Аутентичные тексты создателей лингвистики текста для перевода и обсуждения

Text № 1

M. A. K. HALLIDAY. COHESION IN ENGLISH.
M.A.K. Halliday. Cohesion in English.- London: Essex University, 1976.-357 p.

The word text is used in linguistics to refer to any passage spoken or written of whatever length, that does form a unified whole. A text may be spoken or written, prose or verse, dialogue or monologue. It may be anything from a single proverb to a whole play, from a momentary cry for help to an all day discussion on a committee. A text is a unit of language in use. It is not a grammatical unit like a clause or a sentence; and it is not defined by its size. A text is sometimes envisaged to be some kind of super –sentence, a grammar unit that is larger than a sentence but is related to a sentence in the same way that a sentence is related to a clause, a clause to group and so on: by constituency, the composition of the larger units out of smaller ones. But this is misleading ; a text is not something that is like a sentence, only bigger; it is something that differs from a sentence in a kind.
A text is best regarded as a semantic unit: a unit not of form but of meaning. Thus it is related to a clause or sentence not by size but by realizating the coding of one symbolic system in another. A text does not consist of sentences; it is realized by, or encoded in sentences.
If we understand it in this way we shall not expect to find the same kind of structural integration among the parts of a text as we find among the parts of a sentence or clause. The unity of a text is a unity of a different kind.
A text has a texture and this is what distinguishes it from it from something that is not a text. It derives this texture from the fact that it functions as a unity with respect to its environment.
What are the resources of English for creating texture? It is realized in cohesion. Cohesion is a semantic concept.
Cohesion occurs where the interpretation of some element in the discourse is dependent on that of another. The one presupposes the other in the sense that it cannot be effectively decoded except by recourse to it. When this happens a relation of cohesion is set up, and the two elements, the presupposed and the presupposing, are thereby at least potentially integrated into a text.
The cohesion is found within a sentence and between sentences.
The concept of cohesion accounts for the essential semantic relations whereby any passage of speech or writing is enabled to function as text. We can systematize this concept by classifying it into a small number of distinct categories – reference, substitution, ellipses, conjunction and lexical cohesion; categories which have a theoretical basis as distinct types of cohesive relation, but which also provide a practical means for describing and analyzing texts. Each of these categories is represented in the text by particular features – repetitions, omissions, occurrences of certain words and constructions – which have in common the property of signalling that the interpretation of the passage in question depends on something else. If that something else is verbally explicit, then there is cohesion.
The simplest form of cohesion is that in which the presupposed element is verbally explicit and is found in the immediately preceding sentence.
The cataphoric reference is often signalled in writing with a colon: but although this has the effect of uniting the two parts into a single orthographic sentence, it does not imply any kind of structural relation between them. The colon is used solely to signal the cataphora, this being one of its principal functions.
The reference may be cataphoric, anaphoric, exophoric (the reference to the situation). This sort of grammatic parallelism is not irrelevant to internal cohesion.
The linguistic features which are typically associated with a configuration of situational features – with particular values of the field, mode and tenor constitute a register.
The field is the total event, in which the text is functioning.
The mode is the function of the text in the event including the channel taken by the language spoken or written, extempore or prepared – and its genre, or rhetoric mode, as narrative, didactic, persuasive, phatic communion and so on.
The tenor refers to the type of role interaction, the set of relevant social relations, permanent and temporary, among the participants involved.
Field, mode, tenor – collectively define the context of situation of a text.
A text is a passage of discourse which is coherent in these 2 regards: 1) it is coherent with respect to the context of situation, and therefore is consistent in register; and 2) it is coherent which respect to itself, and therefore, cohesive.
There are 3 major functional components of the linguistic system: the ideational, the interpersonal and the textual. The ideational component is that part of the linguistic system which is concerned with the expression of the content, with the function that language has of being about something.
The interpersonal component is concerned with the social, expressive and connative functions of language, with expressing the speaker’s angle; his attitude, judgements, his encoding of the role relationships in the situation, and his motive of saying at all.
The ideational component represents the speaker in his role as observer, while the interpersonal component represents the speaker in his role as intruder.
The textual component is the text forming component in the linguistic system. This comprises the resources that language has for creating the text.
The given below figures 1 and 2 present the characteristics of cohesion and types of references accounted by the process of cohesion.
Fig. 6. presents some characteristics of cohesion.

