英语语言学课程论文格式

外国语学院英语论文格式规范(附样例) A Contrastive Study between English and Chinese Idioms（题目：二号，黑体，加粗，居中,除了英语小词外，其他单词首字母都要大写；另外：除了题目外，论文中所有英文的字体均采用“Times New Roman”）外国语学院 2001级英语教育1030120011XX XXX 指导老师：XXX（学院、专业、学号、作者姓名、指导教师姓名（小四号宋体字，加粗），依次排印在论文题目下，上空二行，居中）【Abstract】 This paper centers on the different expressions of ……（英文摘要：上空二行；题目采用五号“Times New Roman”字体，加粗，置于粗体方括号【】内，顶格放置；随后的内容与前面的粗体方括号【】之间空一格，不用其他任何标点符号；采用五号“Times New Roman”字体，不加粗；单倍行距。）【Key Words】 idiom; comparison; English; Chinese （英文关键词：题目采用五号“Times New Roman”字体，加粗，两个单词的首字母要大写，置于粗体方括号【】内，顶格放置；随后的内容与前面的粗体方括号【】之间空一格，不用任何其他标点符号，采用五号“Times New Roman”字体，不加粗，除了专有名词外，其他单词的首字母不大写，各单词之间用分号“；”隔开，分号之后空一格；最后一个关键词之后不用任何标点符号；单倍行距。）1. Introduction (顶格，除了第一个单词及专有名词外，其他单词首字母都不要大写；标题最后不用任何标点符号，上空两行) In both English and Chinese, …. So, this essay is trying to focus on the differences between Chinese and English idoms in terms of their essential meaning, customary usage and typical expression (Chang Liang, 1993:44; Li Guangling, 1999). (段落第一行缩进4个英文字符；夹注的标注法：出现在夹注中的作者必须与文后的参考文献形成一一对应关系；注意一个或多个作者间的标点符号，时间、页码等的标注法；另外，汉语参考文献的作者要以拼音形式出现，不能出现汉语姓氏；夹注出现在标点符号之前)2. The similarities between English idioms and Chinese idioms In English, …. And it can be clearly seen in the below examples: (1) I don’t know。我不知道。 (2) I am not a poet. 我不是诗人。 (正文中的例子以（1），（2）…为序号排列，直至最后一个例子；而①, ②…则为脚注或尾注的上标序号)…3. The differences between English idioms and Chinese The characteristics of English idioms（正文章节序号编制：章的编号：1. ，2.， 3.，…；节的编号：…，…；小节的编号为：, …。小节以下层次，采用希腊数字加括号为序，如（i），（ii）…；之后再采用字母加括号，如(a), (b),…;每章题目左顶格，小四号字，加粗；每节（及小节以下）题目左顶格，小四号字，不加粗但要斜体；所有章节的题目都单独一行，最后不加任何标点符号） …. In conclusion, …. The characteristics of Chinese idioms …. Feng (1998) found some problems as shown in the following examples (注意此句中夹注的另一种写法): (9) We never know the worth of water till the well is dry. (10) People take no thought of the value of time until they lose it. …. The analysis of the differences between English and Chinese idioms …(i) …. ….