Автор работы: Пользователь скрыл имя, 06 Апреля 2011 в 18:45, курсовая работа
Being able to read and write is an important skill nowadays. But very often this is not enough to be called literate. Due to illiteracy of people who for various reasons are unable to understand what they read, cannot write well enough, or cannot use the words in their speech properly – there are situations of misunderstanding and even conflicts.
Introduction ……………………………………………………………………....3
I. Illiteracy due to the fact of polysemy. Bushisms from a linguistic view ……....5
1.1. A note on bushisms of all times……………………………………………...6
1.2. Bushisms from the inside view ……………………………………………...6
1.3. Bushisms have a common touch …………………………………………….9
1.4. Richard Thompson’s poem about bushisms ………………………………...10
1.5. Other related linguistic elements: …………………………………………...12
- Mondegreens;
- Spoonerisms;
- Damaging quotation;
- Eggcorn;
- Freudian slip.
II. The analysis of the bushisms’ phenomenon ………………………………….20
2.1. Beyond bushisms…………………………………………………………….22
2.2. Various definitions ………………………………………………………….22
2.3. Reasons ……………………………………………………………………...23
2.4. Bushisms: best moments …………………………………………………....27
Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………30
Bibliography……………………………………………………………………..31
A malapropism does not have to be amusing or surprising. It does not
have to be based on a cliché and of course it does not have to be intentional.
There need be no play on words, no hint of deliberate pun. ("Why,
murder's the matter! slaughter's the matter! killing's the matter! But
he can tell you the
perpendiculars. (Mrs. Malaprop in Richard Sheridan's The Rivals)
Mondegreens are in a sense the opposite of malapropisms; they result from something being misheard rather than missaid. Here's a few misheard phrases and song lyrics (the first three are well-known examples):
Spoonerisms are words or phrases in which letters or syllables get swapped. This often happens accidentally in slips of the tongue (or tips of the slung as Spoonerisms are often affectionately called!):
DAMAGING QUOTATION
A damaging quotation is a short utterance by a public figure used by opponents as a discrediting tactic. These utterances are often, but not always, taken out of context or otherwise changed to distort their original meaning. These quotes are compiled into books or posted on the internet and are repeated in other contexts such as in talk radio or in the United States by stand-up comedians in late-night television monologues. The publication of these quotes is justified as a necessary part of maintaining an informed citizenry. In cases where the quote in question is taken widely out of context it can be difficult for a candidate to find recourse, even though it is very easy to check the accuracy and the context of a quote by using internet resources (such as search engines); in popular jargon, the quotation (especially if humorous) can grow into a meme. 6
In the case of malapropisms, it is a logical fallacy to conclude that the entire argument of whoever made the utterance is incorrect. Yet it has become common in partisan argument in the United States. For instance: former U.S. Vice President Al Gore, during an interview with Wolf Blitzer on CNN (March 9, 1999) stated "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system." This has frequently been distorted by opponents to say that Gore claimed to have "invented the Internet". Partisans have so often used this distorted quote to discredit him, so much so that Internet pioneer Vint Cerf (and others who participated in actually inventing the Internet) have made a point of noting Gore's support and the error of the discreditors.
With the availability of inexpensive computers and the widespread use of the Internet, it has become easy for anyone to accumulate and distribute these quotation lists. Like the "Yogiisms" of baseball great Yogi Berra, or the Colemanballs collected by Private Eye, a damaging quotation purports to give insight into the thinking of the speaker, frequently a politician, or of the politicians or political groups that used it as means of attack. As such they belong to the colorful history of political satire.
EGGCORN
FREUDIAN SLIP
A Freudian slip, or parapraxis, is an error in speech, memory, or physical action that is believed to be caused by the unconscious mind. Some errors, such as a man accidentally calling his wife by the name of another woman, seem to represent relatively clear cases of Freudian slips. In other cases, the error might appear to be trivial or bizarre, but may show some deeper meaning on analysis. As a common pun goes, "A Freudian slip is when you mean one thing, but you say your mother." A Freudian slip is not limited to a slip of the tongue, or to sexual desires. It can extend to our word perception where we might read a word incorrectly because of our fixations. These slips are semi-conscious, which is to say that these thoughts are consciously repressed and then unconsciously released. This is unlike true Freudian repression, which is the unconscious act of making something conscious. The Freudian slip is named after Sigmund Freud, who described the phenomenon he called Fehlleistung (literally meaning "faulty action" or "misperformance" in German), but termed as parapraxis (from the Greek meaning "another action" in English). In his 1901 book The Psychopathology of Everyday Life, Freud gives several examples of seemingly trivial, bizarre or nonsensical Freudian slips. The analysis is often quite lengthy and complex, as was the case with many of the dreams in The Interpretation of Dreams. Popularisation of the term has diluted its technical meaning in some contexts to include any slip-of-the-tongue phenomenon. It is a more deeply repressed set of thoughts. Freud believed that verbal slips come from repressed desires. However, cognitive psychologists would counter that slips can represent a sequencing conflict in grammar production. Slips may be due to cognitive underspecification that can take a variety of forms – inattention, incomplete sense data or insufficient knowledge. Secondly, they may be due to the existence of some locally appropriate response pattern that is strongly primed by its prior usage, recent activation or emotional change or by the situation calling conditions. Some sentences are just susceptible to the process of banalisation: the replacement of archaic or unusual expressions with forms that are in more common use. In other words, the errors were due to strong habit substitution. Examples: kurger bing - Burger King; geet oodies - eat goodies; dood ghinner - good dinner. 7
Summing
up the chapter, it should be noted that all these phenomena, as well
as bushisms, is now deeply studied. Scientists develop special methods
to eliminate illiteracy in the various fields of communication. Before
searching the techniques to eliminate illiteracy, it is necessary to
clarify the main cause of the bushisms existence, to understand the
subtleties of language that in the next chapter should be analyzed with
the help of using replicas of Bush, who is actually the main object
whose name is directly related with a new notion in linguistics.
