修辞格的操作分类系统研究
摘要
知识是一个复杂的系统，规律却是简单的表达。作为科学，修辞有自己的内部规律。修辞规律是对于语言各层面的装饰，既是语法偏离，又是语义替换。具体地说，是对于语言各层面的增加、减少、倒置和替换。按照《国际标准汉语大词典》的解释，所谓修就是装饰，使完美；按照《高级汉语大词典》的解释，修就是修饰，装饰。语音、语词和语句构成了语言基本的层面，修辞经常发生在这些层面上，这些层面在汉语中被称为辞。所谓辞就是言辞，文辞，这是《高级汉语大词典》的解释；优美的语言，这是《国际标准汉语大词典》的解释。所谓修辞就是修饰文辞，或者说是文辞的装饰。英文figures of speech的意思就是文辞的装饰。其中的figure是用图案或图样装饰，这一定义在《美国传统辞典》里可以得到证实。
国内外对于修辞格的分类存在着若干方法，这些方法都有其优点和合理性，也有缺点和不合理性。比利时的μ学派提出的方法似乎更合理，因为他们把分类的重点放在了对语言的装饰上。μ学派认为，辞包括语词、语句、意义和逻辑，辞的装饰包括抑减、添加、抑减添加和换置。笔者认为，意义和逻辑不能作为修辞的层面，因为意义包含在语音、语词和语句之中，语音、语词和语句的改变才能导致意义的变化；逻辑包含在语句之中，语句内部次序的改变才能导致逻辑的变化。如此看来，μ学派提出的修辞层面—语词、语句、意义和逻辑，只有语词和语句有存在的必要了。考虑到传统分类，语音也应该是一个必要的层面，因此，笔者认为修辞层面应该是三个层面—语音、语词和语句。装饰手段采用μ学派提出的四种手段，不过为了方便理解，改用了不同的名称—增加、减少、倒置、替换。辞格是对语音、语词和语句进行增加、减少、倒置、替换而采取的手段。
这篇论文是基于协学派的辞格系统写成的。在进行了大量的分析和比较以后，
依照笔者所认为的修辞是对于辞的装饰的观点，勾勒出了下面的辞格分类表。
辞格分类表
认认 认语音 音语词 词语句 句
增增加加语音+ ++语词十十语句+ ++
减减少少语音- --语词- --语句- --
倒倒置置语音~ ~~语词~ ~~语句~ ~~
替替换换语音一一语词一一语句一一
修包括增加、减少、倒置、替换。辞包括语音、语词、语句。用装饰手段(增
加、减少、倒置、替换)对修辞层面(语音、语词、语句)进行操作就是修辞。
所有的辞格就是这样产生的:对于语音、语词、语句的增加;对于语音、语词、
语句的减少;对于语音、语词、语句的倒置;对于语音、语词、语句的替换。这
不是形式主义，而是操作主义。这里的+表示增加，一表示减少，~表示倒置，一
表示替换。
第一章介绍了国内外对于辞格的分类情况。主要介绍了
.基于相似性的分类
.基于操作场的分类
3.基于操作手段的分类
4.基于操作场和操作手段的分类
5.基于相似性、操作场和操作手段的分类
6.基于句法和意义的分类
.基于功能和方法的分类
.评价
第二章介绍了结构主义的辞格系统。总体介绍了
1.西方结构主义修辞学
1)欧美布拉格结构主义修辞学
2)法国结构主义修辞学
3)比利时结构主义修辞学
2.林学派的普通修辞学
第三章介绍了尝试改进了的结构主义辞格分类系统。详细介绍了笔者运用结
构主义修辞学理论、偏离理论和替换理论对于辞格进行的分类。
1.增加辞格:语音增加辞格，语词增加辞格，语句增加辞格
2.减少辞格:语音减少辞格，语词减少辞格，语句减少辞格
3.倒置辞格:语音倒置辞格，语词倒置辞格，语句倒置辞格
4.替换辞格:语音替换辞格，语词替换辞格，语句替换辞格
第四章对操作分类进行了详细说明，阐述了操作分类的意义。这种意义体现
在传统和现代的结合上，既考虑到人们观念上根据操作场(语音、词汇和句子)
的分类，又考虑到根据操作手段(增加、减少、倒置和替换)的分类。将两者有
机地结合在一起，纵横交错、相互联系，从而构成了一个修辞格的操作分类系统。
该分类包容量大，包括了162个超语法、偏离语言零度的辞格。理解容易、操作
也容易。最后是本文写作期间的参考书目。
关键词:修辞、分类、操作、装饰。
Knowledge is a complicated system while laws are simple expressions. As a science, rhetoric has its own interior laws. The essential laws of rhetoric are the decoration of each of the speech fields, including grammatical deviations and semantic substitutions. Specifically, they are addition, subtraction, transposition to grammar and substitution to semantics of each speech field. 'The so-called " 修" is to decorate, to perfect; (A Dictionary of International Standard Chinese); to decorate, to beautify; (Advanced Chinese Dictionary). Sounds, words and sentences make up the basic speech fields, where rhetoric often happens and functions. These are what are called in Chinese "辞". The so-called "辞 " is the word, diction, speech, statement; (Advanced Chinese Dictionary); graceful speech; (A Dictionary of International Standard Chinese). Therefore, the so-called rhetoric is to decorate the speech, or the decoration of speech. The meaning of figures of speech in English is the decoration of speech, in which figure means to adorn with a design or figures; (The American Heritage Dictionary).There exists various ways in the classification of figures of speech both at home and abroad. Each has its strong points and rationalities as well as its shortcomings and irrationalities. The way put forward by Group u, Belgium, seems more reasonable because it puts emphasis of classification on the figure of speech. The speech of Group u includes words, sentences, meaning and logic, the figure of speech is realized by suppression, addition, suppression-addition and permutation. In my viewpoint,
