• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Pragmatic Analysis of the British TV Series Sherlock

    2016-07-15 09:20ZHANGYi-ran
    科技視界 2016年17期
    關鍵詞:關聯(lián)理論

    ZHANG+Yi-ran

    【Abstract】Most often, in communication, one delivers messages clearly and smoothly. However, there occur the occasions when this direct communication intentionally fails in order to generate an implicature for the hearers to digest. This case also extends to literary, film or TV works. The creators use clever languages to produce suspense or arouse curiosity. As classic theories in pragmatics, Cooperative Principle, Relevance Theory and later Levinsons Theory play significant roles in explaining why such phenomena appear in communication. This paper aims to figure out whether they explain the existences of non-observant scenarios in conversations by carrying out a case study on the lines from one most welcomed British TV series, Sherlock.

    【Key words】Cooperative Principle; Relevance theory; Levinsons Theory

    【摘 要】在理想會話中,說話人希望將信息清楚明了地傳達給對方。然而,在實際對話中,人們時常故意模糊話語。而此中含意(implicture),需聽者揣摩。這種語言上的技巧經(jīng)常被文學及影視作品借用,以此來制造懸念或喚起人們的好奇心。作為語用學中的經(jīng)典理論,合作原理,關聯(lián)理論以及萊文森理論為研究話語交流做出了巨大貢獻。本文借助上述三種理論,從語用角度分析一部廣受好評的英劇《神探夏洛克》。

    【關鍵詞】合作原理;關聯(lián)理論;萊文森理論

    1 Introduction

    In pragmatics, Grice explained why naturally occurring data breaching the Cooperative Principle. This paper presented with an aim to explore whether the Principle still explain perfectly with the advent of modern theories: Relevance Theory and the more recent the prevailing Levinsons Theory. The first part of this paper covers the past literature review concerning the concept of implicature and the Cooperative Principles by Grice (1975), the Relevance Theory (Sperber & Wilson, 1986) and Neo-Gricean theories advocated mainly by Horn (1984) and Levinson (2000). Next, a detailed analysis is presented to demonstrate how the data, extracted from the TV Series Sherlock(2010) generate implicatures by not observing the maxims with supplement explanations via Relevance Theory and the Levinsons Theory, which Grices maxims could not cope with.

    2 Literature Review

    The first part of the literature review covers a brief introduction of Grice s Cooperative Principles, the derived four maxims, the ways of non-observant of the maxims and the concept of implicature. Next comes the Relevance Theory, which is on the other spectrum. The final part presents Neo-Gricean theories which are considered to be revised version of Grices theory.

    2.1 The Cooperative Principles

    Grice is considered to the founding father of conversational implicatures (1975). As he put it ‘“A meant something by X” is roughly equivalent to “A uttered X with the intention of inducing a belief by means of the recognition of this intention” The “meaning” here, is a non-natural meaning which can be interpreted as “l(fā)iteral meaning plus implicature”. This is further spelled out by the Cooperative Principle. The latter is considered being the underlying principle that determines the way in which language is used with maximum effect to achieve rational interaction in communication. This overriding dictum is further supported by the four subdivided maxims quoted from Thomas (1995, p. 63-64):

    a)Maxim of Quantity: 1) Make you contribution as informative as is required for the current purpose of the exchange; 2) Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.

    b)Maxim of Quality: 1) Do not say what you believe to be false; 2) Do not say that for which you lack evidence.

    c)Maxim of Relation: Be relevant.

    d)Maxim of Manner: 1) Avoid obscurity of expression; 2) Avoid ambiguity; 3) Be brief; 4) Be orderly.

    Grice suggests that the speaker is best cooperative when his utterance is true and relevant and provide appropriate amount of information in an explicit manner. When one of the presented maxims is not confirmed, we do not assume that the speaker is not cooperative; in fact he is generating a conversational implicature via flouting the maxim. Moreover, we do not assume that this blatantly unfulfilling is nonsense. On the contrary, it is consider that an appropriate meaning is there to be inferred. In other words, when a maxim is flouted, the hearer is prompt to look for the implicature(Thomas, 1995, p. 65).

    Grice (1975) also mentions that there are two implicatures: one is Generalised implicature which requires little background knowledge to work out, the other is Particularized implicature which does require special background information to be understood by the hearer.

    2.2 Relevance Theory

    Another theory this study employs, developed based on the Gricean theory, is Relevance Theory proposed by Wilson & Sperber (1986). Although Relevance Theorists abide by Grices Relevance Maxim, they cast doubt on the rest of the maxims and even the invention of the Cooperative Principle and the maxims (Cutting, 2008). They argue that, the communication proceeds not because the speaker persistently to obey the maxims but what they seek for relevance is a basic common ground knowledge they both share. The most significant type of cognitive effect is a contextual implicature which is acknowledged as new information. The other forms of cognitive effects are confirming, strengthening or contradicting, weakening an existing assumption. When this cognitive process applied in the communicative aspect, an utterance or an act of inferential communication is “optimal relevant when on the one hand, achieves the greatest contextual effects and on the other hand, achieves for putting in the minimised efforts. Relevance Theory is considered an improvement compared to the Cooperative Principle because it values more the natural and flexible characters of language (Cutting, 2008, p. 41).

