及物性视角下对动物小说的生态话语分析——以《叼狼·双子》为例
Ecological Discourse Analysis of Animal Novels from the Perspective of Transitivity—A Case Study of “Diaolang Shuangzi”
摘要: 本文以系统功能语言学的及物性理论为指导,深入剖析动物小说《叼狼·双子》的生态话语建构机制。通过量化统计与质性分析文本中物质、心理、关系、言语等六大过程的分布特征,揭示其背后蕴含的生态意义。研究发现:其一,物质过程占比达41%,高频出现的捕食、迁徙等行为动词,直观呈现草原生态系统的动态平衡与生存法则;其二,心理过程运用突破传统动物书写模式,赋予狼、狐等角色“担忧”“期待”等情感,消解人类中心主义,构建动物主体地位;其三,关系过程中“归属型”表达占比超28%。本研究证实,及物性系统的创造性运用不仅塑造了鲜活的生态叙事,更通过语言策略传递深层生态伦理,为动物小说生态话语研究提供了新的分析路径。
Abstract: Guided by the transitivity theory of Systemic Functional Linguistics, this paper deeply analyzes the ecological discourse construction mechanism of the animal novel “Diaolang Shuangzi”. Through quantitative statistics and qualitative analysis of the distribution characteristics of the six processes of material, mental, relational, verbal, existential, and behavioral in the text, the ecological significance behind them is revealed. The research finds that: First, the material process accounts for 41%, with frequently occurring verbs such as “predation” and “migration” directly presenting the dynamic balance and survival rules of the grassland ecosystem; second, the use of mental processes breaks the traditional animal writing mode, endowing characters like wolves and foxes with emotions such as “worry” and “expectation”, dissolving anthropocentrism and constructing the subject status of animals; third, the “belonging type” expression in the relational process accounts for more than 28%. This study confirms that the creative application of the transitivity system not only shapes vivid ecological narratives but also conveys deep ecological ethics through language strategies, providing a new analytical path for the study of ecological discourse in animal novels.
文章引用:斯日古冷. 及物性视角下对动物小说的生态话语分析——以《叼狼·双子》为例[J]. 现代语言学, 2025, 13(8): 145-153. https://doi.org/10.12677/ml.2025.138815

参考文献

[1] 吴军, 李雅. 及物性系统视角下的国际生态话语分析——以中俄联合声明为例[J]. 外语学刊, 2025(2): 34-42.
[2] 刘洋. 系统功能语言学视角下动物小说生态话语分析——以《狼王梦》为例[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 太原: 山西大学, 2019.
[3] Mackay, A. (2011) Environmental News Discourse: A Critical Discourse Analysis. Routledge.
[4] Breeze, R. (2013) Analysing Environmental Policy Documents: A Critical Discourse Analysis. Palgrave Macmillan.
[5] 黄国文. 生态话语分析: 理论与实践[J]. 外语研究, 2018(2): 1-8.
[6] 赵秀凤. 科幻小说的生态话语分析: 以《三体》为例[J]. 当代外语研究, 2020(4): 111-120.
[7] 朱永生. 旅游宣传语的生态话语分析[J]. 外语学刊, 2021(3): 21-27.
[8] Naess, A. (1973) The Shallow and the Deep, Long‐Range Ecology Movement. A Summary. Inquiry, 16, 95-100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[9] Stebbins, R.A. (2015) Ecology and Philosophy: The Interplay of Life and Thought. Ecological Research, 30, 211-220.
[10] 乌峰. 蒙古族生态文化研究[M]. 北京: 民族出版社, 2016.
[11] Halliday, M.A.K. (1994) An Introduction to Functional Grammar. Arnold.
[12] Van Leeuwen, T. (1996) Social Semiotics. Longman.
[13] Hodge, R. and Kress, G. (1993) Language as Ideology. Routledge.
[14] Chilton, P. (2004) Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. Routledge.
[15] 胡壮麟. 系统功能语言学近况[J]. 外国语(上海外国语大学学报), 1998(1): 2-6.