meaning should not be regarded as an operated field, nor should logic, since meaning exists in sounds, words and sentences. Only through variation in sounds, words and sentences can the meaning undergo changes. Logic exists in sentences, and only through transposition of the inner order of sentences can make the logic undergo changes. In this case, it seems reasonable to suggest that the operated fields of speech put forward by Group should not include "meaning and logic", but only word and sentence are the necessary composing parts. Considering the traditional classification of figures of speech, sound is also a rhetorical field, therefore, the rhetorical field is composed of sounds, words and sentences. The figure devices adopt those of Group , but use different expressions for the convenience of better understanding, thus, the figure devices are addition, subtraction, transposition and substitution. Then, figures should be the addition, subtraction, transposition and substitution in sounds, words and sentences.This thesis is based on the system of figures of speech raised by Group . Through a great deal of analysis and comparison and according to my understanding that rhetoric is the figure of speech, I draw the following outline classification of figures of speech:
Addition, subtraction, transposition and substitution make up the figure. Sounds, words and sentences constitute speech. Using the figure to figure the speech is the so-called rhetoric and all the figures of speech are generated by addition to sounds, to words and to sentences; by subtraction to sounds, to words and to sentences; by transposition to sounds, to words and to sentences; by substitution to sounds, to words and to sentences. Thus, the point I want to make here is that figures of speech are generated by the figure of speech. This is not formalism. This is operationalism of rhetoric. In the table here, + refers to addition, - refers to subtraction, - refers to transposition, and -substitution.This thesis falls into four chapters, the following is a brief introduction to each chapter:Chapter I deals with the present classification of figures of speech both at home and abroad. 1. The classification based on similarity. 2. The classification based on operated fields. 3. The classification based on operation devices. 4. The classification based on operated fields and devices. 5. The classification based on similarity, operated fields and devices. 6. The classification bas
国内外对于修辞格的分类存在着若干方法，这些方法都有其优点和合理性，也有缺点和不合理性。比利时的μ学派提出的方法似乎更合理，因为他们把分类的重点放在了对语言的装饰上。μ学派认为，辞包括语词、语句、意义和逻辑，辞的装饰包括抑减、添加、抑减添加和换置。笔者认为，意义和逻辑不能作为修辞的层面，因为意义包含在语音、语词和语句之中，语音、语词和语句的改变才能导致意义的变化；逻辑包含在语句之中，语句内部次序的改变才能导致逻辑的变化。如此看来，μ学派提出的修辞层面—语词、语句、意义和逻辑，只有语词和语句有存在的必要了。考虑到传统分类，语音也应该是一个必要的层面，因此，笔者认为修辞层面应该是三个层面—语音、语词和语句。装饰手段采用μ学派提出的四种手段，不过为了方便理解，改用了不同的名称—增加、减少、倒置、替换。辞格是对语音、语词和语句进行增加、减少、倒置、替换而采取的手段。
这篇论文是基于协学派的辞格系统写成的。在进行了大量的分析和比较以后，
依照笔者所认为的修辞是对于辞的装饰的观点，勾勒出了下面的辞格分类表。
辞格分类表
认认 认语音 音语词 词语句 句
增增加加语音+ ++语词十十语句+ ++
减减少少语音- --语词- --语句- --
倒倒置置语音~ ~~语词~ ~~语句~ ~~
替替换换语音一一语词一一语句一一
修包括增加、减少、倒置、替换。辞包括语音、语词、语句。用装饰手段(增
加、减少、倒置、替换)对修辞层面(语音、语词、语句)进行操作就是修辞。
所有的辞格就是这样产生的:对于语音、语词、语句的增加;对于语音、语词、
语句的减少;对于语音、语词、语句的倒置;对于语音、语词、语句的替换。这
不是形式主义，而是操作主义。这里的+表示增加，一表示减少，~表示倒置，一
