Abstract
This paper endeavors to analyze the pragmatic features of the phenomenon of conflict discourse in China’s college student’s debating competition. Theories of conflict analysis and pragmatics, such as Speech act theory, Relevance theory will be taken to analyze the debating conflict discourse in a comprehensive way. Meanwhile it discusses the general feature of Conflict discourse a step further through the interpretation of the pragmatic function of English debating competition. This study provides practical help for communication in daily life and second language learning.
Keywords college students English debating competition conflict discourse pragmatic functions
本文研讨了学院生英语辩论赛中出现冲突性话语现象的语用因素及其语用功能。在冲突性话语略论的理论框架下，综合应用语用学的探讨措施，如言语行为理论，关联理论等，对辩论性冲突语言进行整体的略论和探讨。同时通过对其语用功能的阐述，英语论文，英语论文，进一步阐释冲突性话语的一般性特征。该探讨为日常交际和二语习得提供实际上的帮助。
关键词 学院生 英语辩论赛 冲突性话语 语用功能
1 Introduction
Conflict Discourse is common but complex phenomena. Research on conflict has been extensive in numerous fields, involving rhetoric, anthropology, psychology and linguistics. During the social intercourse one’s utterance is against the other or every partner shares different ideas towards the same thing, then the conflict begins (Grimshaw, 1997). Some scholars hold the idea that the so called Conflict discourse means the collision condition caused by different understandings, benefits, principles and purposes from different groups or individuals. The incompatibility and opposing are the general character of Conflict discourse (Bao Gongmin, Wang Jie, 2017). The research resources in the present study are chosen from the 14th final ground of “FLTRP Cup” National English Debating Competition. The topic is whether the Olympic Games should remove any age requirement for children to compete. During the competition the two sides showed totally different ideas and were engaged in this conflict actively. The affirmative side mainly indicated that the age limit should be removed from the perspective of making full use of children’s golden age for sports and considering the benefits of children themselves. The opposition side refuted this idea by questioning the validity of taking up children’s golden age for sports instead of for education and the validity for leaving such heavy burden on children’s back. Both sides tried their best to refute each other and win the support from audience. This competition presents us perfect resource for research on Conflict discourse and the methods of pragmatics will be used to analyze the conflict dialogues extracted from the whole dialogues of the competition.
|