Reference is referring nouns included into the speech and their equivalents to the real objects by syntactic, logical, semantic and pragmatic factors.
Substitution is a relation in wording rather than in meaning. Substitution may be of five kinds: nominal, one (ones), personal, cardinal, clausal.
Conjunctive elements are cohesive not in themselves but indirectly, by virtue of their specific meanings; they are not primarily devices for reaching out into the preceding (or following) text, but they express certain meanings which presuppose the presence of other components in the discourse.
They have the function of relating successive elements in the text.
Types of conjunctive relations with conjunctive adjuncts are like this:
simple adverbs: but, so, then, next
compound adverbs: accordingly, subsequently, actually,
therefore, thereupon, where, at,
furthermore, nevertheless,
anyway, instead of, besides,
presupposed phrases: on the contrary, as a result, in addition.
On the borderline between grammatical and lexical cohesion is the cohesive function of the class of general nouns.
The class of general nouns is a small set of nouns having generalized reference within the major noun classes, those as “human noun”, “place noun”, “fact noun” and the like.
Human: people, person, man, woman, child, boy, girl;
inanimate concrete noun: thing, object, fact, matter, affair, question, mass, staff, unity;
inanimate abstract: business, role, importance, consequence, action, move
Ellipse is speech or text planned omissions of some implied language structure (sentence member, discourse component or the like) which is easily restored basing on the context ( meaningful or syntactic parallelism).

Text № 2

JOHN R. SEARLE. SPEECH ACTS.
Searle, John R. Speech Acts. - London: Cambridge University, 1969.- P. 16-18; 23; 30.
Language is ruled by governed intentional behaviour to explain the possibility of, not to provide evidence for, linguistic characterization. The form that this hypothesis will take is that speaking a language is performing speech acts, acts such as making statements, giving commands; asking questions, making promises and so on; and more abstractly, acts such as referring and predicating, and secondly, that these acts are in general made possible by and are performed in accordance with certain rules for the use of linguistic elements.
The reason for concentrating on the study of speech acts is simply this: all linguistic communication involves linguistic acts. The unit of linguistic communication is the production of the symbol or word or sentence in the performance of the speech act. Speech acts are the basic or minimal units of linguistic communication.
A speech act is the production of a sentence taken under certain conditions.
The speech act or acts performed in the utterance of a sentence are in general a function of the meaning of the sentence. The meaning of a sentence does not in all cases uniquely determine what speech act is performed in a given utterance of that sentence for a speaker may mean more than what he actually says but it is always in principle possible for him to say exactly what he means.
Since every meaningful sentence in virtue of its meaning can be used to perform a particular speech act (or range of speech acts) and since every possible speech act can in principle be given an exact formulation in a sentence or sentences (assuming an appropriate context of utterance), the study of the meanings of sentences and the study of speech acts are not two independent studies but one study from two different points of view.
It is possible to distinguish at least two strands in contemporary work in the philosophy of language – one which concentrates on the uses of experessions in speech situation and one which concentrates on the meaning of sentences.
J. Austin baptized these complete speech acts with the name “illocutionary acts” and shall henceforth employ this terminology.
Some of the English verbs denoting illocutionary acts are “state”, “describe”, “assert”, “warn”, “remark”, “comment”, “command”, “order”, “request”, “criticize”, “apologize”, “censure”, “approve”, “welcome”, “promise”, “object”, “demand”, “argue”.
J. Austin claimed there were over a thousand of such expressions in English. He stressed that any speaker is characteristically performing at least three distinct kinds of acts.
1. The uttering of words = morphemes, sentences performing utterance acts.
2. Referring and predicating = performing propositional acts.
3. Stating, questioning, commanding, promising, etc. = performing illocuti-onary acts.
Utterance acts consist simply in uttering strings of words. Illocutionary and propositional acts consist characteristically in uttering words in sentences, in certain contexts, under certain conditions and with certain intentions.
The characteristic grammatical form of the illocutionary act is the complete sentence (it can be a one-word sentence); and the characteristic grammatical form of the propositional acts are parts of sentences: grammatical predicates for the act of predication, and proper names, pronouns, and certain other sorts of noun phases for reference. Propositional acts cannot occur alone, that is one cannot just refer and predicate without making an assertion or asking a question performing some illocutionary act.
The linguistic correlate of this point is that sentences, not words, are used to say things.
We can distinguish two (not necessarily separate) elements in the syntactical structure of the sentence, which we might call the propositional indicator and the illocutionary force indicator.
The illocutionary force indicator shows how the proposition is to be taken, or put in another way, what illocutionary force the utterance is to have; that is what illocutionary act the speaker is performing in the utterance of the sentence.
Illocutionary force indicating devices in English include: word order, stress, intonation contour, punctuation, the mood of the verb, the so-called performative verbs.
I may indicate the kind of illocutionary act I am performing by beginning the sentence as “I apologize”, “I warn”, “I state”, etc.

Teкст № 3

Н.И. ЖИНКИН. РЕЧЬ КАК ПРОВОДНИК ИНФОРМАЦИИ.

Н. И. Жинкин. Речь как проводник информации. – М.: Наука, 1983.- 280с.