(ii) …. …. 4. Conclusion ….Bibliography (References) （小四号，加粗，后面不加任何标点符号）Sanved, ed. The Oxford book of American literary anecdotes[C]. New York: OUP, 1981.常亮，“关于英语的偏离否定”[J] 。《外国语文》，1993，4：44。冯树健，“否定之否定新说”[J] 。《英语辅导》，1998，6：11。李光陵，“不完全否定浅析” [J] 。《大学英语》，2000，30：30。（论文最后的参考文献中所有文献的排列顺序：尾注：按照编号顺序。夹注：英文文献----网络文献----汉语文献，各个文献的先后以作者的姓氏字母或拼音为序，不用单独加序号或编号；每个参考文献的第二行起必须缩进4个英文字符；倍行距；另外，与文中的夹注一一对应；不同类型的参考文献写法请参照写作指南中附件2的内容）(以下内容单独一页)汉英习语的对比研究（题目：二号，黑体，加粗，居中）【摘 要】 汉英的习语问题是个既简单有复杂………………（中文摘要：上空二行；题目采用黑体五号字，加粗，置于粗体方括号【】内，缩进2个汉字字符，方括号中的“摘要”两个字之间空一格；随后的内容与前面的粗体方括号【】之间空一格，不用其他任何标点符号，采用楷体五号字，不加粗，单倍行距； 第二行起要顶格；字数约400字，约8-10行；）【关键词】 习语；对比；英语；汉语（中文关键词：题目采用黑体五号字，加粗，置于粗体方括号【】内，缩进2个汉字字符；随后的内容与前面的粗体方括号【】之间空一格，不用其他任何标点符号，采用楷体五号字，不加粗，单倍行距；各单词之间用分号“；”隔开，分号之后不空格；最后一个关键词之后不用任何标点符号；单倍行距）一、 基本格式：论文只能打印在每页纸的一面上，不得打印在正反面上。论文纸的大小尺寸为A4纸打印。侧面装订。二、题名页：论文题名页上打印格式基本相近，中、英文对照，中文题目页在第一页，英文题目页在第二页。一般由顶部往下三分之一页处打印论文题目，论文题目都用大写字母，下隔八行打印论文调查者姓名、所属电大，再下隔八行视实际情况打上提交日期XX年XX月XX日以及课程名称：论文项目设计上述各项内容都应打印在论文题名页的中间部位。三、摘要及关键词页摘要及关键词页上打印格式同论文题名页，中、英文对照，中文题目页在上，英文题目页在下。一般根据提要的内容多少安排打印。中文题目摘要采用宋体一号，加粗，摘要正文部分采用宋体，小四号。关键字题目部分采用宋体三号，加粗，关键字短语部分采用宋体，小四号。英文题目摘要采用Times New Roman字体，字号为一号，加粗，摘要正文部分采用Times New Roman字体，字号为小四。四、致谢页学员可以自选致谢页，一般不要求写中文。英文大标题采用Times New Roman字体，字号为一号，加粗，正文部分采用Times New Roman字体，字号为小四。五、目录页英文大标题采用Times New Roman字体，字号为一号，加粗，小标题部分统一采用Times New Roman字体，字号为三号，加粗。注意在右方注明对应的页号，中间虚线连接。六、正文页论文的正文需隔行打印，正文采用Times New Roman字体，字号为小四。大标题为Times New Roman字体，字号为三号、加粗字。副标题为Times New Roman字体，字号为三号、加粗。七、尾注、参考文献页与附录页尾注、参考文献页与附录页（大标题采用Times New Roman字体，字号为一号，加粗）正文部分如尾注、参考文献目录与附录可不必隔行打印，字体为Times New Roman小四。