表示替换。
第一章介绍了国内外对于辞格的分类情况。主要介绍了
.基于相似性的分类
.基于操作场的分类
3.基于操作手段的分类
4.基于操作场和操作手段的分类
5.基于相似性、操作场和操作手段的分类
6.基于句法和意义的分类
.基于功能和方法的分类
.评价
第二章介绍了结构主义的辞格系统。总体介绍了
1.西方结构主义修辞学
1)欧美布拉格结构主义修辞学
2)法国结构主义修辞学
3)比利时结构主义修辞学
2.林学派的普通修辞学
第三章介绍了尝试改进了的结构主义辞格分类系统。详细介绍了笔者运用结
构主义修辞学理论、偏离理论和替换理论对于辞格进行的分类。
1.增加辞格:语音增加辞格，语词增加辞格，语句增加辞格
2.减少辞格:语音减少辞格，语词减少辞格，语句减少辞格
3.倒置辞格:语音倒置辞格，语词倒置辞格，语句倒置辞格
4.替换辞格:语音替换辞格，语词替换辞格，语句替换辞格
第四章对操作分类进行了详细说明，阐述了操作分类的意义。这种意义体现
在传统和现代的结合上，既考虑到人们观念上根据操作场(语音、词汇和句子)
的分类，又考虑到根据操作手段(增加、减少、倒置和替换)的分类。将两者有
机地结合在一起，纵横交错、相互联系，从而构成了一个修辞格的操作分类系统。
该分类包容量大，包括了162个超语法、偏离语言零度的辞格。理解容易、操作
也容易。最后是本文写作期间的参考书目。
关键词:修辞、分类、操作、装饰。
Knowledge is a complicated system while laws are simple expressions. As a science, rhetoric has its own interior laws. The essential laws of rhetoric are the decoration of each of the speech fields, including grammatical deviations and semantic substitutions. Specifically, they are addition, subtraction, transposition to grammar and substitution to semantics of each speech field. 'The so-called " 修" is to decorate, to perfect; (A Dictionary of International Standard Chinese); to decorate, to beautify; (Advanced Chinese Dictionary). Sounds, words and sentences make up the basic speech fields, where rhetoric often happens and functions. These are what are called in Chinese "辞". The so-called "辞 " is the word, diction, speech, statement; (Advanced Chinese Dictionary); graceful speech; (A Dictionary of International Standard Chinese). Therefore, the so-called rhetoric is to decorate the speech, or the decoration of speech. The meaning of figures of speech in English is the decoration of speech, in which figure means to adorn with a design or figures; (The American Heritage Dictionary).There exists various ways in the classification of figures of speech both at home and abroad. Each has its strong points and rationalities as well as its shortcomings and irrationalities. The way put forward by Group u, Belgium, seems more reasonable because it puts emphasis of classification on the figure of speech. The speech of Group u includes words, sentences, meaning and logic, the figure of speech is realized by suppression, addition, suppression-addition and permutation. In my viewpoint,
meaning should not be regarded as an operated field, nor should logic, since meaning exists in sounds, words and sentences. Only through variation in sounds, words and sentences can the meaning undergo changes. Logic exists in sentences, and only through transposition of the inner order of sentences can make the logic undergo changes. In this case, it seems reasonable to suggest that the operated fields of speech put forward by Group should not include "meaning and logic", but only word and sentence are the necessary composing parts. Considering the traditional classification of figures of speech, sound is also a rhetorical field, therefore, the rhetorical field is composed of sounds, words and sentences. The figure devices adopt those of Group , but use different expressions for the convenience of better understanding, thus, the figure devices are addition, subtraction, transposition and substitution. Then, figures should be the addition, subtraction, transposition and substitution in sounds, words and sentences.This thesis is based on the system of figures of speech raised by Group . Through a great deal of analysis and comparison and according to my understanding that rhetoric is the figure of speech, I draw the following outline classification of figures of speech:
