語篇中的銜接和語篇主旨大意的關係 （簡體書）

李元科，1982年出生于廣東。2006年獲得英國利物浦大學對外英語教學專業碩士學位。2007年以優異成績考取該校博士研究生，師從國際著名的語篇分析專家Michael Hoey教授和功能語言學專家Geoff Thompson教授，研究語篇中的銜接和語篇主旨大意的關系。2011年獲博士學位。現在華南師范大學外國語言文化學院任教。

《功能語言學論叢:語篇中的銜接和語篇主旨大意的關系》由李元科編寫，中山大學出版社出版，是“功能語言學論叢”系列之一，研究當前語言學最熱門的課題之一：語篇中的銜接。具有科學性和實用性，適合從事相關研究工作的人員參考閱讀。

Figures
Tables
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 A short review of studies on cohesion and of aspects of cohesion that have not been explored sufficiently
1.2 The aim of my present study
1.3 The organization of the book
Chapter 2 Literature Background
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Hasan（1984）and Halliday and Hasan（1985）
2.3 The limitations of Hasan's method and improvements
2.4 Parsons（1991a，1991b）
2.5 Hoey（1991）
2.6 Scott's KeyWords tool
2.7 Hoey's（2001）Textual Interaction
2.8 Mann and Thompson's（1988a，1988b）Rhetorical Structure Theory Conclusions
Chapter 3 Research Question 1 and the Method
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Research question 1 and the data
3.3 The method used to explore research question
3.3.1 Classifying processes in a text into chains according to the commonality of meanings they express
3.3.2 Unpacking in text nominalizations that contain nominalised processes included in chains
3.3.3 Identifying recurrent nuclei in text
3.3.4 Ranking the recurrent nuclei in text in descending order of frequency
3.3.5 Classifying processes in summaries into chains according to the commonality of meanings they express
3.3.6 Unpacking in summaries nominalimfions that contain nominalised processes included in chains
3.3.7 Identifying recurrent nuclei in summaries
3.3.8 Comparing the results in A4 with that in B3 to identifythe recurrent nuclei in text that are repeated in two or more summaries of the text i
Chapter 4 Findings with Regard to Research Question 1
4.1 Introduction
4.2 The results with regard to research question 1
4.3 The characteristics of the recurrent nuclei in texts
that are important to the texts' meanings
4.3.1 Category 1
4.3.2 Categories 1（c），2 and 3（b）
4.3.3 Subcategory 3（a）
4.3.4 The probability of presence in the leads of the recurrent nuclei that are important to texts' meanings
4.3.5 Category4
4.4 Conclusions
Chapter 5 Research Question 2 and Findings
5.1 Introduction
5.2 The definitions of type A and type B nuclei
5.3 Research question 2 and the method of exploring the question
5.4 The results with regard to research question 2
5.5 Examining the 'maverick' cases
5.5.1 The seven initial occurrences of type A material nuclei that express causes
5.5.2 The four initial occurrences of type A material nuclei that are part of the content of saying of verbal nuclei
5.5.3（a）The initial occurrences of two type A material nuclei that contextualize
5.5.3（b）The six initial occurrences of type B material nuclei that also contextualize
5.5.4 Proposition splitting
5.5.5 Inference
5.5.6 Proposition integration
5.5.7 Reduction
5.5.8 The remaining and final example
5.6 Conclusions
Chapter 6 Conclusions
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Areas of innovation and contribution of my present study
6.3 Patterns of lexis in a text and the meaning of the text
6.4 Information distribution in the leads
6.5 The strategies that summary writers often use to write summaries for hard news texts
6.6 Conjunctive relations and the meaning of a text
6.7 Future research avenues
Appendix A
Appendix B
References

Enhancing 'so,yet,then': one clause expands another by embellishing around it: qualifying it with some circumstantial feature of time,place,cause or condition.
Martin(1992)applies these three types of relation toclause,nominal group and verbal group,respectively.The following paragraphs give a synopsis of Martin's(1992)discussion of the realizations of these three types of relation in clause,nominal group and verbal group.
Elaboration is used to define message parts(i.e.the unit of analysis).In clause,verbal group and nominal group,items standing in elaboration relation are combined to form a single message part.In the discussion below,following Martin(1992),'=' indicates that the items placed on its two sides stand in an elaborating relation and together constitute a single message part.
In a clause,elaboration is realized through two kinds of structure.One is 'Process=Range: process' structure,such as take=a walk,because 'it involves just one meaning,which is realized through two lexical items,orie elaborating the other'(Martin,1992: 311).The other is 'a class of locative phrases which can be interpreted as subclassifying the Process whose ritual destination they provide.These are associated with verbs ofmotion(especially go and come); their destination is realized through an unmodified nominal head(e.g.come = to tea)'(Martin,1992: 313,his example).