一.关于本专业毕业论文的选题 英语专业本科生毕业论文选题可以在三个大的方向中进行，即英语文学，语言学和翻译学。各个大方向中又可以选择小的方向，具体解释如下： 1.英语文学：选择英语文学的毕业论文选题可以从三个方向进行：国别文学研究、文学批评理论研究和比较文学研究。 在进行国别文学研究选题时，一般选取英国文学或美国文学中的某一经典作家（如海明威），某一经典作品（如《双城记》），某一写作手法（如象征手法的运用）或某一文学思潮（如浪漫主义运动）作深入研究。但在选择作家或作品时最好选择在文学史上作为经典的作家或作品。有个别流行作家或作品极富盛名，容易引起学生的兴趣，如《飘》或《荆棘鸟》，学生有强烈愿望选择它们作为研究对象。在不可避免上述情况时，应该尽可能地挖掘作品内在的深刻含义，不能流于肤浅的分析。 文学批评理论的选题一般不太适合英语专业本科生，因为该理论知识的学习在英语专业研究生阶段，本科生一般不具备文学批评理论的知识结构。这个方向的选题可以有关某一文学批评理论,一文学批评术语的阐释或某两种或以上的文学批评理论的比较。 比较文学研究就是将两个以上的作家或作品进行比较。这两个作品或作家可以是同一国别的（如“雪莱与拜伦的诗歌比较”），也可以是不同国别的（如《牡丹亭》与《罗密欧与朱丽叶》） 2.语言学：选择语言学的毕业论文选题可以在两个大的方向进行：普通语言学和应用语言学。 普通语言学的研究就是对于英语语言的任何一个方面的研究，如对一种词性、或一种时态、或拼写、语调等等方面的研究（如“一般现在时及其交际功能”）。 应用语言学包括教学法的研究和其它一些新兴的应用语言学分支的研究。师范专业或本身从事教师职业的学生选择教学法方向的较多。在这个方向选题，也要避免过大范围的选题，而应对一个具体问题进行研究，最重要的是要结合教学实践或实验。这个方向的好的选题有：“个性与英语教学”，“方言对英语学习的影响”等。 3.翻译学：翻译学的选题一般可以在两个方向上进行：翻译理论以及翻译活动。对翻译理论的研究就是探讨某一种翻译理论等等。相比之下，对翻译活动的研究更多一些，这些选题可以是对一种语言现象的翻译、或一种修辞格的翻译的研究（如“汉语成语的英译”）。应该注意的是，在对翻译活动作研究时，往往需要某种翻译理论支撑，总结规律，并对这一活动作出评价，要避免仅仅时例子的罗列。 二.英语专业毕业论文格式要求 学位论文包括前置、主体、附录等三个部分。 （一）前置 1．英文封面：由论文英文题目、解释、作者、指导老师姓名和职称、时间组成。 2．目录：由论文的中、英文摘要、篇、章、条、款以及参考书目、附录等序号、题名和页码组成，排在英文封面之后另页。 3．中、英文内容摘要：摘要是论文的内容不加注释和评论的简短陈述，宜以最简洁的语言介绍论文的概要、作者的突出论点、新见解或创造性成果以及实验方法、数据或结论，是一篇完整的短文，可以独立使用，中文摘要一般在200字左右 4关键词：关键词是用以表示全文主题内容信息的单词或术语。为便于文献检索，学位论文应注明三至五个具有代表意义中、外文“关键词”，这些关键词就是论文的中心词，以显著的字符另起一行，分别排在中、外文摘要的左下方。各关键词之间用“分号”隔开。外文关键词应与中文关键词相对应。 （二）主体部分 主题部分包括引言（Introduction）、正文(Body)、结论(Conclusion)、参考文献(Bibliography)。主体部分必须由另页右页开始。 1．引言：主要说明研究工作的目的、涉及范围、相关领域的前人研究成果和知识空白、研究设想、研究方法等方面的概述、理论意义和实用价值等。 2．正文：论文的正文是核心部分，占主要篇幅。一般论文选题需要从几个方面来论述或论证。要求论据充分，论点明确。行文必须实事求是，客观真切，准确完备，合乎逻辑，层次分明，简练可读。正文部分要有分级标题，章、条、款、项的序号编码方法，采用阿拉伯数分级系列编号法，论文中的章、条、款、项依次排列，依次从1开始，连续编号，中间用“．”相隔，最末级编号之后不加点。示例： 1． 2．…… …… .… 3．结论：学位论文的结论是最终的、总体的结论，它是对正文部分的论述的概述，也可以在结论或讨论中提出建议、研究设想、尚待解决的问题等。 4．参考文献：写作学位论文过程中，阅读或运用过某些文献所列出的书目清单，置于正文之后，另页开始。参考文献的著录按原文献语种为原则。 （1）文献目录应另页书写，外文文献排前，中文文献排后。外文文献书名须用斜体。 （2）文献目录一律按作者姓氏汉语拼音或外文字母顺序排列。 （3）每条文献必须顶格写，回行时空两字或五个英语字母。 （4）将各文献的类型代号（即文献英文名的首字母）注明在文献之后： 专著[M] 学位论文[D] 论文集〔C〕 报纸文章〔N〕 期刊文章〔J〕 报告[R] 专利 [P] 专著、论文集的析出文献[A] 其他未说明文件 〔Z〕 电子文献中光盘图书 [M／CD]（MONOGRAPH ON CD） 网上期刊〔J/OL〕（serial online） 5．文内所引文献：要求附夹注，应在引文后加括号注明作者姓名（英文只注姓），出版年和引文页码。若为转引文献，则加quoted in 字样。 例：（王佐良，1982：38） （Newmark，8：26-33） 6.文献中列出的文献应该与正文中标注的文献一一对应。正文中没有出现的，不应出现在参考文献中。 （三）附录部分 附录包括所有与论文有关的补充材料，如图表或照片等。（A，其实这我都不懂哦，只是帮你找一下，转过来的而已，不用太感动拉，我会不好意思的，哈哈！）