Addition, subtraction, transposition and substitution make up the figure. Sounds, words and sentences constitute speech. Using the figure to figure the speech is the so-called rhetoric and all the figures of speech are generated by addition to sounds, to words and to sentences; by subtraction to sounds, to words and to sentences; by transposition to sounds, to words and to sentences; by substitution to sounds, to words and to sentences. Thus, the point I want to make here is that figures of speech are generated by the figure of speech. This is not formalism. This is operationalism of rhetoric. In the table here, + refers to addition, - refers to subtraction, - refers to transposition, and -substitution.This thesis falls into four chapters, the following is a brief introduction to each chapter:Chapter I deals with the present classification of figures of speech both at home and abroad. 1. The classification based on similarity. 2. The classification based on operated fields. 3. The classification based on operation devices. 4. The classification based on operated fields and devices. 5. The classification based on similarity, operated fields and devices. 6. The classification bas
引文
Cuddon, J. A. A Dictionary of Literary Terms. Penguin Books, 1976.
Genette, Gérard. Figures of Literary Discourse. Columbia University Press, 1982.
Gideon O. Burton. The Forest of Rhetoric. Brigham Young University, 1996.
Golden, James I. The Rhetoric of Western Thought. Kendall Hunt Pub. Co. , 1989.
Group μ. A General Rhetoric. The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1970.
Guinn, Dorothy M. & Marder, Daniel. A Spectrum of Rhetoric. Little Brown and Company, 1987.
Lanham, Richard A. A Handlist of Rhetorical Terms. Berkeley, 1990.
Ogden, C. K. & I. A. Richards. The Meaning of Meaning. Routeledge and Kegan Paul, Ltd. , 1923.
Richards, I. A. The Philosophy of Rhetoric, Oxford University Press, 1936.
Ricoeur, Paul. The Rule of Metaphor, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1978.
Wasaly, Ann. "Reviews" Rhetorica. California University Press, 1983.
Wilson, Raymond Jackson. Figures of Speech. Alfred A. Knopf, 1989.
Zeiger, Arthur. Encyclopedia of English, 1978.
Corbett, Edward P. J. Classical Rhetoric for the Modem Student. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Nash, Walter. Rhetoric the Wit of Persuasion. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd. , 1989.
Howell, Wilbur Samuel. Logic and Rhetoric in England 1500-1700. Princeton, N. J. , 1956.
John. Wilkinson and Purcell Weaver. The New Rhetoric. University of Notre Dame Press, 1969.
Zeiger. A. Encyclopedia of English. New York: Arco Publishing Company, Inc. . 1978.
Grolier Educational Staff. Encyclopedia Americana, Scholastic Library Publishing, 1997
O. Watson. Longman Modem English Dictionary, Longman Group Limited, 1976
Gale Group. Merit Students Encyclopedia, Gale Group, P. F. Colliers, Inc, 1991.
Macdonald. A. M. Chamber's Twentieth Century Dictionary, Chambers, 1977.
