Reflections on discourse and knowledge: An interview with Teun van Dijk

Pub Date : 2018-01-01 DOI:10.1163/18773109-01001005
J. Andor
{"title":"Reflections on discourse and knowledge: An interview with Teun van Dijk","authors":"J. Andor","doi":"10.1163/18773109-01001005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Jozsef Andor: Thank you very much for accepting my call for an interview. I would like to start it by asking the “father” of modern text linguistics, author of the first, now classic, theoretically orientedmonograph, about the current state of the art. At the timewhenMouton inTheHague published your SomeAspects of Text Grammars, and in the periods immediately following it, text linguistics mainly concentrated on providing a grammar-like description, interpretation of texts, just slightly extending the scope of analysis beyond the frames of the sentence. This was probably due to the intent to provide a new level of linguistic representation, one that was higher in its scope than that of syntax in linguistic theory. Text linguistics as formulated in the 80s of the last century, this way, was basically a part of the systemic description of language. It may be stated, in view of the later developments of the field, that the early period of modern text linguistics concentrated on outlining frameworks to describe what now can be called the connexity, that is, the primarily grammatically relatedbodyof knowledgeof texts, or at bestwhat at the timewas called ‘locally based cohesion’. Therewere a number of models developedwith this scope, but perhaps yours and that of Halliday and Hasan were the most influential ones. As amatter of fact, the earlymodelswere at the timeunable to grasp the textual norms of coherence, the role of world knowledge and what has been called ‘common ground’ by Herbert Clark. How do you see, interpret the process of the development of the discipline from the early stages, frompurely and strictly linguistically based descriptions of texts to the present daymodels of textology,","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18773109-01001005","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18773109-01001005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Jozsef Andor: Thank you very much for accepting my call for an interview. I would like to start it by asking the “father” of modern text linguistics, author of the first, now classic, theoretically orientedmonograph, about the current state of the art. At the timewhenMouton inTheHague published your SomeAspects of Text Grammars, and in the periods immediately following it, text linguistics mainly concentrated on providing a grammar-like description, interpretation of texts, just slightly extending the scope of analysis beyond the frames of the sentence. This was probably due to the intent to provide a new level of linguistic representation, one that was higher in its scope than that of syntax in linguistic theory. Text linguistics as formulated in the 80s of the last century, this way, was basically a part of the systemic description of language. It may be stated, in view of the later developments of the field, that the early period of modern text linguistics concentrated on outlining frameworks to describe what now can be called the connexity, that is, the primarily grammatically relatedbodyof knowledgeof texts, or at bestwhat at the timewas called ‘locally based cohesion’. Therewere a number of models developedwith this scope, but perhaps yours and that of Halliday and Hasan were the most influential ones. As amatter of fact, the earlymodelswere at the timeunable to grasp the textual norms of coherence, the role of world knowledge and what has been called ‘common ground’ by Herbert Clark. How do you see, interpret the process of the development of the discipline from the early stages, frompurely and strictly linguistically based descriptions of texts to the present daymodels of textology,
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
对话语与知识的反思:对戴克的访谈录
Jozsef Andor:非常感谢你接受我的面试。首先,我想问一下现代语篇语言学之父,第一部经典的理论专著的作者,关于这门艺术的现状。当海牙的穆顿发表你的《文本语法的某些方面》时,以及随后的一段时间里,文本语言学主要集中于对文本提供类似语法的描述和解释,只是将分析的范围稍微扩展到句子框架之外。这可能是由于意图提供一个新的语言表征水平,一个在其范围内比语言学理论中的句法更高的水平。上世纪80年代形成的篇章语言学,基本上是语言系统描述的一部分。鉴于该领域后来的发展,可以这样说,现代语篇语言学的早期集中于概述框架,以描述现在可以称为连接的东西,即主要与语法相关的文本知识体,或者当时被称为“局部衔接”的东西。有很多模型都是在这个范围内发展起来的,但也许你和哈利戴和哈桑的模型是最有影响力的。事实上,早期的模型在当时无法掌握连贯的文本规范,世界知识的作用以及赫伯特·克拉克所谓的“共同点”。你如何看待,如何解读这门学科的发展过程从早期阶段,从纯粹严格的基于语言的文本描述到今天的文本模型,
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1