语言学可以写的内容很多。基本上不外乎以下一些:一，语音类如语音的属性、音韵与语音的关系、强弱、轻浊、音节等二，词汇类如词汇形态学，语义学，构词，词化，语义场等等三，语法类如语法结构，层次，修辞等四，句子类如分析句子的各种成分，语序，基本句型等五，语篇类如连贯性，思维逻辑性，结构修辞，主体与客体意识等这方面的教材很多，就看你的要求了。现在英语与汉语的对比语言学和对比文学比较热，从这方面下手也不错。

转摘More and more scholars are now showing an interest in adopting linguistic approaches to translation studies. Between 1949 and 1989, an incomplete survey by the author revealed that there were only about 30 textbook passages discussing the relationship between linguistics and translation, including aspects of general linguistics, pragmatics, stylistics, text linguistics, rhetoric and machine translation. From 1990 to 1994, there was an incredible increase in the number of passages looking at translation from a linguistic point of view. Almost 160 articles published over these five years concerned translation and general linguistics, stylistics, comparative linguistics, semantics, pragmatics, sociolinguistics, text linguistics, rhetoric, etc. New terms such as discourse analysis, hermeneutics, dynamic equivalence, deep structure and surface structure, context, theme and rheme, cooperative principles, to mention just a few, appeared in the field of translation studies. We can definitely identify a trend of applying linguistics theories to translation studies in these years. Today, we are at the point of questioning whether linguistics is a necessary part of translation. In recent years, some scholars who are in favour of free translation, have repeatedly raised this question to the public and appealed for an end to the linguistic approach to translation. Some firmly believe that translation is an art and that therefore linguistics is neither useful nor helpful. Such a claim is wrong if we look at translation as a whole, including scientific translation where meanings are rigid and restricted and the degree of freedom is limited. Flexibility, in this case, is neither required nor appreciated. But even in literary translation, linguistics is hardly a burden. Wang Zongyan pointed out that « If one sees linguistics as a body of rules regulating language, translators most probably will yawn with boredom. If it signifies the use of words and locutions to fit an occasion, there is nothing to stop translators from embracing linguistics » (Wang 1991: 38). The controversy over « literal » versus « free » translation has a long history, with convincing supporters on each side. For example, ancient Western scholars like Erasmus, Augustine, and others were in favour of literal translation. Among early Chinese translators, Kumarajiva is considered to be of the free school, while Xuan Zuang appears as literal and inflexible. In modern China, Yan Fu advocated hermeneutic translation, while Lu Xun preferred a clumsy version to one that was free but inexact. There is nothing wrong in any of these stances. When these translators emphasized free translation they never denied the possibility of literal translation, and vice versa. Problems only arise when the discussion turns to equivalent translations. The problem of equivalence has caused much controversy. Some people believed that there could be an equivalence of language elements independent of the setting in which they of occurred. Based on this assumption, some « literal » translators tried to decompose a text into single elements in hopes of finding equivalents in the target language. This is a naive idea. Jakobson (1971: 262) notes that « Equivalence in difference is the cardinal problem of language and the pivotal concern of linguistics. » He does not refer to « equivalence » but to « equivalence in difference » as the cardinal problem. Nida was also misunderstood by many for his notion of « equivalence, » which he took to mean that « Translating consists in reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source-language message, first in terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style » (1969: 12). He further concluded that « Absolute equivalence in translating is never possible » (1984: 14). De Beaugrande and Dressler believed that the success or failure of either free or literal approaches was uncertain: an unduly « literal » translation might be awkward or even unintelligible, while an unduly « free » one might make the original text disintegrate and disappear altogether. To them, equivalence between a translation and an original can only be realized in the experience of the participants (cf. de Beaugrande and Dressler 1981: 216-217). Catford (1965: 27) expressed the same concern that equivalent translation is only « an empirical phenomenon, discovered by comparing SL and TL texts. » In citing the above examples, I have absolutely no intention of insisting on untranslatability. What I mean is that a translator should incorporate his or her own experience and processing activities into the text: solving the problems, reducing polyvalence, explaining away any discrepancies or discontinuities. Linguistic knowledge can help us treat different genres in different ways, always with an awareness that there are never exact equivalences but only approximations. Therefore, amplification and simplification become acceptable. If we agree that texts can be translated, then, in what way does linguistics contribute to translation? To answer this question, we must look at the acceptance of western linguistics in China and its influence on translation. Systematic and scientific study of the Chinese language came into being only at the end of the last century, when Ma Jianzhong published a grammar book Mashi Wentong «马氏文通» in 1898, which was the first in China and took the grammar of Indo-European languages as its model. The study of language was, in turn, influenced by translation studies in China. In Mashi Wenton, the main emphasis is on the use of morphology, which takes up six-sevenths of the book. Influenced by the dominant trend of morphological studies, a word was regarded as the minimum meaningful unit, and a sentence was therefore the logical combination of words of various specific types. Translation was, then, principally based on the unit of the word. In the West, Biblical translation provided a very good example, just as the translation of Buddhist scriptures did in China. Not until the end of the 19th century did some linguists come to realize that sentences were not just the summary of the sequenced words they contained. The Prague School, founded in the 1920s, made a considerable contribution to the study of syntax. According to the analytic approach of the Functional Perspective of the Prague School, a sentence can be broken down into two parts: theme and rheme. Theme is opposed to rheme in a manner similar to the distinction between topic and comment, and is defined as the part of a sentence which contributes least to advancing the process of communication. Rheme, on the other hand, is the part of a sentence which adds most to advancing the process of communication and has the highest degree of communicative dynamism. These two terms help enlighten the process of translating Chinese into English. In the mid-1950s, the study of syntax peaked with the Chomsky's establishment of transformational-generative grammar. This theory of the deep structure and surface structure of language influenced translation tremendously. Nida relied heavily on this theory in developing his « analyzing-transfering-reconstructing » pattern for translation. Some Chinese linguists, in the meantime, tried to raise language studies to a higher plane. Li Jinxi (1982) enlarged the role of sentence studies in his book A New Chinese Grammar, two thirds of which was devoted to discussing sentence formation or syntax. He writes that « No words can be identified except in the context of a sentence. » The study was then improved by other grammarians, including Lu Shuxiang, Wang Li. With the development of linguistic studies, translation based on the unit of the sentence was put forward by some scholars. It was Lin Yu-Tang who first applied the theory to translation in his article « On Translation. » He claimed that « translation should be done on the basis of the sentence [...] What a translator should be faithful to is not the individual words but the meaning conveyed by them » (Lin 1984: r 3). The importance of context in the understanding of a sentence was therefore emphasized. Chao Yuanren, a Chinese scholar and professor at Harvard University, criticized scholars and translators who tended to forget this point and take language for something independent and self-sufficient. In fact, it is obvious that when we translate a sentence, we depend on its context; when we interpret an utterance we rely on the context of the speech (cf. Chao 1967). When a sentence is removed from the text, it usually becomes ambiguous due to the lack of context. Therefore, translation becomes difficult. In the 1960s, people began to realize that the study of language based on sentences was not even sufficient. A complete study should be made of the whole text. A simple sentence like « George passed » may have different interpretations in different contexts. If the context is that of an examination, it means George did well on a test; in a card game it would indicate that George declined his chance to bid; in sports it would mean the ball reached another player. Without a context, how could we decide on a translation? Linguists therefore shifted their attention to the study of texts and to discourse analysis. Text linguistics have become increasingly popular since that time. Van Dijk was a pioneer in this field, and his four-volume edition of the Handbook of Discourse Analysis is of great value. Halliday's Cohesion in English and Introduction to Functional Grammar help us to better understand the English language on a textual level. It is worth noting that de Beaugrande and Dressler (1981) provided an overall and systematic study of text, which is useful to translation studies. De Beaugrande actually wrote a book called Factors in a Theory of Poetic Translating in 1978. The book did not become very popular as it confined the discussion to translating poetry. At the same time, books on a linguistic approach to translation were introduced into China, such as the works of Eugene Nida, Peter Newmarks, . Catford, Georges Mounin, and others. These books gave a great push to the application of linguistic theories to translation studies in China. Textual or discoursive approaches to the study of translation could not keep pace with the development of text linguistics. Some studies remained on the syntactic or semantic level, though even there textual devices were employed. In talking about the translation units of word and text, Nida wrote: ... average person naively thinks that language is words, the common tacit assumption results that translation involves replacing a word in language A with a word in language B. And the more « conscientious » this sort of translation is, the more acute. In other words, the traditional focus of attention in translation was on the word. It was recognized that that was not a sufficiently large unit, and therefore the focus shifted to the sentence. But again, expert translators and linguists have been able to demonstrate that individual sentences, in turn, are not enough. The focus should be on the paragraph, and to some extent on the total discourse. (Nida and Tabber 1969: 152) From that statement we can see that Nida regards a discourse as something larger than a paragraph, as an article with a beginning and an ending. Nida himself never applied text linguistics to translation, and there might be some confusion if we use his term in our interpretation of discourse, because discourse analysis is not merely a study based on a larger language structure. Some Chinese scholars did make the effort to apply text linguistics to the theory and practice of translation. Wang Bingqin's article (1987) was the first academic paper of this sort. He stated his aim to study and discover the rules governing the internal structure of a text in light of text linguistics. He analyzed numerous examples using textual analysis, but unfortunately, all the samples he collected were descriptions of scenery or quotations from the books of great scholars--no dialogue, no illocutionary or perlocutionary forces in the language. He failed to provide a variety of examples. For this reason, his research findings are largely restricted to rhetorical texts in ancient China (cf. Wang 1981; Luo 1994). Scholars like He Ziran applied pragamatics to translation. He's article (1992) put forth two new terms, « pragmalinguistics » and « socio-pragmatics » which, in translation, refer respectively to « the study of pragmatic force or language use from the viewpoint of linguistic sources » and to « the pragmatic studies which examine the conditions on language use that derive from the social and cultural situation. » He discusses the possibility of applying the pragmatic approach to translation in order to achieve a pragmatic equivalent effect between source and target texts; that is, to reproduce the message carried by the source language itself, as well as the meaning carried by the source language within its context and culture. In this article he tries to distinguish « pragma-linguistics » from « socio-pragmatics » but finally admits that « Actually, a clear line between pragma-linguistics and socio-pragmatics may sometimes be difficult to draw. » Still he insists that the application of the pragmatic approach to translation is helpful and even necessary. Ke Wenli (1992) argued that semantics, which in a broad sense combines semantics and pragmatics, should be studied to help understand, explain and solve some of the problems encountered in translation. In this article, he examines four semantic terms--« sense and reference, » « hyponomy, » « changes of meaning » and « context »--giving many examples to illusrate the importance of having some general knowledge of semantics and of understanding the relationship between semantics and translation. This article is clearly written and readers can easily draw inspiration from it. These linguistics approaches shed new lights on the criteria of « faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance » defined by Yan Fu. Chinese scholars began to criticize the vagueness of these three criteria and endeavored to give them concrete significance through the theories of western linguistics. The result is that the content of these three traditional criteria has been greatly enriched, especially by the effect equivalence theory, which in a broad sense means that the target language should be equivalent to the source language from a semantic, pragmatic, and stylistic point of view. But we are still unable to evaluate translations in a very scientific way. Therefore, Chinese scholars like Fan Shouyi, Xu Shenghuan and Mu Lei embarked on quantitative analyses of translations and used the fuzzy set theory of mathematics in accomplishing their analysis. Fan published several articles on this field of study. His 1987 and 1990 articles evaluate translations according to a numerical quantity of faithfulness. Xu's article « A Mathematical Model for Evaluating a Translation's Quality » presents a normal mathematical model. He states that it is difficult to produce an absolutely accurate evaluation of translations with this model because of the uncertainty and randomness of man's thought process. Making such analysis more accurate and objective would require further research. The unit in translation is a hard nut to crack. Without solving this problem, no research in translation studies will ever be sufficient. To date, very few people have focused their research on this area. Nida holds that the unit should be the sentence, and in a certain sense, the discourse. Barkhudarov (1993: 40), Soviet linguist and translation theorist, suggests that: translation is the process of transforming a speech product (or text) produced in one language into a speech product (or text) in another language. [...] It follows that the most important task of the translator who carries out the process of transformation, and of the theorist who describes or creates a model for that process, is to establish the minimal unit of translation, as it is generally called, the unit of translation in the source text. Though he notes the importance of the unit of translation in a text and considers that this unit can be a unit on any level of language, he fails to point out what a text is and how it might be measured in translation. Halliday's notion of the clause might be significant in this case. To him, a clause is a basic unit. He distinguishes three functions of a clause: textual, interpersonal and ideational. According to Halliday, these functions are not possessed by word or phrase. But he is not quite successful in analyzing the relationship between clause and text (cf. Halliday 1985). In China, some people have tried to solve this problem. Wang Dechun (1987: 10) more or less shares Bakhudarov's view that the translation unit cannot be confined just to sentences. In some ways, the phoneme, word, phrase, sentence, paragraph, or even text can all serve as a unit. At this point, we cannot find anything special in treating text translation except for having text as the highest level among translation units. This is not the aim of text linguistics or discourse analysis. If we want to apply these to the theory and practice of translation, we will require a textual approach.

本科生英语论文 范文

范文一：英语本科 毕业 论文

The Spirit of Revolt of Tess --Study in Tess of the D'Urbervilles

Thesis statement:

Everyone knows that Tess’s life is a great tragedy, but she is still a courageous woman who dares to fight by all means. In order to defeat the unfortunate fate she always resists the decadent society, the traditional concept, and the hypocrisy religion.

Outline

Ⅰ.Brief Introduction to Tess of the d'Urbervilles

A. Women’s role in industrial movements during 19th century in England

B. A brief commentary of the novel

1. the writer --Thomas hardy

2. general introduction of the novel

Ⅱ.Tess’s spirit of revolt all through her life

A. Tess’s fight to the moribund society

1. the moribund society

2. Tess’s fight to the moribund society

B. Tess’s resistance to the traditional moral concept

1. the traditional moral concept

2. Tess’s resistance to the traditional moral concept

C. Tess’s resistance to the hypocritical religion

hypocritical religion in that time

2. Tess’s resistance to the hypocritical religion

D. Tess’s resistance to the unfortunate marriage

’s unfortunate marriage

2. Tess’s resistance to the unfortunate marriage

Ⅲ.Conclusion: In a word, Tess has shown a powerful woman's image to common people with her unyielding spirit of revolt. She, to the moribund society, traditional old morals, hypocritical religion, capitalist marriage system, has carried on the strongest revealing and criticism. Her kindhearted enlightenment, noble emotion, strong personality, and her resistance in imbuing all rooted in the hearts of the people forever, worth savoring.

Abstract

This paper mainly focuses on the spirit of revolt of Tess. First of all, this paper begins with a brief introduction to the novel. Then, this paper makes a brief commentary of the novel. Moreover, it concentrates on :(1) Tess’s fight to the moribund society. (2) Tess’s resistance to the traditional moral concept. (3) Tess’s resistance to the hypocritical religion. (4) Tess’s resistance to the unfortunate marriage. And at last the paper reveals that Tess is actually a character with the spirit of revolt all through her life.

key words:tragedy,Spirit of revolt,industrial movement,unfortunate fate

内容提要

本文研究的是小说主人公“苔丝”的“反抗精神”。首先，本文对小说的背景做了介绍。然后，对文本进行简要评论。再次，本文主要从以下四个方面对文本主人公“苔丝”的“反抗精神”进行集中讨论：(1) 苔丝对腐朽社会的抗争;(2) 苔丝对传统的道德观念的反抗;(3) 苔丝对伪善的宗教的反抗;(4) 苔丝对不幸婚姻的反抗。最后，揭示出苔丝整个人生经历中的反抗精神。

关键词：悲剧,反抗精神,工业运动,不幸命运

范文二：英语专业毕业论文格式要求

1、主要任务

毕业论文写作是完成本科教学计划、实现本科培养目标的重要阶段，是英语人才培养不可或缺的重要环节，是英语专业本科教学计划的重要组成部分，是培养学生综合应用所学的基本理论、基础知识和基本技能，并分析和解决实际问题的重要途径，是对学生进行科学研究的初步训练。毕业论文是学生大学毕业前的最后学习阶段，是英语教学深化和升华的重要过程;是对学生的英语实践技能、英语 语文知识 及其他相关学科知识、综合素质、研究与创新能力进行检验考核的重要手段;是学生学士学位资格认证的重要依据;是衡量、评估英语专业教学质量与水平的重要内容之一。

2、知识要求

英语专业的毕业论文按专业方向的不同可分为“文学”、“语言及语言学研究”、“语言教学”、“翻译研究”和“ 文化 与跨文化”等不同类别。按论文性质的不同，又可分为理论型研究论文、应用型研究论文、综述型论文和研究 报告 型论文。每个专业方向都可以有这4种不同的类型。

(1)理论型研究论文指对已有的语言、文学、翻译、教学、文化等学科领域的理论性和应用性的研究成果，在翔实、可靠的事实材料的基础上进行有一定新意的探讨，这种新意可包括新的命题、新的视角、新的材料、新的 方法 、新的论证、新的结论。理论型研究应熟识与了解现有的科学观点、结论和评价，并进行消化、吸收，针对现有理论中的不足、不确切和未涉及之处进行局部的修正、改进、补充或完善。写理论型研究论文的学生要有较好的理论准备，能够熟练运用已学的理论知识，正确、科学地分析、解决论文撰写过程中出现的各种具体的理论性问题，在教师的指导下发现、提出理论性问题并对某一具体理论提出自己的看法和意见。

(2)应用型研究论文指以实际应用为目的，探讨已有的知识在实践中应用的可能性，或运用已有的研究成果探索应用的新途径。应用型研究必须与教学、研究或社会相结合，重点在于如何运用现有的知识，提出、分析、论证或解决在实践中出现的各种新问题，作出有参考或应用价值的结论。选择写应用型研究论文的学生要有一定的理论准备，能够熟练运用已学的理论知识，正确分析、解决论文撰写过程中出现的各种具体问题并在老师的指导下运用某一具体理论提出解决问题的看法和意见。

(3)综述型论文是对某一学科领域研究与发展状况作综合叙述介绍的一种论文类型。综述型论文是在大量阅读各种文献的基础上，对学科中某一具体的理论性或实际应用性问题的研究状况进行综合归纳，分析整理，去粗取精，做出判断，理出清晰而明确的研究发展脉络，从而展示研究现状和已取得的研究成果，分析问题的症结，并指出未来的研究走向和发展趋势的动态性研究成果。写综述型论文的学生应对所选课题的研究状况有比较全面的把握和正确的了解，对材料的归纳 总结 要较好地体现出综合性和概括性，要在分析、判断的基础上作出新的结论，而且要有一定的前沿性和前瞻性。

(4)研究报告型论文是就某一课题开展调查或测试并对调查或测试中获得的各种数据进行分析、综合、归纳、整理、讨论，从而作出结论的调研性论文。研究报告型论文可分为调查报告与测试报告两类。写研究报告型论文的学生需要具有正确采集、分析和处理信息和数据的方法，需要具有在理论上对调查过程进行分析和论证的能力，并能在老师的指导下独立 1

制定调查或测试方案。

3、能力培养要求

毕业论文写作是本科英语专业教学计划中规定的一项内容和组成部分，是学生毕业前提交的一份具有一定的理论或应用价值的学术论文。它是学生毕业前独立而系统地从事科学研究的初步尝试。毕业论文表明学生的英语水平和实际应用英语的能力，表明学生相关学科方面的学识水平，表明学生发现问题、提出问题和解决问题的能力以及独立从事科研工作的能力。毕业论文对能力的培养有以下几个方面的具体要求：

(1)锻炼学生运用连贯的、正确的、科学的英语语言的能力，全面提高学生综合运用英语的水平;

(2)培养学生发现问题、提出问题、分析问题的思维品质;

(3)培养学生运用所学的理论知识解决来理论性问题或英语实践技能方面的应用性问题的能力;

(4)培养学生严肃认真的科学态度和严谨踏实的工作作风;

(5)培养学生勇于实践、勇于探索、勇于创新的精神。

4、综合素质要求

毕业论文在英语人才培养中起着一般教学不可替代的作用，是对课堂教学和非课堂教学的重要补充。毕业论文跟课堂教学和非课堂教学二者的配合可有效地解决语言知识、言语技能和相关知识的活用问题，能以一种综合性的研究成果的方式把分散的知识、技能与能力要素有机地结合起来。这种结合是全方位的，即思想、观念、知识、技能、能力和文化素质等诸多方面的全面综合，这种结合同时也包括文献资料检索能力、资料筛选能力、计算机应用能力、动手能力、概括能力、归纳能力、分析问题的能力与解决问题的能力等等。总之，毕业论文教学以培养学生全方位的多方面综合素质为目的。