring to be weddings band. It seemed that Rachels response was totally irrelevant to Phoebes question, but Phoebe understood that Rachel was trying to help Monica to refuse her request in an euphemistic way. What Phoebe did was also cut off the relation between her and Rachels words.So it was this kind of “cutting off the relation” that helped Phoebe to beat Rachel in language, flouting the maxim of relation.

        Last, the violation of the maxim of manner:

        Chandler: There was something we wanted to tell you about the wedding. It is going to be a small ceremony.

        Monica: It is actually going to be just family.

        Janice: Wait. You two think of me as family?

        Chandler and Monica was going to hold the engagement ceremony where they wouldnt like Janice to join, they said these words and hope Janice to quit the ceremony voluntarily.However, the reaction from Janice was out of their control since their obscurity of expression misled Janice that they considered Janice a member of their family, which would strengthen Janices idea to take part to their ceremony. Actually, this was an good example that obscurity of expression, which flouted the maxim of the manner, would mislead hearer and fail the speakers communicative goals.

        In short, to familiarize ourselves with the pragmatics of the language we are using or learning is of essential significance, where speech act and cooperative principles play an important role and whenever we use or learn a language, we should pay attention to avoid pragmatic failure.

        References:

        [1]Searle,J.“what is a Speech Act?” in Giglioli,P.(ed.)Language and Social Context.Harmondsworth:Penguin,1972.

        【作者簡介】Majingyi,北京中央民族大學(xué)外國語學(xué)院。

        猜你喜歡
        中央民族大學(xué)簡介外國語
        中央民族大學(xué)
        An Analysis on Holden’s Anti-hero Imagein The Catcher in the Rye
        長江叢刊(2018年24期)2018-11-14 15:58:43
        Research on Guidance Mechanism of Public Opinion in Colleges and Universities in Micro Era
        Book review on “Educating Elites”
        Hometown
        鄭州外國語學(xué)校
        ?????? ??? ?????―?? ,?? ??? ????
        ??? ?? ??? ??? ‘? ??’?????? ????
        An Analysis on the Structure of “Yue Lai Yue X”
        健康體檢數(shù)據(jù)分析肥胖及相關(guān)疾病——以中央民族大學(xué)退休教工為例
        无码国产亚洲日韩国精品视频一区二区三区| 音影先锋中文字幕在线| 超碰97人人射妻| 色妞www精品视频| 手机色在线| 一区二区三区在线观看人妖| 国内精品久久久久影院优| 性久久久久久久| 亚洲欧洲AV综合色无码| 久久久亚洲av午夜精品| 日本熟妇色xxxxx日本妇| 国产看黄网站又黄又爽又色| 欧美在线成人免费国产| 中文字幕色资源在线视频| 久久久久夜夜夜精品国产| 熟妇人妻中文字幕无码老熟妇| 无码高潮少妇毛多水多水免费 | 中文字幕国产精品专区| 男女无遮挡高清性视频| 国产真人性做爰久久网站| 亚洲AⅤ精品一区二区三区| 日本高清色一区二区三区| 好吊妞视频这里有精品| 国产高清乱理伦片| 亚洲色四在线视频观看| 中文字幕精品一区二区的区别| 国产色xx群视频射精| 中文字幕精品亚洲人成| 中文字幕一区二区人妻在线不卡 | 中文字幕日韩人妻在线| 国产人妻熟女高跟丝袜| 午夜精品久久久久成人| 国产大片中文字幕| 亚洲av色在线播放一区| 天天狠天天添日日拍| 免费人成黄页网站在线观看国产| 久久综合老鸭窝色综合久久| 中文字幕无码成人片| 国产在线无码一区二区三区| 国产黄片一区视频在线观看| 看女人毛茸茸下面视频|