    2.3 Neo-Gricean Pragmatics

    The last theory this study touches on is the Neo-Gricean pragmatics advocated by Horn(1984) and Levinson (2000). Largely based on the Grices Cooperative Principle, Horn (1984) reduces the maxims to two: the Quality remained and Quantity, Relation and Manner merged into two principles: the Q[uantity] Principle: Make the information contributable; say as much as and as one can. The R[ation] Principle: make the contribution necessary; say no more than one must. In other words, the reductionist theory involves with maximising the R Principle and minimising the Q Principles. Levinsons theory (2000), another Neo-Gricean theory, is comprised of three categories: (Q) Quantity, (I) Information and (M) Manner. Huang (2007, p. 41, 46, 50) simplified Levinsons theories as follows:

    The Q-principle:

    Speaker: do not say less than is required (bearing the I-principle in mind).

    Addressee: what is not said is not the case.

    The I-principle:

    Speaker: do not say more than is required( bearing the I-principle in mind)

    Addressee: what is generally said is stereotypically and specifically exemplified.

    The M-principle:

    Speaker: do not use a marked expression without reason.

    Addressee: what is said in a mark way is not unmarked.

    Because Levinsons theory, based on the Grices Cooperative Principle and revised Horns theory, makes the conversational implicature analysis easier to carry on, this analysis mainly carries out comparisons between Levinsons theory with Griceans theory.

    3 The Analysis

    3.1 Introduction of Sherlock (2010)

    This is a qualitative study with the data extracted from a British TV series, Sherlock (2010). Sherlock, the long being acclaimed London based “consulting detective” formed by Scottish fictionist and physician Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. He is famous for his strong logical deduction and forensic skills to solve extreme difficult cases. The Sherlock in the new series (2010) succeeds all the characteristics the original has: an arrogant and genius consulting detective who has been holding a desire to be proved as the cleverest among both the criminals and polices. Dr. John Watson, another main character, is an army doctor retired from warfare. He is considered to compromise everything that Sherlock has even his arrogant character. However, they do share one thing in common -- the wit. It is wit that binds them together and it is wit that makes the Doctor proved understand practically every utterance Sherlock puts. The new series was well received by the audience with the view rating ranking in several countries including China. It is believed that the wit embedded in language plays crucial part in wining the audience. Therefore, examples are extracted to see whether Grices theory can explain how and why such wits are achieved by not observing the principles. The indeterminate ones are further analysed with the Relevance Theory and Neo-Gricean theories, in particular Levinsons system to find the best possible explanations.

    3.2 Case study

    In Grices Cooperative Principle, the speaker is expected to contribute the true information as much and as accurate as he could with the shared conversation purpose in mind (Grice, 1975). He then points out that several sub-maxims should be proposed with the goal to generate results from the Cooperative Principle as stated in the literature review. What comes along with the Cooperative Principle is the implicature. In daily conversation, there are numerous occasions when one does not obey one or more maxims which are considered, on large scale, to yield implicatures.

    According to Grice (1975), there are five ways of not observing the maxims and two of which are focus here. They are:

    Flouting a maxim-one blatantly breaches a maxim carrying an implicature

    Violating a maxim-one covertly breaches a maxim with a misleading or deceiving purpose

    In the following part, several non-observant phenomena with examples in Sherlock are shown and explanations why such non-observance occur follow.

    3.3 Flouting the maxims

    Quality

    Example 1

    [When Sherlock and Dr. Watson were brought to the Buckingham Palace, they guessed who could probably have them there.]

    a) Dr. Watson: Here to see the Queen?

    b) Sherlock: Oh, apparently, yes.

    c) Mycroft: Just once, can you two behave like grown-ups?

    In example 1, Dr. Watson made a most reasonable deduction when in the highest land of a country, one is expected to see the highest person, and in Buckingham Palace, it would be the Queen. Sherlock answered “Oh, apparently, yes.” when they both saw Mycroft, Sherlocks brother, walked in and burst into laughter. In this case, Sherlock flouted the maxim of Quality in which he gave wrong information not to mislead but on the contrary, to humiliate his brother. Apparently, his brother cannot be a queen who by the nature should be a female sex. Besides, what the word “queen” embedded is someone who is flamboyant and acting like a girl. The implicature generated by flouting the maxim of Quality is well received by the three persons at the scene which lead to the dramatic laughter of Sherlock and Dr. Watson and the rebuttal by Mycroft in 1c). Mycrofts argument is again a flouting of the maxim of Quality. True to the fact that Dr. Watson and his younger brother are grown-ups but by overlooking the fact and also the cooperative principle that it requires right information to communicate, he gave the opposite answer. By uttering this, Mycroft intended to insult Sherlock and Dr. Watson by the implicature: What they just did was childish, and they should behave maturely as adults.

    Quantity

    Example 2

    [Sherlock and Dr. Watson were forced to go to some place they had no idea of and finally they were there which turned out to the Buckingham Palace. As a consultant detective, Sherlock insisted on his brother Mycroft to tell him straight who his client was and thats when Harry, the employee of the direct client came in.]

    a) Sherlock: And my client is...?

    b) Harry: Illustrious, in the extreme. And remaining, I have to inform you, entirely anonymous.

    Harrys answer breaches the maxim of Quantity. When Sherlock asked who his client was, he expected an answer that contributes appropriate amount of information in a direct manner like “the client is whom.” However, out of expectation, Harry chose not to give a proper answer. Together with the qualifiers, “illustrious”, “in the extreme” and “anonymous”, the speaker aimed to imply that the client was too celebrated to be informed by the name. Although this answer did give Sherlock an opportunity to generate such implicature; he chose to ignore it, which gave rise to the following conversation.

