构式语法视角下俄语学术引言语步的典型构式研究
A Study on Typical Constructions in Russian Academic Introduction Moves from the Perspective of Construction Grammar
摘要: 本文以构式语法理论为基础,结合Swales提出的CARS (Create A Research Space)模型,对俄语语言学类核心期刊中的学术引言语篇进行语步划分与构式分析,旨在揭示俄语学术写作中语步结构与语言构式之间的互动规律。研究识别出三大语步(M1-M2-M3)中共计32类典型构式,发现各语步在构式类型、句法形式与语用功能上具有显著差异。M1语步偏好使用领域提示与引证型构式,M2语步侧重限制性判断与批评构式,M3语步则高度依赖程式化的目标表达与方法展望构式。此外,构式呈现出结构固定性与语用灵活性并存的特征,反映出学术引言中的模板化趋势与个体写作策略的结合。本文研究不仅丰富了构式语法在篇章层面的应用路径,也为俄语学术写作教学与文本建模提供了初步的参考与语料基础。
Abstract: Drawing on the theoretical framework of Construction Grammar and integrating Swales’s CARS (Create A Research Space) model, this study conducts a rhetorical move segmentation and constructional analysis of introductions in Russian linguistics research articles published in core academic journals. The aim is to uncover the interactional patterns between move structures and linguistic constructions in Russian academic writing. The analysis identifies 32 typical constructions distributed across the three major moves (M1-M2-M3) and reveals significant differences in construction types, syntactic forms, and pragmatic functions among them. M1 tends to employ field-indicating and citation-related constructions, M2 focuses on restrictive evaluation and critique constructions, while M3 relies heavily on formulaic goal-expressing and methodological-projection constructions. Furthermore, the findings show a coexistence of structural rigidity and pragmatic flexibility, reflecting the integration of templated tendencies in academic introductions with individual writing strategies. This study not only enriches the application pathways of Construction Grammar at the discourse level, but also provides preliminary reference and corpus foundations for Russian academic writing instruction and text modeling.
文章引用:刘威齐, 常颖. 构式语法视角下俄语学术引言语步的典型构式研究[J]. 现代语言学, 2025, 13(11): 475-482. https://doi.org/10.12677/ml.2025.13111186

参考文献

[1] Goldberg, A.E. (1998) Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. University of Chicago Press.
[2] Hyland, K. (2009) Academic Discourse: English in a Global Context. Bloomsbury Publishing.
[3] Boas, H.C.E. and Gonzálvez-García, F.E. (2014) Romance Perspectives on Construction Grammar. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
[4] Hyland, K. (2005) Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. Bloomsbury Publishing.
[5] Charles, M. (2007) Argument or Evidence? Disciplinary Variation in the Use of the Noun That Pattern in Stance Construction. English for Specific Purposes, 26, 203-218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[6] Boas, H.C. (2010) Contrastive Studies in Construction Grammar. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
[7] Kanoksilapatham, B. (2005) Rhetorical Structure of Biochemistry Research Articles. English for Specific Purposes, 24, 269-292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[8] Алешинская, Е.В. (2023) Риторическая структура введении к исследовательским статьям по компьютерным наукам: Сравнительныи анализ [Rhetorical Structure of Research Paper Introductions in Computer Science: A Comparative Analysis]. Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, 9, 53-64.
[9] Tikhonova, E., Zavolskaya, O. and Mekeko, N. (2025) Stylistic Redundancy and Wordiness in Introductions of Original Empirical Studies: Rhetorical Risks of Academic Writing. Journal of Language and Education, 11, 125-136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[10] 施春宏, 蔡淑美. 构式语法研究的理论问题论析[J]. 外语教学与研究, 2022, 54(5): 643-655, 798.
[11] 吴清清. 近二十年国内构式语法研究文献综述[J]. 现代语言学, 2023, 11(1): 234-239.
[12] 文旭, 杨坤. 构式语法研究的历时取向——历时构式语法论纲[J]. 中国外语, 2015, 12(1): 26-34.
[13] Swales, J.M. (1990) Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge University Press.
[14] Swales, J.M. (2004) Research Genres: Explorations and Applications. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[15] Goldberg, A. (2006) Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford University Press.
[16] Connor, U. and Mauranen, A. (1999) Linguistic Analysis of Grant Proposals: European Union Research Grants. English for Specific Purposes, 18, 47-62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef