英美文学相关论文3000字

Language and ThoughtLanguage and Thoughtby Dan Slobin of the University of California, BerkeleyNo one would disagree with the claim that language and thought interact in many significant There is great disagreement, however, about the proposition that each specific language has its own influence on the thought and action of its On the one hand, anyone who has learned more than one language is struck by the many ways in which languages differ from one But on the other hand, we expect human beings everywhere to have similar ways of experiencing the Comparisons of different languages can lead one to pay attention to 'universals'--the ways in which all languages are similar, and to 'particulars' --the ways in which each individual language, or type of language, is special, even Linguists and other social scientists interested in universals have formulated theories to describe and explain human language and human language behavior in general terms as species-specific capacities of human However, the idea that different languages may influence thinking in different ways has been present in many cultures and has given rise to many philosophical Because it is so difficult to pin down effects of a particular language on a particular thought pattern, this issue remains It comes in and out of fashion and often evokes considerable energy in efforts to support or refute Relativity and Determinism There are two problems to confront in this arena: linguistic relativity and linguistic Relativity is easy to In order to speak any language, you have to pay attention to the meanings that are grammatically marked in that For example, in English it is necessary to mark the verb to indicate the time of occurrence of an event you are speaking about: It's raining; It rained; and so In Turkish, however, it is impossible to simply say, 'It rained last night' This language, like many American Indian languages, has more than one past tense, depending on one's source of knowledge of the In Turkish, there are two past tenses--one to report direct experience and the other to report events that you know about only by inference or Thus, if you were out in the rain last night, you will say, 'It rained last night' using the past-tense form that indicates that you were a witness to the rain; but if you wake up in the morning and see the wet street and garden, you are obliged to use the other past-tense form--the one that indicates that you were not a witness to the rain Differences of this sort have fascinated linguists and anthropologists for They have reported hundreds of facts about 'exotic' languages, such as verbs that are marked or chosen according to the shape of an object that is being handled (Navajo) or for the relative ages of speaker and hearer (Korean) Such facts are grist for the mill of linguistic And, indeed, they can be found quite readily in 'nonexotic' languages as To cite a fact about English that is well known to linguists: It is not appropriate to say Richard Nixon has worked in Washington, but it is perfectly OK to say Gerald Ford has worked in W Why? English restricts the present perfect tense ('has worked') to assertions about people who are Exotic! Proponents of linguistic determinism argue that such differences between languages influence the ways people think--perhaps the ways in which whole cultures are Among the strongest statements of this position are those by Benjamin Lee Whorf and his teacher, Edward Sapir, in the first half of this century--hence the label, 'The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis', for the theory of linguistic relativity and Whorf proposed: 'We cut nature up, organize it into concepts, and ascribe significances as we do, largely because we are parties to an agreement to organize it in this way--an agreement that holds throughout our speech community and is codified in the patterns of our language' (Whorf, 1940; in Carroll, 1956, 213-4) And, in the words of Sapir: 'Human are very much at the mercy of the particular language which has become the medium of expression for their The fact of the matter is that the "real world" is to a large extent unconsciously built up on the language habits of the group' (Sapir, 1929; in Manlbaum, 1958, 162) Investigating Language and Thought How can such bold claims be substantiated beyond examination of individual languages themselves? If one takes the hypothesis seriously, it should be possible to show that Turks are more sensitive to evidence than are Americans, but that Americans are more aware of death than T Clearly, the hypothesis cannot be supported on so grand a Rather, experimental psychologists and cognitive anthropologists have sought to find small differences, on controlled tasks, between speakers of various Maybe Navajos are somewhat more sensitive to shapes of objects, for The results have been In most cases, human thought and action are overdetermined by an array of causes, so the structure of language may not play a central causal Linguistic determinism can best be demonstrated in situations in which language is the principal means of drawing people's attention to a particular aspect of For example, if you regularly speak a language in which you must pick a form of second-person address (you) that marks your social relationship to your interlocutor--such as Spanish tu ('you' for friends and family and for those socially subordinate) usted ('you' for those socially above in status or for those with whom you have no close connection) or French tu versus vous--you must categorize every person you talk to in terms of the relevant social (As a thought experiment of linguistic determinism, think of the categorizations of social relationships that would have to be made if Spanish became the common language of the United S) Going beyond thought experiments, some of the most convincing research demonstrating some degree of linguistic determinism is being conducted under the direction of Stephen C Levinson at the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics in Nijmegen, The N Levinson and his collaborators distinguish between languages that describe spatial relations in terms of the body (like English 'right/left', 'front/back') and those that orient to fixed points in the environment (like 'north/south/east/west' in some aboriginal Australian languages) In a language of the second type one would refer, for example, to 'your north shoulder' or 'the bottle at the west end of the table'; in narrating a past event, one would have to remember how the actions related to the compass Thus, in order to speak this type of language, you always have to know where you are with respect to the compass points, whether you are speaking or And Levinson's group have shown, in extensive cross-linguistic and cross-cultur studies, that this is, in fact, the Much more research needs to be done, but it is not likely that the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis will be supported in the strong form quoted For one, language is only one factor that influences cognition and For another, if the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis were really true, second language learning and translation would be far harder than they However, because language is so pervasive--and because we must always make cognitive decisions while speaking--weaker versions of the hypothesis will continue to attract scientific (For a lively debate on many of these issues, with much new evidence from several fields, read Gumperz and Levinson ) Suggested Readings Gumperz, J J, and Levinson, S C Rethinking linguistic Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University P Lucy, John A Language diversity and thought: A reformulation of the linguistic relativity Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University P Sapir, E "The status of linguistics as a science" Language 207- Reprinted in The selected writings of Edward Sapir in language, culture, and personality, by D G Mandelbaum, 160- Berkeley: University of California P Whorf, B L "Science and linguistics" Technology Review 42: 227-31, 247- Reprinted in Language, thought, and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf, by J B Carroll, 207- Cambridge, MA: The Technology Press of MIT/New York: W

英美文学方向的选题太多了啊，网上一搜一大堆，选一个你自己喜欢并感兴趣的就行了。　1、 透过《傲慢与偏见》看现代社会爱情观　　2、生与死的抗争--《厄舍古厦的倒塌》主题解读　　3、浅谈“欧·亨利式结尾”及其文学影响　　4、从宗教角度解读简爱的多重性格　　5、从女权主义角度剖析《小妇人》中的乔　　6、 “英雄”的陨落--悲剧美学角度分析《老人与海》　　7、 从《菊花》中看女主人公Elisa实现自我价值的障碍　　8、奉献与宽容---浅析《双城记》中的仁爱精神　　9、 《格列佛游记》中对理性的反思与批判　　10、浅析《警察和赞美诗》的戏剧化特色　　11、一场失败革命的反思---论《动物庄园》中所表现的象征意义　　12、论詹姆斯·乔伊斯《阿拉比》的精神顿悟　　13、从后印象主义角度解读《到灯塔去》中的双性同体观　　14、 从中西方道德观差异谈《伊利亚特》与《封神演义》人物品德　　15、 韦伯《猫》中的女性主义　　16、 浅析《儿子与情人》中的心理冲突　　17、浅析中西方喜剧文化---以《武林外传》和《老友记》为例　　18、从女性主义看《傲慢与偏见》中的女性形象　　19、《瓦尔登湖》中自然主义的现实意义　　20、 从男性角色解读《简爱》中的女性反抗意识　　21、论《荆棘鸟》中的女性意识　　22、 论劳伦斯《虹》中的异化　　23、《罗密欧与朱丽叶》与《梁祝》悲剧结局所体现的中西文化差异　　24、从《在路上》看五六十年代美国社会价值观　　25、 评希思克利夫被扭曲的心路历程　　26、试论马克·吐温短篇小说的幽默特色　　27、惠特曼的死亡哲学　　28、 论《呼啸山庄》--原始古朴与文明理性的交错色彩　　29、 论《了不起的盖茨比》中“二元主角”手法的运用　　30、透过小说《威廉·威尔逊》和《黑猫》看艾伦·坡的善恶观

论《洛丽塔》中纳博科夫的现代意识 (文化冲突)The Dispiriting Incompatibility of European and American CulturesThroughout Lolita, the interactions between European and American cultures result in perpetual misunderstandings and Charlotte Haze, an American, is drawn to the sophistication and worldliness of Humbert, a E She eagerly accepts Humbert not so much because of who he is, but because she is charmed by what she sees as the glamour and intellect of Humbert’s Humbert has no such reverence for C He openly mocks the superficiality and transience of American culture, and he views Charlotte as nothing but a simple-minded However, he adores every one of Lolita’s vulgarities and chronicles every detail of his tour of America—he enjoys the possibilities for freedom along the open American He eventually admits that he has defiled the country rather than the other way Though Humbert and Lolita develop their own version of peace as they travel together, their union is clearly not based on understanding or Lolita cannot comprehend the depth of Humbert’s devotion, which he overtly links to art, history, and culture, and Humbert will never truly recognize Lolita’s unwillingness to let him sophisticate Eventually, Lolita leaves Humbert for the American Quilty, who does not bore her with high culture or grand 偶然和无常纳博科夫的《洛丽塔》中的混沌 (心里和心理学方面的混乱)The Inadequacy of PsychiatryHumbert’s passion for Lolita defies easy psychological analysis, and throughout Lolita Humbert mocks psychiatry’s tendency toward simplistic, logical In the foreword to Lolita, John Ray, J, PD, claims that Humbert’s tale will be of great interest to psychiatry, but throughout his memoir Humbert does his best to discredit the entire field of study, heaping the most scorn on Freudian For example, he enjoys lying to the psychiatrists at the He reports mockingly that Pratt, the headmistress of Lolita’s school, diagnoses Lolita as sexually immature, wholly unaware that she actually has an overly active sex life with her By undermining the authority and logic of the psychiatric field, Nabokov demands that readers view Humbert as a unique and deeply flawed human being, but not an insane Humbert further thwarts efforts of scientific categorization by constantly describing his feelings for Lolita as an enchantment or spell, closer to magic than to He tries to prove that his love is not a mental disease but an enormous, strange, and uncontrollable emotion that resists easy Nabokov himself was deeply critical of psychiatry, and Lolita is, in a way, an attack on the 以《洛丽塔》为例分析文学内在价值与社会道德规范的冲突解析《洛丽塔》中主人公的悲剧命运论《洛丽塔》的悲剧意义(这段3个主题都有相关,但是不详细)Humbert and Lolita are both exiles, and, alienated from the societies with which they are familiar, they find themselves in ambiguous moral territory where the old rules seem not to Humbert chooses exile and comes willingly from Europe to America, while Lolita is forced into exile when Charlotte She becomes detached from her familiar community of Ramsdale and goes on the road with H Together, they move constantly and belong to no single fixed The tourists Humbert and Lolita meet on the road are similarly transient, belonging to a generic America rather than to a specific In open, unfamiliar territory, Humbert and Lolita form their own set of rules, where normal sexual and familial relationships become twisted and Both Humbert and Lolita have become so disconnected from ordinary society that neither can fully recognize how morally depraved their actions Humbert cannot see his own monstrosity, and Lolita shows only occasional awareness of herself of a Though Humbert sweeps Lolita away so that they can find a measure of freedom, their exile ultimately traps Lolita is bound to Humbert because she has nowhere else to go, and though Humbert dreams of leaving America with Lolita, he eventually accepts that he will stay in America until he Though each of them undergoes one final exile, Lolita to Dick Schiller and Humbert to prison, it is clear that they are first and foremost exiled from their own selves, an exile so total that they could never return to their original places in the worlds they once Exile in L