    Example 3

    a) Sherlock: Who is my client?

    b) Mycroft: Take a look at where youre standing, and make a deduction.

    c) Mycroft: You are to be engaged by the highest in the land.

    Sherlock insisted to know who exactly his client was by asking a direct question in 3a), a much stronger request than 2a). This time, Sherlock still did not get a satisfactory answer from Mycroft. What Mycroft said in 3b) can be viewed as a flout of the maxim of Relation because there is no direct association between “who ones client is” and “ones deduction”. 3c) is another case of flouting of the maxim of Quantity. “The highest in the land” is more or less equivalent to the one who was “illustrious in the extreme”. Still who the client was is concealed. This one can also be deemed as the speakers unwillingness to reveal the identity of the person talked about. The curious audience might suspect that the client was not really a significant matter or the one was too famous to be known in such occasion. In such a word puzzle, it successfully arouses suspense and the audiences curiosity.

    Relation

    Example 4

    [Dr. Watson is typing another blog titled “Sherlock Holmes Baffled”.]

    a) Sherlock: No, no, no, dont mention the unsolved ones.

    b) Dr. Watson: People want to know youre human.

    When Sherlock says in the example 4a) “Dont mention the unsolved case.” in fact he wants Dr. Watson to stop putting the unsolved case online. According to Speech Act Theory (Austin, 1962), Sherlock utters 4a) (locution) with an expectation that Dr Watson would follow his request (illocution). However, instead of doing what Sherlock demanded, the Doctor says 4b) in the way that flouts the maxim of Relation: What John informed is not relevant. Under such circumstance, Sherlock cleverly received the implicature that by unostentatiously bleaching the Maxim Dr. Watson implicates that his public image was almighty that there was no case would set him back, but by reading Dr. Watsons blog the public could get that the opinions previously held were wrong.

    Manner

    Example 5

    a) Sherlock: Do people actually read your blog?

    b) Dr. Watson: Where do you think our clients come from?

    c) Sherlock: I have a website.

    d) Dr. Watson: In which you enumerate 240 different types of tobacco ash.

    e) Dr. Watson: Nobodys reading your website.

    Example 5 is a case when flouting the maxim of Manner comes. When Sherlock asked the way in 5a), in fact he wanted Dr. Watson to provide an accurate answer: “yes” or “no”. However, instead of giving an explicit answer, the doctor asked back in 5b). It was Sherlock himself, in the detectives mind, who attracted clients to the consultancy out of either admiration or need after reading his own website Science of Deduction. The replies given by Dr. Watson in 5d) and e) failed Sherlocks expectation indirectly and then directly and produced a comic effect.

    3.4 Violating the maxims

    Quality

    Example 6

    [Dr. Watson is on a crime scene in place of Sherlock when they were talking about Sherlocks constantly talking habit.]

    a) Dr. Watson: Do you just carry on talking when Im away?

    b) Sherlock: I dont know, how often are you away?

    Sherlocks utterance is a violation of the maxim of Quality. Under rare circumstances do people totally be oblivion of the environment especially one holds a desire to be informative. Here Sherlocks utterance “I dont know” in 6b) is therefore considered to be deceiving. Probably, he was trying to indicate that he did not know the doctor was away because he did not require a response when he kept talking or he just did not pay any attention to his partner. This latter implicature is more or less proved by Sherlocks supplement “how often are you away?”. This utterance yet could not possibly be explained by the Cooperative Principles because it obeys all the maxims but still generates implicatures either as he did not expect to communicate with the other speaker for most of the times he simply informed him whatever came across his mind or actually Sherlock knew his partner was not so often away which made Dr. Watsons initial utterance a violation of the maxim of Quality.

    Example 7

    [The two came to Irenes in searching of the compromising photos the client from the Buckingham Palace required. When asked, Irene deliberately turned the topic away to another case Sherlock was working on.]

    a) Sherlock: I know the victim was a sportsman, recently returned from foreign travel

    b) Sherlock: and that the photographs Im looking for are in this room.

    c) Irene: OK, but how?

    d) Sherlock: So they are in this room. Thank you.

    The utterance in 7a) by Sherlock shows his marvellous talent. He comes to Irenes for the compromising photos she was taken with one of the Royal members. However, he was told that he would not be given the photos and then asked about one of the cases Sherlock was investigating. Sherlock explains his investigation together with a seemingly irrelevant sentence 7b). Under this circumstance, Sherlock blatantly breaches the maxim of Relevance but this is not even the trigger of an implicature yet. In fact, this utterance is not true. Sherlock did not know the exact location of the photos. By uttering “I know that the photographs Im looking for are in this room” he holds a 50 to 50 chance that the photos might be in this room. Through this abruptly changing of topic he would expect a confirmed answer. In this way, Sherlock violated the maxim of Quality by saying something he lacked evidence with a purpose to mislead and this misleading function was further justified by his utterance in 7d). In this case, breaching of two maxims collides with flouting the maxim of Relation.

    Quantity

    Example 8

    [Dr. Watson keeps typing.]

    a) Sherlock: What are you typing?

    b) Dr. Watson: Blog.

    c) Sherlock: About?

    d) Dr. Watson: Us.

    e) Sherlock: You mean me.

