The Experiential Reconstruction of Literary Work in Adaptations: A Functional Stylistic Analysis of the Original, Simplified and Expanded Versions of <i>Maliang and His Magical Brush</i>

CHEN Yu-min; JU Xue

Jun. 2021

Article Contents

Article Navigation > Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition) > 2018 > 34(2): 6-12

CHEN Yu-min, JU Xue. The Experiential Reconstruction of Literary Work in Adaptations: A Functional Stylistic Analysis of the Original, Simplified and Expanded Versions of Maliang and His Magical Brush[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 34(2): 6-12.

Citation:

CHEN Yu-min, JU Xue. The Experiential Reconstruction of Literary Work in Adaptations: A Functional Stylistic Analysis of the Original, Simplified and Expanded Versions of Maliang and His Magical Brush[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 34(2): 6-12.

Citation:

PDF( 379 KB)

The Experiential Reconstruction of Literary Work in Adaptations: A Functional Stylistic Analysis of the Original, Simplified and Expanded Versions of Maliang and His Magical Brush

CHEN Yu-min,
JU Xue

School of Foreign Languages, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510275, China

Received Date: 2017-10-09
Available Online: 2021-06-01
Publish Date: 2021-06-01

Abstract

Abstract

Drawing upon the transitivity framework in functional stylistics, this paper compares the foregrounding variations in the original, simplified and expanded versions of Maliang and His Magical Brush, and explores the situational motivations underlying the stylistic variations. It is found that the simplified versions differ from the expanded version in terms of the choice of voice in material process and types of mental process. Moreover, the simplified version as textbook discourse and the simplified version as the verbiage of a cartoon differ in their foregrounded ways of projection. The variations in foregrounding are found to be influenced by the multi-level context of situation and communicative purposes of different literary texts. As compared with stylistic analysis of a single text, the comparative study of multiple texts with the same theme could effectively reveals the motivations related to context of situation and the theme of literary work.
- experiential reconstruction,
- functional stylistics,
- foregrounding,
- original literary work,
- adaptation

FullText(HTML)

References(29)

References

[1]	张德禄. 功能文体学研究方法探索[J]. 四川外语学院学报, 2007, (6): 12-16.
[2]	陈瑜敏, 黄国文. 语法隐喻框架下英语文学原著与简写本易读度研究[J]. 外语教学与研究, 2014, (6): 853-864.
[3]	黄国文, 刘衍. 语言复杂性的功能语言学研究——《爱丽丝漫游奇遇记》原著与简写本难易程度比较[J].外语教学, 2015, (2): 1-7.
[4]	Chen, Y.M. Reconstructing classical Chinese fables through modern adaptations: a functional comparative study [J]. Social Semiotics, DOI: 10.1080/10350330.2016.1169610, 2016, (2): 145-157.
[5]	陈瑜敏, 邹妍妍.《爱丽丝漫游奇境记》原著与简写本的复合小句关系对比研究[J]. 外语与外语教学, 2016, (6): 54-62.
[6]	胡壮麟.理论文体学[M]. 北京: 外语教学与研究出版社, 2000.
[7]	申丹. 西方现代文体学百年发展历程[J]. 外语教学与研究, 2000, (1): 22-28.
[8]	刘世生, 宋成方. 功能文体学研究[J]. 外语教学, 2010, (6): 14-19.
[9]	Halliday, M. A. K. The linguistic study of literary texts[A]. In Webster, J. (ed.). Linguistic Studies of Text and Discourse[C]. London: Continuum, 2002: 5-22.
[10]	Halliday, M. A. K. Linguistic function and literary style: an inquiry into the language of William Golding’s The Inheritors[A].In Webster, J. (ed.). Linguistic Studies of Text and Discourse[C]. London: Continuum, 2002: 88-125.
[11]	张德禄. 韩礼德功能文体学理论述评[J]. 外语教学与研究, 1999, (1): 44-50.
[12]	Halliday, M.A. K. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar [M]. Oxon: Routledge, 2014.
[13]	Halliday, M. A. K. & McDonald, E. Metafunctional profile of the grammar of Chinese[A]. In Caffarel, A., Martin, J. R. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.(eds.). Language Typology: A Functional Perspective[C]. Philadelphia:Benjamins, 2004: 305-393.
[14]	洪运.《神笔马良》之父洪汛涛[J]. 博览群书, 2013, (3): 126-127.
[15]	李传新. 话说《神笔马良》及其版本[J]. 百家书话, 2011, (4): 72-73.
[16]	马力.建构与解构——一个文学史现象: 20世纪90年代两岸童话范式转变与研究[M]. 北京:中国社会科学出版社, 2004.
[17]	Halliday, M. A. K. Forward [A].In Birch, D. & O’Toole, M. (eds.). Functions of Style[C]. London: Pinter, 1988: Ⅶ-Ⅸ.
[18]	Halliday, M. A. K. Systemic grammar and the concept of a “science of language”[A].In Webster, J. (ed.). On Language and Linguistics[C].London: Continuum, 1992/2003: 199-212.
[19]	王力.中国语法理论[M]. 山东: 山东教育出版社出版, 1984.
[20]	Li, E.S. Systemic Functional Grammar of Chinese[M]. London: Continuum, 2007.
[21]	Li, C.N. & Thompson, S. A. Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar[M].Berkeley: Universityof California Press, 1981.
[22]	洪汛涛.神笔马良[M]. 北京: 人民文学出版社, 1981.
[23]	韩绍祥.神笔马良[M]. 北京: 人民教育出版社, 2003.
[24]	李治中.神笔马良[M]. 北京: 人民美术出版社, 2010.
[25]	洪汛涛.神笔马良[M]. 浙江: 浙江文艺出版社, 2011.
[26]	Martin, J.R. & White, P.R.R.The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English[M]. London: Palgrave, 2005.
[27]	申丹. 有关功能文体学的几点思考[J]. 外国语, 1997, (5): 2-8.
[28]	雷茜, 张德禄. 现代文体学研究方法的新发展[J]. 现代外语, 2016, (2): 278-286.
[29]	彭宣维, 程晓堂. 理论之于应用的非自足性——评价文体学建构中的理论问题与解决方案[J].中国外语, 2013, (1): 27-35.