II. THE ANALYSIS OF THE BUSHISMS’ PHENOMENON.
After eight long years, it’s time to say goodbye to President Bush and ponder the legacy he leaves us. Forget the two wars, a trillion-dollar debt, an economy in shambles, Katrina, and an international image that’s a PR nightmare. Number 43 leaves behind a cavalcade of so-called Bushisms that ought to keep us laughing through our tears. Let’s start with his (mis)pronunciation of the word nuclear, which he invariably mispronounced as “nucular”. Then there’s his mangled pronoun usage: “You teach a child to read and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test.” - Yup, he said it, way back in 2001 during a speech in Tennessee. Six years later, his grammar was still failing when he spoke about No Child Left Behind: “As yesterday’s positive report card shows, “childrens” do learn when standards are high and results are measured.” Whether you agree or not with Bush’s immigration policy, you’ve got to love this comment he made in 2005: “Those who enter the country illegally, violate the law.” Thanks for making that clear, Mr. President. Last June, he graced us with this classic example of a misplaced modifier: “I remember meeting a mother of a child who was abducted by the North Koreans right here in the Oval Office.” Really? In the Oval Office? If those North Koreans had left the child and abducted Bush instead, they might have saved the rest of us a lot of trouble.8 Fortunately, the English language is more resilient than the US economy or surely after eight years of Bush’s leadership we would be suffering a linguistic recession as severe as the current economic crisis.
In a recent speech, President Bush offered this insight into what some call the rhetorical situation: “The only thing I can tell you is that when I speak, I'm very conscience about the audiences that are listening to my words”. Apparently the president is so conscious of his "audiences" that he sometimes loses track of his words. As we note in choosing the correct word, the noun conscience means "the sense of what is right and wrong." The adjective conscious means "being aware." The president, we suspect, fully intended to be conscious. Of course, our intention is not to poke fun at the Communicator-in-Chief. Rather, as students of the language, we should express our gratitude. Over the course of his administration, George W. Bush has generously illustrated many principles of English grammar and usage. Here are just a few: 9
"You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test." (February 21, 2001) Credit to Mr. Bush for attempting to use a singular pronoun to refer to a singular noun ("a child"), but both of the pronouns in this sentence really should be in the subjective case: not "he or her" but "he or she." (See Using the Different Forms of Pronouns.)
"When we get the facts, we'll share it with the American people."
(November 8, 2001). Ah, but those pronouns can be almost as slippery as the facts. Let's quietly change "it" to "them" to agree with the noun "facts." (The president may want to work on this Practice Exercise on Pronouns.)
"It's a time of sorrow and sadness when we lose a loss of life."
(December 21, 2004) Indeed. Such needless repetition is called pleonasm.
"The goals of this country is to enhance prosperity and peace."
(Speaking at the White House Conference on Global Literacy, September 18, 2006) Presumably distracted by "this country" (the singular object of the preposition "of"), the president missed the plural subject, "goals." Our advice: use "are," not "is," and visit Correcting Errors in Subject-Verb Agreement).
"We've got pockets of persistent poverty in our society, which I refuse to declare defeat—I mean, I refuse to allow them to continue on. And so one of the things that we're trying to do is to encourage a faith-based initiative to spread its wings all across America, to be able to capture this great compassionate spirit." (March 18, 2002) Fortunately, the mixed metaphors here distract from the more serious breakdowns in syntax.
"And
the question is, are we going to be facile enough to change with - will
we be nimble enough; will we be able to deal with the circumstances
on the ground? And the answer is, yes, we will." (July
25, 2006) "Columbia carried in its payroll classroom
experiments from some of our students in America."
(February 11, 2003) "Projection"? "commiserate"?
"facile"? "payroll"? Not since Mrs. Malaprop herself
have we witnessed such a master of malapropism. So thank you, President Bush,
for expanding the range of the English language and for helping America
to become what you once described as "a literate country and a
hopefuller country."
Информация о работе Bushisms: iiliteracy as a type of polysemy