    The dialogues in example 8 are a case when the speaker secretly hid certain information from the hearer. From 8a) to 8d), each time when Sherlock tried to ask a question on the typing thing, Dr. Watson intentionally gave unsatisfactory reply. What Dr. Watson provided, was in fact the true information relevant to Sherlocks question and not in an ambiguous way, which is an observance of the maxims of Quality, Relation as well as Manner. What Dr. Watson failed to observe is the maxim of Quantity. In other words, in his utterances both in 8b) and 8d) he did not give sufficient information for the hearer. However, the shared background knowledge, Sherlock did know Dr. Watson owned a blog keeping tracks of every case they worked on, makes the seemingly misleading conversation could continue.

    Relation

    Example 9

    [Sherlock and Irene were fighting against the broken-in Americans and then Sherlock looked at the opened safe.]

    a) Sherlock: Do you mind?

    b) Irene: Not at all.

    Sherlock asked if Irene minded that he took whats inside the safe out. However, Irene misunderstood that the man was asking about the feelings of him observing her measurement early on which later proved to be the code to the safe. Irenes answer was misleading to the Americans and even the viewers but highly relevant to the question. In this case, there is no implicature although Sherlocks asking does violate the maxim of Manner if in full it would be “Do you mind if I…”. Nonetheless, he avoided some of the information in order to get what he perceived to be the satisfactory answer.

    Manner

    Example 10

    [Harry and Mycroft were describing the case to Sherlock in Buckingham Palace.]

    a) Harry: My employer has a problem.

    b) Mycroft: A matter has come to light of an extremely delicate and potentially criminal nature, and in this hour of need, dear brother, your name has arisen.

    In example 10, Harry vaguely referred the case as a “problem”. And without more detailed information, one cannot deduce how severe the problem was. This utterance violates the maxim of Manner in which he failed to give accurate answer. Mycroft, thereupon supplemented by uttering 10b). If Harrys misleadingness was unintentional, Mycrofts one was deliberate. First, Mycrofts talk was so deceiving that he used such ambiguous words like “extremely” and “potentially”. One can hardly define the degree of “extreme” and “potential”, which may confuse a detective. For one thing, one may be concerned whether it was a crime and for another the matter was really severe (which in fact might not be). Mycroft used this ambiguous or even misleading utterance to lure his brother to take the case for his well understanding of Sherlocks curious character.

    The above discussed how Cooperative Principle and its subdivided four maxims cope with the data in the TV series Sherlock (2010). It can be seen that, Grice theory can explain most the problems that occur yet there are unsolved ones such as the reasons for generating particular implicatures and the obscured boundaries of each maxim. Next comes a brief discussion about the Relevance Theory and the Neo-Gricean theories with a perspective to witness whether they are in supportive to the Cooperative Principle.

    3.5 Relevance Theory

    What Relevance Theory contributes to the daily conservation is that it pays more attention to the ambiguity and the flexibility which are the very nature of language. It does not provide fixed maxims for speakers to follow but the reasons why people behave in that way. Wilson and Sperber (1986) argue that communication is possible not because the interlocutors seek to obey certain maxim but based on a particular relevance, a common feature of human cognition. They also point out that an utterance is optimally relevant if and only of that on the one hand, it is relevant enough to worth an audiences attention and on the other hand, it achieves the most adequate contextual effects. In this way, the four maxims proposed by Grice can be replaced by one: the principle of Relevance. Relevance Theory can explain some phenomenon easier what Grices theory almost fails to. The following example is served as an evidence.

    Example 11

    a) Inspector: Dr Watson?

    b) Dr. Watson: Yeah.

    c) Inspector: Its for you.

    d) Dr. Watson: OK, thanks.

    e) Inspector: No, sir, the helicopter.

    This conversation took place when Dr. Watson was on a crime scene for Sherlock when suddenly they lost contact through Internet. At the same time, an inspector came to Dr. Watson with a phone call still on. A humorous effect, if examined via the Relevance Theory, was caused by the contrast between the largest relevance and the optimal relevance. The largest relevance is the effect based on the greatest contextual effects and the smallest processing efforts. However, the optimal relevance is the one that is compatible with communicators abilities and preferences together with the audiences minimum processing efforts. In the example 11, the utterance by the Inspector “its for you.” meant “a helicopter is for you”. Dr. Watson misunderstood that the phone call in process was for him. The doctor had such reaction because he saw the Inspector was engaged by a call, the most influential context, so he spared his least efforts to work out “ it” in “ its for you.” meant the phone. He then was proved wrong by the Inspectors utterance: “no, sir. The helicopter.” with the approaching sound of a helicopter. Following the doctors deduction process from the largest relevance to the optimal relevance, as soon as the optimal relevance is revealed, the viewers immediately sense the humour. This example can also be interpreted as a violation of Manner maxim as the Inspector gave misleading information by uttering ambiguously it in 10c). If examined in cognitive deduction, the reference of it here is obvious because our mind tends to combine what is saying with what is doing, especially when the utterance involves an act. Therefore, in this case, the humorous effect best be analysed using the Relevance Theory.

    3.6 The Levinsons System

    One contribution Levinsons System makes is that it pays equivalent attention to both Particularized implicatures as well as Generalized implicatures compared to Grices mainly focus on the Particularized ones. In Levinsons three principles, the first two Q-principle and I-principle which restrict each other and can be examined through the semantic aspect while the Manner-principle which is more or less similar to Grices Manner maxim and Wilson & Sperbers Relevance Theory relies on cognitive aspect as well as the contextual effect. As a supplement to the Grices theory, this paper only touches its application to generate a Generalized implicature which do not need background.

