英语论文网

r. But all of these interpretations of context are static and fixed, and all of the contextual components are regarded as static, fixed and isolated. As the deepening of the context study, as the combination of the context study and communication study, traditional and static context study cannot meet the needs of developing communication any more. People need to discuss context in a new perspective. 3.3. Discussion on context in the perspective of pragmatics and relevance 3.3.1. Static context and dynamic context As what is discussed above, the traditional views of context are static and fixed. But the static study on context cannot meet the need of dynamic communication process. According to Thomas, meaning is not fixed only decided by words, and the speaker alone also does not arouse it; meaning is dynamic and it depends on the negotiation of communicators. And she considered the pragmatics as “the study of interactive meaning”. In her view, context is dynamic and changing all the time according to all the factors relevant to communication. [15] Most of the contextual factors are developing, and all the developing factors would probably become the elements of context. As we all know, there are many components forming the context, and these contextual components are “the pool of shared knowledge”, which are very important to understand the utterance or text. But not all the contextual components can be seen as context, only those closely relate to the current communication can form the context. Professor Liu Huanhui pointed out that all the probable contextual components, objective or subjective, would not form the context if they lose the relevance to the linguistic communication. ”. [16] Commonly, people regard the linguistic communication as a r process of circular, which all the participators play the roles of speaker and hearer alternatively. But Frank Dance suggested that the process of communication is a process of twisting ascendance, and the linguistic communication is a continuously developing process. [17] Every success in information and meaning transformation means that the communication would be up to a new height. Otherwise, if a participator does not understand or misunderstand of the other participator’s intentional meaning, the communication would be blocked or drawn back. In another word, the linguistic communication is dynamic, the precious information is the foreword of the latter information, and then the latter information becomes the foreword of the next latter information. In this way, the context is changing as the communication is developing. Hence, context is a dynamic concept as well as communication. In the perspective of pragmatics, “static context is by no means unimportant, but we attaché more importance to dynamic context, because communication is based on interactive meaning generation and interpretation on the one hand, and on dynamic negotiation and interpretation of context on the other, and all communication starts from a certain relevant given context, and following the ostensive-inference model, dynamically and effectively arrives at the invisible implicit premise and implicit conclusion.” [18] Actually, the process of understanding an utterance or a text is a process of context proposition and selection. The hearer should select some relevant contextual components to form a communication environment within limited time, so that one can understand the utterance or text more quickly and