从“笑话”看强否定立场标记语

Strong Negative Stance Markers from “Jokes”

摘要: 本文从“笑话”的词义演变过程推导出“笑话”在特定语境中具有的隐性否定义是由“笑”的义项“讥笑、嘲笑”传达的。“笑话”具有语用标记语功能，是表示对对方言域或行域的否定，语义否定和语用否定共同促成了“笑话”对对方言语行为的强语力否定，其显现出的负面语义层次构建了一个相对完整的连续统：不理解 < 不认同 < 反对 < 斥责。立场标记“笑话”在语篇中主要起到人际互动和立场表达功能，当“笑话”的否定语力等级越低，越靠近连续统的左边，其体现的人际互动功能越强，更多地用于增进人际关系和社交互动；越靠近连续统的右边，其体现的立场表达功能越强，更多地用于明确表达个人立场和观点。表否定的立场标记“笑话”表达负面立场，其负面含义的强度会因说话者主观视点而有所不同。另外，本文认为与“笑话”同类的“X话”能表达强否定语义离不开认知隐喻以及语用推理的推动作用，表达语用否定的立场标记语都偏向于话轮中的应答语，必须有否定主体和否定客体存在。

Abstract: This article deduces that the implicit negative meaning of “joke” in specific contexts is conveyed by the sense of “laughter” as “ridicule” or “mockery” through the evolution of the meaning of the word “joke”. “Joke” has the function of semantic marker, which is to express the negation of the dialectal domain or behavioral domain. Semantic negation and pragmatic negation together contribute to the strong linguistic negation of the other party’s verbal behavior, and the negative semantic hierarchy it reveals builds up a relatively complete continuum: incomprehension < disapproval < opposition < rebuke. The stance marker “joke” mainly plays the functions of interpersonal interaction and stance expression in the discourse. When the negative force level of “joke” is lower and closer to the left side of the continuum, it embodies a stronger function of interpersonal interaction, and is more used to enhance interpersonal relations and social interaction; the closer to the right side of the continuum, the stronger the stance-expression function it embodies, and the more it is used to express one’s personal stance and opinions. The negative stance marker “joke” expresses a negative stance, and the strength of its negative meaning varies depending on the subjective point of view of the speaker. In addition, this paper argues that the strong negative semantics of “X words”, which are similar to “jokes”, cannot be separated from the cognitive metaphor and pragmatic reasoning, and that stance markers that express pragmatic negativity are biased towards respondents in the turn of the discourse, and must have a negating subject and a negating object exist.