    Here is one example also from the TV series talked.

    Example 12

    a) Sherlock: I was in the middle of a case, Mycroft.

    b) Mycroft: What, the hiker and the backfire? I glanced at the police report.

    c) Mycroft: A bit obvious, surely?

    d) Sherlock: Transparent.

    This case accords with the Q-principle. In dialogues, Sherlock and Mycroft were talking about “the hiker and the backfire” case. Mycroft intended to let Sherlock to attend to the case he was about to mention by putting forward that he had already known the fact and Sherlock confirmed his idea by uttering “transparent”. “Transparent” is semantically stronger than “obvious”. Here, Mycroft opted for the semantically weaker “obvious” casting doubt that Mycroft might lack confidence to say the case was exactly what he thought to be because he gave out a hint that he merely glanced at the police report. What Sherlock did thereafter was to back up his implicature by using what Mycroft did not entailed, the semantically stronger “transparent”.

    4 Conclusion

    The aim of this study is to show whether the Cooperative Principles and the four maxims proposed by Grice are key roles to generate implicatures by using the non-observant data from the series, Sherlock. From what has been discussed above, the conclusion can be drawn that Grices theory does work out most of the implicatures and give most of satisfactory explanations. However it functions, the Grices theory gives too much focus on the hearers and makes the flexible conversations rigid by preparing the principle speaker should obey. In addition, sometimes, it is difficult to distinguish which maxim speakers breach. The problems are revised by the Relevance Theory in which both cognition and context-based activity are considered. This makes the explanation of why speakers generate implicatures clearer and more convincible. The main contribution Levinsons Theory makes to the Grices Cooperative Principle is the supplement of the generalized implicatures which makes Grices theory more applicable in various fields. To sum up, the Gricean Cooperative principles are still most feasible in analysing the implicatutres in daily conversations with Relevence Theory as well as the Neo-Griceans pragmatics serve as supplementary roles. It should also be pointed out that it is not an exhaustive comparison on the three theories. On the one hand, it is a detailed case study with the data exacted mainly from one TV series, and the corpus should be further expanded. On the other hand, it focuses on the non-observant phenomena of the maxims of the Cooperative Principles, the rest, for instance, the Levinsons Theory, this paper only mentioned two principles. Researchers may continue to explore other aspects of Levinsons Theory.

    【References】

    [1]Austin, J. L.. How to do things with words. Cambridge[J]. MA: Harvard University Press,1962.

    [2]Grice, H.P.. Logic and conversation. In P. Cole(Ed.)Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts[J]. New York: Academic Press,1975:41-58.

    [3]Cutting, J.. Pragmatics and Discourse: A resource book for students. 2nd edution. London & New York: Routledge,2008.

    [4]Horn, R.. Towards a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference: Q-based and R-based implicature. In D. Schiffrin(ed.), Meaning, form, and the use in context: linguistic applications[J]. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press,1984:11-42.

    [5]Huang, Y.. Pragmatics[J]. Oxford: Oxford University Press,2007.

    [6]Levinson,C.. Presumptive meanings: the theory of generalized conversational implicature[J]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,2000.

    [7]Sperber,D.,&Wilson,D.. Relevance: communication and cognition[J]. Oxford: Blackwell,1986.

    [8]Thomas,J..Meaning in interaction: an introduction to Pragmatics[J]. London: Longman,1995.

    [責任編輯:王偉平]

    猜你喜歡
    關聯(lián)理論
    《西游記》中幽默語言的英譯研究
    新高考改革下如何提高學生的閱讀理解能力
    《生活大爆炸》中刻意曲解之關聯(lián)理論探析
    關聯(lián)視閾下的學習者語用能力發(fā)展研究
    關聯(lián)理論視角下的漢英隱喻翻譯
    基于關聯(lián)理論的高中英語讀前活動優(yōu)化設計
    国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 桃色一区二区三区在线观看| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器 | 在线观看舔阴道视频| 热re99久久国产66热| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看 | www.精华液| 国产高清videossex| 两个人看的免费小视频| 黄色a级毛片大全视频| 99久久99久久久精品蜜桃| 欧美乱码精品一区二区三区| 两性午夜刺激爽爽歪歪视频在线观看 | 国产真人三级小视频在线观看| 国产主播在线观看一区二区| avwww免费| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出| 美女高潮喷水抽搐中文字幕| 琪琪午夜伦伦电影理论片6080| 99国产综合亚洲精品| 丝袜美腿诱惑在线| 久久久久久久久久久久大奶| 给我免费播放毛片高清在线观看| 亚洲成av人片免费观看| 国产麻豆成人av免费视频| 国产精品亚洲av一区麻豆| √禁漫天堂资源中文www| 精品第一国产精品| 一级毛片高清免费大全| 欧美精品啪啪一区二区三区| 国产精品国产高清国产av| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 亚洲成人免费电影在线观看| 一进一出抽搐gif免费好疼| 人人妻,人人澡人人爽秒播| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区| 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| 午夜福利免费观看在线| 搡老妇女老女人老熟妇| 麻豆av在线久日| 中文字幕人妻熟女乱码| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 国产精品久久电影中文字幕| 久久人人爽av亚洲精品天堂| 99久久99久久久精品蜜桃| 国产精品98久久久久久宅男小说| 国产一区二区三区视频了| 精品久久久久久,| 精品国产美女av久久久久小说| 女性生殖器流出的白浆| а√天堂www在线а√下载| 99riav亚洲国产免费| 极品人妻少妇av视频| 国产精品久久电影中文字幕| 窝窝影院91人妻| 欧美精品啪啪一区二区三区| 久久精品91蜜桃| 男女午夜视频在线观看| 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| 在线天堂中文资源库| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 1024视频免费在线观看| 久99久视频精品免费| 国产单亲对白刺激| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3 | 性欧美人与动物交配| 中文字幕最新亚洲高清| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 精品福利观看| 久久久久久人人人人人| 村上凉子中文字幕在线| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 色综合站精品国产| 满18在线观看网站| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 9色porny在线观看| 国产精品亚洲美女久久久| 国产亚洲精品久久久久久毛片| 亚洲 国产 在线| 国产高清激情床上av| 国产三级黄色录像| 大型av网站在线播放| 中文字幕人妻熟女乱码| 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 免费在线观看日本一区| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影 | 午夜精品在线福利| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色 | 国产aⅴ精品一区二区三区波| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| 香蕉久久夜色| 在线观看免费视频日本深夜| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网| 日本 av在线| 成人免费观看视频高清| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 精品欧美国产一区二区三| 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| 欧美国产精品va在线观看不卡| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 在线视频色国产色| 国产野战对白在线观看| 美女免费视频网站| 他把我摸到了高潮在线观看| 露出奶头的视频| 在线免费观看的www视频| or卡值多少钱| 一二三四社区在线视频社区8| 免费观看人在逋| 青草久久国产| 在线av久久热| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 搞女人的毛片| 一进一出抽搐gif免费好疼| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区| 女性生殖器流出的白浆| 亚洲精华国产精华精| 亚洲成a人片在线一区二区| 国产日韩一区二区三区精品不卡| 欧美乱码精品一区二区三区| 亚洲三区欧美一区| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 亚洲精品美女久久久久99蜜臀| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91| 日本一区二区免费在线视频| 日本三级黄在线观看| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 人人妻人人爽人人添夜夜欢视频| 久久精品国产亚洲av高清一级| 欧美日韩一级在线毛片| 法律面前人人平等表现在哪些方面| 亚洲国产欧美网| 动漫黄色视频在线观看| 亚洲国产精品999在线| 在线天堂中文资源库| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 亚洲免费av在线视频| 亚洲欧美日韩高清在线视频| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看| 国产精品久久久久久亚洲av鲁大| 国产精品,欧美在线| 制服丝袜大香蕉在线| 99在线视频只有这里精品首页| 一卡2卡三卡四卡精品乱码亚洲| 国产成人精品久久二区二区免费| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| 国产不卡一卡二| 极品教师在线免费播放| 亚洲成av人片免费观看| 成人18禁在线播放| 香蕉久久夜色| 91字幕亚洲| 88av欧美| 中亚洲国语对白在线视频| 欧美黄色淫秽网站| 黄色毛片三级朝国网站| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| 男女下面进入的视频免费午夜 | 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区| 亚洲性夜色夜夜综合| 男人操女人黄网站| 亚洲第一电影网av| 欧美精品啪啪一区二区三区| 波多野结衣高清无吗| 黄片小视频在线播放| 69av精品久久久久久| 黄色片一级片一级黄色片| 亚洲情色 制服丝袜| 亚洲专区国产一区二区| 在线视频色国产色| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 69精品国产乱码久久久| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 免费无遮挡裸体视频| 搡老岳熟女国产| av在线天堂中文字幕| 国产麻豆成人av免费视频| 精品国产乱子伦一区二区三区| 国产亚洲精品久久久久久毛片| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区| 亚洲一码二码三码区别大吗| 国产精品亚洲av一区麻豆| 精品久久久久久久人妻蜜臀av | 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 十八禁人妻一区二区| 国产亚洲欧美精品永久| 亚洲va日本ⅴa欧美va伊人久久| 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 久久久久久亚洲精品国产蜜桃av| 看黄色毛片网站| 老熟妇仑乱视频hdxx| 99国产精品免费福利视频| 中国美女看黄片| 精品久久久久久成人av| 亚洲自偷自拍图片 自拍| 国产精品影院久久| 午夜福利,免费看| 91国产中文字幕| 最新美女视频免费是黄的| 中文亚洲av片在线观看爽| 国产私拍福利视频在线观看| 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 搡老妇女老女人老熟妇| 欧美黄色淫秽网站| av电影中文网址| 国产亚洲精品第一综合不卡| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| 十八禁人妻一区二区| 午夜久久久久精精品| 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 在线观看一区二区三区| 国产高清有码在线观看视频 | 日韩免费av在线播放| 长腿黑丝高跟| 久9热在线精品视频| 亚洲第一电影网av| 黄色成人免费大全| 久热这里只有精品99| 电影成人av| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 国产精品乱码一区二三区的特点 | 老司机福利观看| 日韩精品中文字幕看吧| 村上凉子中文字幕在线| 男女之事视频高清在线观看| 在线av久久热| 一本大道久久a久久精品| 丁香欧美五月| 91av网站免费观看| 两人在一起打扑克的视频| 9191精品国产免费久久| 乱人伦中国视频| 极品教师在线免费播放| 亚洲免费av在线视频| 搞女人的毛片| 一级a爱片免费观看的视频| 日本免费a在线| 99久久综合精品五月天人人| 国产精品乱码一区二三区的特点 | 精品久久蜜臀av无| 久久精品亚洲熟妇少妇任你| 国产在线观看jvid| 亚洲一码二码三码区别大吗| 国产精品久久电影中文字幕| 国产精品一区二区精品视频观看| av视频免费观看在线观看| 中国美女看黄片| 9色porny在线观看| 在线观看www视频免费| 午夜福利,免费看| 99在线视频只有这里精品首页| 看免费av毛片| 每晚都被弄得嗷嗷叫到高潮| 黄色视频不卡| 三级毛片av免费| 99久久99久久久精品蜜桃| 国产亚洲精品第一综合不卡| 久久人妻福利社区极品人妻图片| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 熟妇人妻久久中文字幕3abv| 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| 亚洲五月天丁香| 天堂影院成人在线观看| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 美女高潮喷水抽搐中文字幕| 真人一进一出gif抽搐免费| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av在线| 香蕉丝袜av| 婷婷丁香在线五月| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 少妇粗大呻吟视频| 亚洲av电影在线进入| www国产在线视频色| 日韩精品中文字幕看吧| 婷婷六月久久综合丁香| 麻豆av在线久日| 欧美久久黑人一区二区| 99久久久亚洲精品蜜臀av| 久久久国产精品麻豆| 日本撒尿小便嘘嘘汇集6| 欧美日韩瑟瑟在线播放| 免费av毛片视频| 欧美乱妇无乱码| 真人做人爱边吃奶动态| 91成人精品电影| av视频在线观看入口| 高清在线国产一区| 麻豆久久精品国产亚洲av| or卡值多少钱| 精品久久久久久成人av| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 亚洲专区字幕在线| 午夜a级毛片| 欧美成人一区二区免费高清观看 | 动漫黄色视频在线观看| 美女高潮到喷水免费观看| 女人精品久久久久毛片| 欧美日韩瑟瑟在线播放| 久久天堂一区二区三区四区| 在线观看日韩欧美| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频 | 最新在线观看一区二区三区| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看| 国产一卡二卡三卡精品| 中文字幕人妻熟女乱码| 一本大道久久a久久精品| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 成人手机av| 韩国av一区二区三区四区| 久久国产精品男人的天堂亚洲| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 欧美最黄视频在线播放免费| 精品人妻1区二区| cao死你这个sao货| 夜夜躁狠狠躁天天躁| 涩涩av久久男人的天堂| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放 | 性色av乱码一区二区三区2| 日本三级黄在线观看| 999久久久精品免费观看国产| av有码第一页| 精品午夜福利视频在线观看一区| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 国产精品日韩av在线免费观看 | 国产xxxxx性猛交| 日韩大码丰满熟妇| 真人做人爱边吃奶动态| 丁香欧美五月| 桃红色精品国产亚洲av| 精品高清国产在线一区| 美女午夜性视频免费| 久久九九热精品免费| 欧美日本视频| 国产一卡二卡三卡精品| 欧美日韩一级在线毛片| 在线十欧美十亚洲十日本专区| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三| 在线观看免费午夜福利视频| 国产免费男女视频| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看| 免费在线观看日本一区| 午夜福利18| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| 丁香六月欧美| 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 免费看十八禁软件| 人妻丰满熟妇av一区二区三区| 人人妻人人澡欧美一区二区 | 天天一区二区日本电影三级 | 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3 | 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡| 天堂动漫精品| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9| 在线观看免费视频日本深夜| 国产一区二区激情短视频| 久久久国产成人精品二区| 久久国产精品影院| 琪琪午夜伦伦电影理论片6080| 老司机福利观看| 免费在线观看影片大全网站| 一夜夜www| xxx96com| 久久国产乱子伦精品免费另类| 免费看十八禁软件| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 国产免费av片在线观看野外av| x7x7x7水蜜桃| 侵犯人妻中文字幕一二三四区| 国产一区二区三区综合在线观看| 久久久国产成人精品二区| 亚洲电影在线观看av| 久久中文字幕一级| 成人18禁高潮啪啪吃奶动态图| www.自偷自拍.com| 在线观看午夜福利视频| 亚洲国产欧美网| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院| 在线观看日韩欧美| 国产精品一区二区精品视频观看| 99在线人妻在线中文字幕| 国产亚洲欧美精品永久| 黄色 视频免费看| 日本a在线网址| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 人人妻人人澡欧美一区二区 | 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区mp4| 99在线人妻在线中文字幕| 国产亚洲欧美精品永久| 每晚都被弄得嗷嗷叫到高潮| 狠狠狠狠99中文字幕| 一级毛片女人18水好多| 最好的美女福利视频网| 91国产中文字幕| 国产精品乱码一区二三区的特点 | 日韩大尺度精品在线看网址 | 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 亚洲专区中文字幕在线| 51午夜福利影视在线观看| 黄色a级毛片大全视频| 国产不卡一卡二| 久久这里只有精品19| 变态另类成人亚洲欧美熟女 | 91在线观看av| 精品乱码久久久久久99久播| 女人精品久久久久毛片| 国产一区二区三区视频了| 日日干狠狠操夜夜爽| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 国产91精品成人一区二区三区| 性欧美人与动物交配| 欧美一区二区精品小视频在线| 久久天躁狠狠躁夜夜2o2o| 午夜日韩欧美国产| 免费在线观看完整版高清| 91麻豆av在线| 精品电影一区二区在线| 在线观看午夜福利视频| 日韩国内少妇激情av| 国产一区二区三区综合在线观看| svipshipincom国产片| 亚洲美女黄片视频| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 一级a爱视频在线免费观看| 成在线人永久免费视频| 最新美女视频免费是黄的| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| tocl精华| 国产精品98久久久久久宅男小说| 成人欧美大片| 亚洲 国产 在线| 大香蕉久久成人网| 香蕉久久夜色| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 国产aⅴ精品一区二区三区波| 美女午夜性视频免费| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站| 麻豆成人av在线观看| 性色av乱码一区二区三区2| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 精品国产美女av久久久久小说| 精品一区二区三区四区五区乱码| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 看黄色毛片网站| 91精品三级在线观看| 亚洲第一电影网av| 啦啦啦免费观看视频1| 久久这里只有精品19| 国产高清视频在线播放一区| 大型av网站在线播放| 精品久久久精品久久久| www.999成人在线观看| av天堂久久9| 男女下面进入的视频免费午夜 | 日本 欧美在线| 欧美精品啪啪一区二区三区| 久久中文字幕人妻熟女| 亚洲中文日韩欧美视频| 亚洲精品美女久久av网站| 黄色丝袜av网址大全| 美女大奶头视频| 国内精品久久久久久久电影| 午夜视频精品福利| 亚洲人成电影观看| or卡值多少钱| 国产精品电影一区二区三区| 天堂动漫精品| 九色国产91popny在线| 国产高清激情床上av| 国产亚洲欧美精品永久| 午夜福利18| 夜夜夜夜夜久久久久| 嫩草影视91久久| 69精品国产乱码久久久| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 欧美绝顶高潮抽搐喷水| 欧美日韩亚洲综合一区二区三区_| 一级毛片精品| 啦啦啦 在线观看视频| 我的亚洲天堂| 亚洲第一青青草原| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 色综合亚洲欧美另类图片| 日本在线视频免费播放| 国产不卡一卡二| 精品午夜福利视频在线观看一区| 在线视频色国产色| 亚洲一区高清亚洲精品| 最好的美女福利视频网| 日韩一卡2卡3卡4卡2021年| 此物有八面人人有两片| 亚洲人成电影免费在线| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区| 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看| 一级黄色大片毛片| 日本a在线网址| 黄色毛片三级朝国网站| 美女午夜性视频免费| 制服诱惑二区| 国产成+人综合+亚洲专区| 免费av毛片视频| 久久这里只有精品19| 亚洲欧美日韩另类电影网站| 日韩三级视频一区二区三区| 欧美成人免费av一区二区三区| 12—13女人毛片做爰片一| 满18在线观看网站| 丁香六月欧美| avwww免费| 美女 人体艺术 gogo| 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| 亚洲无线在线观看| 日本三级黄在线观看| 神马国产精品三级电影在线观看 | www.熟女人妻精品国产| 日韩精品青青久久久久久| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 极品人妻少妇av视频| 午夜两性在线视频| 日韩视频一区二区在线观看| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| a在线观看视频网站| 一本大道久久a久久精品| 国产精品二区激情视频| 老司机午夜福利在线观看视频| 99久久久亚洲精品蜜臀av| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 一区二区三区国产精品乱码| 1024香蕉在线观看| 亚洲一区高清亚洲精品| 丝袜在线中文字幕| 日韩av在线大香蕉| 亚洲最大成人中文| 免费搜索国产男女视频| av免费在线观看网站| 久久久久国内视频| 亚洲欧美激情在线| 青草久久国产| ponron亚洲| 精品一区二区三区四区五区乱码| 最好的美女福利视频网| www国产在线视频色| avwww免费| av天堂久久9| 十八禁网站免费在线| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 久久久久久大精品| 国产熟女xx| 一夜夜www| 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 免费看十八禁软件| 国产99白浆流出| 女警被强在线播放| 亚洲美女黄片视频| 一卡2卡三卡四卡精品乱码亚洲| 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| 两个人看的免费小视频| 国产精品九九99| 国产亚洲精品一区二区www| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 亚洲五月色婷婷综合| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 老司机福利观看| 宅男免费午夜| 可以在线观看毛片的网站| 日韩视频一区二区在线观看| 757午夜福利合集在线观看| 亚洲精品久久国产高清桃花| 国产一级毛片七仙女欲春2 | 国产区一区二久久| 久热这里只有精品99| 我的亚洲天堂| 黑丝袜美女国产一区| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看 | 亚洲成人精品中文字幕电影| 法律面前人人平等表现在哪些方面| 日本精品一区二区三区蜜桃| 在线国产一区二区在线| 日本a在线网址| 亚洲三区欧美一区| 热99re8久久精品国产| 国产成人系列免费观看| www.熟女人妻精品国产| 99在线人妻在线中文字幕| 国产伦一二天堂av在线观看| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 999精品在线视频| 极品人妻少妇av视频| 一区福利在线观看| 亚洲在线自拍视频| 亚洲狠狠婷婷综合久久图片| 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 一级作爱视频免费观看|