Текст – центральное звено взаимодействия языка и мышления, это иерархия предикатов. Отдельно взятое слово не может быть предметом анализа.
Важный вывод можно сделать о роли порядка и места предложений для организации внутренних связей текста это процесс отбора и распределения слов в тексте, распределение предметных признаков в предложении и группе предложений. Текст воспринимается как целое, как самостоятельная единица анализа. Все речевые процессы нужно рассматривать в речевом акте, чтобы понять природу речевого процесса и текста. Н. И. Жинкин призывал изучать человека говорящего, т. е. не отрывать человека от речи и речь от человека. Язык и речь находятся в неразрывной связи с процессом общения людей между собой.
Особое место в учении Н.И. Жинкина занимают проблемы кодирования и декодирования информации в мышлении человека в процессе порождения, восприятия и понимания речевых сообщений. Его эксперименты подтвердили гипотезу о возможности несловесного мышления, когда происходит переход на особый код внутренней речи, названной автором «предметно-схемным кодом»; обозначаемое является знаком; код непроизносимый, в нем нет признаков слов натурального языка, это код невербального мышления.
Гипотеза Н.И. Жинкина об отборе элементов текста
Отбор - универсальная операция; от речевого звука до мысли.
Слова не хранятся в памяти в их полной форме. Хранятся определенным образом организованные в виде «решетки фонем» и «решетки морфем» их элементы, с которых по определенным правилам как бы снимается полная форма слова в момент отбора при построении сообщения.
I уровень отбора: Составление слов из звуков
II уровень отбора: Составление сообщения из слов
Здесь действуют особые семантические правила, которые относятся только к значениям слов, на основе которых осуществляется их сочетаемость. Эти семантические правила служат своего рода фильтром, пропускающим в интеллект только осмысленные языковые выражения.
Основа концепции порождения текста может быть представлена в виде
следующих этапов:
- замысел текста;
- прогнозирующее начало текста;
- конец будущего текста;
- иерархия подтем и субподтем, задающих необходимые уровни развертывания замысла в текст, а тем самым, и в его структуру.
Эти интеллектуальные образования, возникающие до текста, являются основными средствами ограничения, накладываемыми на процесс отбора элементов текста, т.к. с самого начала очерчивают предметно - тематическую область сообщения и тем самым сужают область поиска необходимых языковых средств.
Большая роль отводится Н.И. Жинкиным ориентации на партнера по коммуникации.
Автор текста не восстанавливает все необходимые звенья замысла, полагая, что они будут восстановлены партнером по коммуникации на основе сформированных в его интеллекте необходимых знаний, имеющихся в тексте, и опыта. В результате в тексте возникают «смысловые скважины», устранение которых в процессе понимания текста возможно лишь в результате актуализации необходимых знаний о реальной действительности.
Речь - механизм порождения и понимания сообщений.
Язык - средство реализации речевого процесса - обладает своей собственной структурой. Но именно речь является сферой употребления языка.
Для неё нет отдельных языковых дисциплин, нет перегородок между ними; это целое, функционирующее в неразрывном единстве и взаимодействии.
Особенно это важно для процессов свертывания текста.
Смысл сообщения, развивая логическую теорию Г.Фреге1, считает Н. И. Жинкин, имеет двойственную природу: он рождается на грани лингвистических значений и их психологической интерпретации в конкретных темах общения. Творческий характер речеобразования и выражения смысла сообщения осуществляется путем перестройки ансамбля лексических значений в тексте.
Между репликами партнеров всегда должен быть мост - внутренняя речь, в которой лексическое значение интегрируется, и таким образом, формируется текстовый смысл. Рассмотрим следующий текст, приведенный по предложениям:
1. Черные, живые глаза пристально смотрели с полотна.
2. Казалось, сейчас разомкнутся губы и с них слетит веселая шутка, уже играющая на открытом и приветливом лице.
3. Кто автор этой замечательной картины?
4. Прикрепленная к позолоченной раме табличка свидетельствовала, что портрет Чингиннато Баруцци написан К.Брюловым.
Между первыми тремя предложениями настолько глубокие скважины, что их нелегко связать по смыслу, и только в четвертом предложении указано всё необходимое, чтобы связать вместе все четыре предложения. Но в то же время и четвертое предложение, отдельно взятое, малопонятно.
Текст во внутренней речи сжимается в концепт (представление), содержащий смысловой сгусток всего текстового отрезка. Этот сгусток хранится в долговременной памяти и может быть восстановлен в словах, не совпадающих буквально с воспринятыми, но таких, в которых интегрирован тот же смысл, который содержался в лексическом интеграле полученного высказывания.
Текстовый смысл - это интеграция лексического значения двух смежных предложений текста. Если интеграция не возникает, берется следующее смежное предложение, и так до того момента, когда возникнет смысловая связь между всеми предложениями.