Macmillan. Macmillan Contemporary Dictionary, New York. Macmillan Publishing Company. 1979.
从莱庭，《英语修辞学新论》，济南出版社，1999。
文军，《英语修辞格辞典》，重庆大学出版社，1992。
徐鹏，《英语辞格》，商务印书馆，1996。
胡曙中，《英语修辞学》，上海外语教育出版社，2002。
李鑫华，《英语修辞格详论》，上海外语教育出版社，2000。
李国南，《辞格与词汇》，上海外语教育出版社，2001。
黄任，《英语修辞与写作》，上海外语教育出版社，1996。
冯翠华，《英语修辞大全》，外语教学与研究出版社，1995。
陈望道，《修辞学发凡》，上海外语教育出版社，2001。
杨鸿儒，《中国当代修辞学》，中国世界语出版社，1997。
张静，《语言语用语法》，文心出版社，1994。
吴为章，《实用语法修辞》，北京广播学院出版社，1993。
张菊坪，《现代汉语释要》，武汉大学出版社，1992。
张斌，《中华学生语法修辞辞典》，上海辞书出版社，1997。
Genette, Gérard. Figures of Literary Discourse. Columbia University Press, 1982.
Gideon O. Burton. The Forest of Rhetoric. Brigham Young University, 1996.
Golden, James I. The Rhetoric of Western Thought. Kendall Hunt Pub. Co. , 1989.
Group μ. A General Rhetoric. The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1970.
Guinn, Dorothy M. & Marder, Daniel. A Spectrum of Rhetoric. Little Brown and Company, 1987.
Lanham, Richard A. A Handlist of Rhetorical Terms. Berkeley, 1990.
Ogden, C. K. & I. A. Richards. The Meaning of Meaning. Routeledge and Kegan Paul, Ltd. , 1923.
Richards, I. A. The Philosophy of Rhetoric, Oxford University Press, 1936.
Ricoeur, Paul. The Rule of Metaphor, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1978.
Wasaly, Ann. "Reviews" Rhetorica. California University Press, 1983.
Wilson, Raymond Jackson. Figures of Speech. Alfred A. Knopf, 1989.
Zeiger, Arthur. Encyclopedia of English, 1978.
Corbett, Edward P. J. Classical Rhetoric for the Modem Student. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Nash, Walter. Rhetoric the Wit of Persuasion. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd. , 1989.
Howell, Wilbur Samuel. Logic and Rhetoric in England 1500-1700. Princeton, N. J. , 1956.
John. Wilkinson and Purcell Weaver. The New Rhetoric. University of Notre Dame Press, 1969.
Zeiger. A. Encyclopedia of English. New York: Arco Publishing Company, Inc. . 1978.
Grolier Educational Staff. Encyclopedia Americana, Scholastic Library Publishing, 1997
O. Watson. Longman Modem English Dictionary, Longman Group Limited, 1976
Gale Group. Merit Students Encyclopedia, Gale Group, P. F. Colliers, Inc, 1991.
Macdonald. A. M. Chamber's Twentieth Century Dictionary, Chambers, 1977.
Macmillan. Macmillan Contemporary Dictionary, New York. Macmillan Publishing Company. 1979.
从莱庭，《英语修辞学新论》，济南出版社，1999。
文军，《英语修辞格辞典》，重庆大学出版社，1992。
徐鹏，《英语辞格》，商务印书馆，1996。
胡曙中，《英语修辞学》，上海外语教育出版社，2002。
李鑫华，《英语修辞格详论》，上海外语教育出版社，2000。
李国南，《辞格与词汇》，上海外语教育出版社，2001。
黄任，《英语修辞与写作》，上海外语教育出版社，1996。
冯翠华，《英语修辞大全》，外语教学与研究出版社，1995。
陈望道，《修辞学发凡》，上海外语教育出版社，2001。
杨鸿儒，《中国当代修辞学》，中国世界语出版社，1997。
张静，《语言语用语法》，文心出版社，1994。
吴为章，《实用语法修辞》，北京广播学院出版社，1993。
张菊坪，《现代汉语释要》，武汉大学出版社，1992。
张斌，《中华学生语法修辞辞典》，上海辞书出版社，1997。
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |