相关理论基础及其研究概述
言语行为的理论基础
The theory of speech acts is a significant concept in the study of language pragmatics, initially introduced by British philosopher J.L Austin in the 1950s This theory explores how language is used not just to convey information but also to perform actions through speech.
，说话者说话时可能同时实施三种行为：言内行为、言外行为和言后行为
Hành vi ngôn ngữ bao gồm ba loại chính: Hành vi nội ngữ, là hành động nói ra từ, cụm từ và câu, thể hiện nghĩa đen thông qua ngữ pháp, từ vựng và âm vị Hành vi ngoại ngữ thể hiện ý định của người nói, được thực hiện khi nói một số lời nhất định Cuối cùng, hành vi hậu ngữ là hành động phát sinh từ những gì đã nói, hoặc những thay đổi do lời nói gây ra, hoàn thành thông qua việc diễn đạt những câu nói nhất định.
American philosopher J Searle categorizes speech acts into five types, each sharing a common, universal purpose The first type is assertives, which involve statements or descriptions that the speaker believes to be true.
例如：I have never seen the man before / the earth is globe b) 指令类：试图使听话者做某些事情
For instance, phrases like "Open the window!" and "Would you like to go to the picnic with us?" illustrate direct requests and invitations Additionally, commitment statements reflect the speaker's promise to undertake certain actions in the future.
例如：I promise to come / I will bring you the book tomorrow without fail d) 表达类：表达对某一现状的感情和态度。
例如：I’m sorry for the mess I have made / It’s really kind of you to have thought of me e) 宣告类：通过说话引起骤变。
例如：I now declare the meeting open / I fire you
Every category of behavior serves a common purpose, yet the implicit actions associated with that purpose can vary in their effectiveness Language functions not only as a structure but also as a form of action To understand what individuals accomplish or intend when they speak, it is essential to categorize speech acts.
Since the post-Chomskyan era in the 1960s, linguistic research has increasingly recognized that language is not just a structural form or an autonomous system; it is also a social phenomenon that plays a crucial role in communication and even functions as a behavior Consequently, the field of linguistics has shifted away from a singular focus on "linguistic universals," with scholars redirecting their attention to language use, functionality, and communication, leading to a diverse and vibrant landscape of linguistic theories Among these, speech act theory has emerged as a particularly noteworthy branch of study.
J.L Austin is widely regarded as the pioneer of speech act theory, primarily using the term "performative" rather than the more common "speech act." Researchers in this field, including Austin, focus on the concept that "to say is to do," suggesting that speaking inherently involves performing actions or achieving specific goals To understand what individuals accomplish through their speech, the study of speech acts begins with categorizing different types of these acts Austin, along with scholars like J Searle and G.N Leech, has made various attempts to classify and analyze these speech acts based on their unique principles.
奥斯丁(J.L Austin)起初认为，人们的话语大体上可分为陈事性和施
There are two main categories of speech acts: constative and performative Constative speech acts state whether something is true or false and possess logical truth value, while performative speech acts do not have logical truth value and are used to bring about an action For instance, when a shipowner declares, "I name this ship 'Freedom'," the ship acquires its name Similarly, when someone advises, "I suggest you quit smoking," they are effectively performing an act of advising J.L Austin later discovered that constative speech acts can also be considered a form of action.
The article categorizes speech acts into three main types: "locutionary," which refers to the act of producing sounds and words; "illocutionary," which involves the intention behind the speech; and "perlocutionary," which focuses on the effects of the speech on the listener This approach moves away from previous classifications to emphasize the significance of speech acts in communication.
Perlocutionary speech acts can be categorized into three types The first type, assertive speech acts, involves a speaker (S) making a statement (X) about a subject (H), conveying an inherent meaning The second type, directive speech acts, focuses on the speaker's intention to influence the listener's actions or beliefs Understanding these distinctions is crucial for effective communication and interpretation of meaning in various contexts.
In the context of speech acts, when S says X to H, the underlying meaning often conveys a different intention, such as expressing a desire for the windows to be closed when stating "this room is cold." Performative speech acts indicate that by saying something, S accomplishes a particular action or outcome Among the various types of speech acts, performative and constative acts have garnered significant scholarly interest Researchers, including J.L Austin, have explored categorizing English verbs based on their performative functions, distinguishing between verbs like "try" as performative and "manage" as constative This classification enhances our understanding of verb characteristics, exemplified by the nuances between "He didn’t listen" and "He didn’t hear," where the latter implies a deeper context involving the paradox of both listening and not listening However, the complexity of word meanings poses challenges in this categorization effort.
Categorizing verbs into strict binary types presents challenges, particularly with verbs like "inform" and "tell," whose classification as agentive or resultative remains debated Moreover, attempting to classify all English verbs is seemingly impractical and can lead to unnecessary complications Consequently, such efforts have subsided after an initial period of enthusiasm.
Unlike J.L Austin, J Searle's understanding of speech acts extends beyond the simplistic notion of "speech as action." He defines speech acts as utterances that possess the characteristics of linguistic actions and are closely tied to specific conversational purposes This includes the speaker's intentions, beliefs, and feelings, as well as the listener's comprehension of these elements.
以上奥斯丁(J.L Austin)等人对言语行为分类的理解,从“动词分析”
、“意图分析”到“语义分析”,表现了学者们对于言语行为问题由表及里
The understanding of speech acts involves a gradual progression from superficial to profound insights, transitioning from form to meaning The classification of speech acts remains a topic of debate, with various interpretations reflecting individual perspectives This ongoing discussion highlights the complexity of categorizing speech acts, as noted by J Searle.
和里奇(G.N Leech)两人的分类,可以看出,除了语义表现式不同外,里奇
(G.N Leech)的分类法将塞尔(J Searle)的“指示性”和“承诺性”两种言
语行为合二为一,此外多设了一种“疑问性”而同时又减少了一种“宣告性
”的种类。对此，本文拟在下面做一些具体分析。
Searle categorizes speech acts into indicative and commissive types based on their semantic expressions, highlighting that while both trigger changes in the objective world, they differ in other semantic components Leech argues that despite Searle's classification suggesting a "deep structure" distinction, indicative and commissive speech acts should be considered similar due to their shared deep structure, including the ability to follow non-declarative object clauses or infinitives and their identical temporal reference We concur with Leech, noting that aside from their structural similarities, the semantic content of both types is also comparable In Searle's framework, the psychological states of "desire" and "intention" are often indistinguishable, with even the speaker sometimes unclear about the differences The primary distinction lies in "who" performs the action, yet both share the crucial commonality of "an action being performed," which can be abstracted as a defining characteristic Thus, when the corresponding direction, psychological state, and propositional content are similar, the agent markers can align, reflecting the same communicative intent.
间接言语行为理论的提出是赛尔(J Searle)的最大贡献所在。赛尔(J
Searle)认为间接语言现象实际上是“通过实施另外一种语言行为来间接地
语言对比理论
Contrastive linguistics is a branch of modern linguistics focused on comparing the similarities and differences between two languages to address teaching and translation challenges This comparison can occur at various levels, including phonetics, grammar, vocabulary, semantics, and pragmatics, as well as from cultural, psychological, and ethnic perspectives Additionally, researchers examine the punctuation systems of different languages With the ongoing advancement of globalization, contrastive linguistics has gained increasing attention from scientists and scholars worldwide.
Contrastive linguistics, a subfield of applied linguistics, has always been focused on studying the differences between two languages, as clearly articulated by scholars such as Wo, Lado, and Chomsky Lado also suggested exploring the relationship between language and culture, a topic that initially went unnoticed but has gained attention from some researchers in recent years The understanding of the nature of this discipline is not static; it evolves and deepens over time.
In the mid-1970s, P V Buren and R Dirven argued that contrastive linguistics is not useful for foreign language teaching but can enhance understanding of language structures and the relationships between language systems, serving as a discovery procedure to identify commonalities across different languages In 1978, P H Breitenstein classified contrastive linguistics into two categories: scientific and pedagogical.
Contrastive linguistics lacks its own independent theory and evolves in tandem with theoretical linguistics It initially aligned with structuralist linguistics and later adopted theories and methods from various linguistic schools as they emerged As Dipietro noted, "A contrastive analysis can become as complex as the linguistic theory it is connected to, a principle worth remembering When theories change, new contrastive approaches will emerge If there are inconsistencies within the theory itself, those contradictions will inevitably manifest when applying the theory to contrastive analysis."
Comparative linguistics, as defined by prominent scholar Xu Yulong in his work "Comparative Linguistics," is a branch of linguistics focused on the synchronic comparison of two or more languages Its primary objective is to analyze and describe the similarities and differences between these languages, with particular emphasis on their distinctions This research has applications in various related fields.
Xu Yulong's definition of contrastive linguistics, established in 2002, is widely recognized and endorsed by many scholars This definition highlights the focus of contrastive linguistics as a branch of linguistics on the differences between two distinct languages Additionally, Pan Wenguo, in his work "Contrastive Analysis of English and Chinese" (2005), emphasizes that one of the purposes of language comparison is to enhance a deeper understanding of one's native language.
This article aims to analyze the theories proposed by Mr Xu Yulong and Mr Pan Wenguo in the field of contrastive linguistics It examines aspects such as phonetics, vocabulary, and syntax to explore the nuances of ironic language behavior Additionally, the study compares these findings with Vietnamese, ultimately identifying the similarities and differences between the two languages.
汉语讽刺的定义
Scholars have interpreted the concept of satire from various perspectives, leading to diverse opinions on its meaning To provide a precise definition of satire, we will explore the definitions found in different Chinese dictionaries and examine the interpretations offered by various researchers in detail.
1.3.1中国辞书里关于讽刺所下的定义
《辞海》对讽刺的定义如下：“不用正言，以微言托意。”
《辞源》对讽刺的解释是：“以婉言隐喻讥讽人”。诗周南关雎序：
The phrase emphasizes the importance of communication and advice, suggesting that both the influence of positive guidance ("wind") and the challenges posed by criticism ("sting") serve as metaphors for constructive dialogue It asserts that those who express their thoughts face no blame, while those who listen are sufficiently warned to reflect on their actions.
In the "Comprehensive Chinese Dictionary," the term "satire" has two meanings: first, it aligns with the definition in "Ciyuan," referring to the use of euphemistic language to mock individuals; second, it denotes a literary technique that employs irony or ridicule to depict various aspects of social life.
The Modern Chinese Dictionary defines satire as a technique that employs metaphor, exaggeration, and other methods to expose, criticize, or mock individuals or events.
First, we dismiss the second interpretation of the "Comprehensive Chinese Dictionary," as literary irony is a creative method that, while related to the conversational irony studied in this article, is fundamentally different in nature.
根据各辞书对讽刺概念的定义，我们可以看出讽刺具有两个本质特征
The article discusses two forms of expression: euphemism and sarcasm Euphemism involves using gentle language to convey messages indirectly, while sarcasm serves a more biting purpose, aiming to wound others through pointed remarks Sarcasm employs subtlety and indirectness, often conveying criticism through hints and allusions, targeting specific events, phenomena, or individuals without straightforward language.
1.3.2文艺学美学对讽刺的定义
中国最早的文学理论著作《文心雕龙》中，刘勰虽然没有系统的对讽
In "Book of Rites, Chapter 25," it is explained that the term "刺" (ci) refers to a sharp critique or satire The poet employs satire with a piercing force, as seen in the three critiques of the Zhou rites, where events are interconnected This highlights the essence of satire, emphasizing that the notion of "wind" is multifaceted, conveying deeper meanings beyond the surface.
The term "风" is a borrowed character for "讽," which here refers to "讽喻," indicating a subtle critique of human affairs In contrast, "讽" denotes a more severe form of criticism or reproach Together, "讽" and "刺" imply a distinct type of "刺," representing a unique and pointed form of critique.
“直刺”不同的“谑而不谑、“婉而多讽”、“温柔敦厚”之“刺”。
Lu Xun (1995) defines satire as the art of an author who, using concise or even exaggerated language, depicts the truth about a group or a facet of society, which is recognized as 'satire.' He emphasizes that the essence of satire lies in its connection to reality Similarly, Ai Rongben (1988) describes satire as the creative expression of an author who passionately exposes the absurd and incongruous elements of their subject, revealing its inherent worthlessness.
Satire, as defined by Shu Cheng (1987), is a technique that uses exaggeration or cleverness to expose the worthlessness of life, prompting audiences to experience a sense of negation and emotional pleasure from the portrayal of ugliness Zeng Qingyuan (1998) describes satire as a contradictory movement that reveals the essence of characters and events, leading to laughter Additionally, Wang Qingsheng in the "Dictionary of Literary Creation" defines satire as a form of artistic expression.
From a specific perspective and aesthetic viewpoint, the use of satire and irony serves to depict the detrimental aspects of society and outdated elements in real life This approach aims to create a comedic effect while simultaneously denouncing and condemning these issues.
The definitions of satire in the literary and artistic communities remain inconsistent and lack a solid consensus, often relying on metaphorical expressions like "tearing apart to show." Some definitions follow celebrity interpretations, while others fall into circular reasoning, as seen in Wang Qingsheng's work Furthermore, literary satire as an artistic technique differs significantly from the discourse satire we are examining, which possesses a distinct power of influence.
1.3.3修辞学对讽刺所下的定义
In "Modern Chinese Rhetoric" (1963), Zhang Gong defines satire as a rhetorical device that employs language to express an uncompromising rejection of the actions or negative phenomena within society, often through humor Similarly, Yang Hongru in "Contemporary Chinese Rhetoric" (1993) describes satire as a means of utilizing a specific linguistic approach to reveal and denounce the actions of adversaries or internal contradictions, emphasizing a complete denial of these behaviors Yang highlights that this "specific" approach often involves indirect and nuanced expressions.
Satire often blurs the lines between humor and criticism, delivering sharp and incisive commentary that targets the core of societal issues It serves as a literary technique that highlights the contradictions in unreasonable, erroneous, or corrupt aspects of life, aiming to denounce and critique them Utilizing rhetorical devices such as exaggeration, irony, and metaphor, satire effectively underscores its messages, making it a powerful tool for social commentary.
1.3.4 语用学与认知语言学对讽刺所下的定义
Tang Shansheng (2003) recognizes sarcasm as a linguistic act, defining it as a speech behavior where the speaker uses seemingly positive or affirming language to convey a negative evaluation, particularly towards the listener He notes that irony is a subset of sarcasm but acknowledges that this view is not comprehensive Additionally, Zhu Xiaozhou (2002) explores sarcasm from the perspectives of cooperative principles, politeness principles, and speech act theory, suggesting that sarcasm is an indirect speech act that veils a face-threatening behavior Sarcasm arises when speakers politely violate the quality maxim, allowing them to mask impolite remarks with a veneer of politeness, thereby adhering to cooperative and politeness principles while expressing their true intentions Li Keping (2003) builds on H.P Grice's theories to analyze the pragmatic features and intentions of sarcasm, categorizing it into declarative, directive, promissory, and expressive forms He emphasizes that the literal meaning of sarcastic discourse often represents an ideal state of action, where the speaker appears to express satisfaction and gratitude in a light-hearted tone, yet this façade frequently contains obvious exaggeration, creating a stark contrast with the actual context.
越南语中对讽刺的定义
对应于汉语中的“讽刺”概念，越南语中就有了“mỉa mai”（嘲讽
），“châm biếm”（讽刺），“nói mát”（凉说——说甜言的讽刺），
和“nói móc”（说锋利的话语）及“xúc xiểm”（讥讽），其中“mỉa mai
“Mỉa mai” là một thuật ngữ thuần Việt, được hình thành từ từ “mỉa” Theo định nghĩa của Huang Pi (2012), “mỉa” được hiểu là “giễu cợt bằng cách nói cạnh khóe hoặc nói ngược lại điều mà ai cũng thấy rõ”, tức là sử dụng sự châm biếm hoặc phản ngữ để chế giễu một sự vật hay hiện tượng rõ ràng Trong khi đó, “mỉa mai” có nghĩa là “mỉa bằng cách nói ngược lại với ý mà mình muốn cho người ta hiểu”, tức là truyền đạt ý nghĩa thực sự thông qua những lời nói trái ngược.
“Châm biếm”（针砭）是汉越词，而且每个语素都各有其义。其 中：
“Châm”（针）：是指“缝衣服用的工具，也是指用来按穴位刺入 病人人体内以治病”。
"Biếm" (砭) là một loại "kim đá" được sử dụng trong y học cổ truyền, nơi người ta dùng kim đá để châm cứu và điều trị bệnh Hiện nay, thuật ngữ này còn được áp dụng để chỉ những lời nhắc nhở hoặc ám chỉ nhằm ngăn cản ai đó phạm phải sai lầm.
"Nói mát" là một hình thức giao tiếp mà trong đó lời nói có vẻ nhẹ nhàng, như lời khen ngợi, nhưng thực chất lại mang ý nghĩa châm biếm hoặc chỉ trích Hình thức này thể hiện sự khéo léo trong việc truyền tải thông điệp phê phán mà không trực tiếp chỉ trích, làm cho người nghe có thể cảm nhận được sự mỉa mai ẩn sau những câu nói ngọt ngào.
"Nói móc" là hành động sử dụng những lời châm chọc, nhằm chỉ trích hoặc soi mói những khuyết điểm của người khác một cách có chủ ý, với mục đích khiêu khích hoặc làm tổn thương.
（故意抓住别人的短处并用讥讽来打击别人）
Xúc xiểm, hay còn gọi là sự chế giễu, là hành động đặt điều và xúi giục một người gây hại hoặc tạo ra mâu thuẫn với người khác Hành vi này không chỉ làm tổn thương đến danh dự của người bị xúc xiểm mà còn có thể gây ra những xích mích nghiêm trọng trong các mối quan hệ xã hội.
Although Vietnamese has many words corresponding to the concept of irony in Chinese, the essence of irony ultimately aims to satirize, critique, and combat various social vices and negative phenomena.
总而言之，按《từ điển Thiều Chửu》(卲晭词典——汉越词典) 中，“
Châm biếm”（针砭）就有两种意思。（1）: 是指用针或尖石头扎入人体以
Châm biếm là một hình thức nghệ thuật giao tiếp, được định nghĩa là việc chế giễu một cách hóm hỉnh nhằm phê phán Theo từ điển Hán-Việt (2005), châm biếm không chỉ giúp chữa bệnh mà còn có tác dụng khuyên ngăn, ngăn chặn những sai lầm có thể xảy ra Điều này cho thấy tầm quan trọng của châm biếm trong việc phản ánh và phê phán xã hội.
According to speech act theory, when a speaker employs expressions of sarcasm or irony, they are violating the "Cooperative Principle" proposed by American philosopher H.P Grice in 1950.
The essence of sarcasm lies not in the quality of the statement itself, but rather in the underlying implications of the speaker's intent This indicates that sarcastic speech acts represent a form of implicit expression in discourse.
本文对讽刺的见解
Based on various definitions of sarcasm from Chinese and Vietnamese dictionaries, it is generally agreed that sarcasm is an indirect linguistic act used to criticize or mock someone through euphemistic language To better elucidate the essence of sarcasm, we define it as a speech act where the speaker employs implied meanings to achieve their objectives Furthermore, sarcastic discourse involves several key elements: the context that gives rise to the sarcasm, the speaker's negative evaluative attitude, the use of euphemistic language to convey sarcasm, and the speaker's intent to expose, criticize, or ridicule the actions and behaviors of a specific target.
In general, we understand the concept of sarcastic speech acts as the expression of criticism, exposure, or mockery directed at others by the speaker through euphemistic language within a specific discourse context.
、贬损等否定性的间接言语行为。
讽刺是一种言语行为
Austin posits that speaking is an act of doing, while J Searle asserts that all modes of linguistic communication involve speech acts He emphasizes that the fundamental unit of language communication is not the symbols, words, or sentences typically perceived, but rather the act of speaking itself.
In Chinese, "sarcasm" is an action characterized by its performative nature, making it a form of speech act To define sarcasm as a specific type of speech act, it is essential to consider the elements that constitute sarcastic verbal behavior.
1.6.1讽刺言语行为的要素
When describing a speech act, several key elements must be considered According to Kott (1983), to identify the primary function of a speech act, one must analyze seven factors: the speaker, the listener, their interaction, the language code used, the context, the topic, and the form of information He emphasizes that the central function of speech is determined by the goals of the speech activity This framework is particularly useful in analyzing the elements of irony, which consists of four key components: the context that leads to the ironic speech act, such as events or discourse; the speaker's negative evaluative attitude towards that context; the specific manner of expression, often characterized by euphemism; and the speaker's intention to expose, criticize, or mock the actions of a specific target The following analysis will delve into these four elements of ironic speech acts.
（1）存在导致讽刺言语行为发生的背景
To create sarcastic speech, there must be a triggering factor, such as a specific event, statement, or characteristic This trigger is essential for the speaker to convey their sarcastic intent effectively.
The speaker's verbal response to the trigger point highlights the irony directed at the perpetrator of the event, the issuer of the discourse, or the owner of the characteristic This sarcastic language serves as a reaction to the incident or discourse, specifically targeting the individual responsible for the action or statement.
例1：（背景：老舍在山东大学讲书时，有一次演讲说）
老舍：文艺作品中的坏人形象大都是脑满肠肥，一脸横肉的大胖 子。
At the time, this statement went unnoticed by the audience However, a week later, a well-dressed, portly "gentleman" named Liang Shiqiu took the stage to deliver an academic report, and during his presentation, he suddenly shifted his focus.
In my personal observation, villains in both Chinese and foreign literary works are often depicted as slender individuals, with necks as thin as those of monkeys.
听报告的人知道，老舍正是脖子很细的瘦子。
但是，老舍没有卷入这次争端，而是斥之为“无聊”。 1
In the example discussed, it remains unclear whether Lao She intended to be sarcastic in his speech; he may have simply been expressing his view that the archetype of a villain in literature is a "fat, bloated man," without targeting anyone specifically Later, it is noted that Lao She dismissed the ensuing controversy as trivial, indicating that his remarks do not warrant further debate However, Liang Shiqiu interpreted Lao She's comments as a direct attack, prompting him to respond in kind In this context, the intent and target of the satire from Liang Shiqiu's perspective are distinctly evident.
（2）讽刺者具有否定性评价态度
众所周知，当讽刺者对某人、某一事件或某一行为等持有反对、否定
A crucial factor in determining whether a satirist employs sarcasm is their underlying intention When individuals express dissatisfaction or frustration, they are more likely to resort to sarcastic remarks Understanding the satirist's motives is essential in interpreting the use of satire effectively.
1 转引黄杨英-关联翻译理论与幽默讽刺之本的翻译）
（3）话语实现方式
Satire refers to the speaker's critical or dissatisfied attitude towards the characteristics and actions of a subject, expressed through language As a result, satire is considered impolite behavior that threatens the negative face of the other party.
Effectively expressing dissatisfaction in a subtle manner is crucial for speakers, as direct expressions can easily devolve into mere criticism or insults Therefore, indirectness is a vital component of sarcasm As He Zhaoxiong (2000) noted, communication can be categorized into straightforward statements and more nuanced, implicit expressions He also highlighted that rhetorical devices such as sarcasm, irony, and metaphor carry indirect meanings Consequently, the subtlety of sarcasm manifests as an indirect speech act in verbal communication.
（4）讽刺者实施这一言语行为的目的
The power of sarcastic language lies in its ability to reveal, criticize, and belittle a specific target, often causing the subject to feel hurt This sharpness makes sarcasm more piercing than general criticism, effectively delivering a more profound impact.
1.6.2讽刺与相关概念的区分
Satire is a powerful linguistic act that poses significant questions in pragmatics Key concepts related to satire include irony, sarcasm, and humor It is essential to define "satire" within the context of the Chinese language and to clarify whether it is synonymous with irony, sarcasm, or humor Understanding the distinctions among satire, irony, sarcasm, and humor is crucial for a comprehensive grasp of these rhetorical devices.
This article aims to clarify the complex relationships between irony, humor, and satire, enabling a detailed analysis of the strategies used in satirical speech acts We will provide an in-depth exploration of these concepts through authoritative dictionaries and the perspectives of various scholars.
1.6.2.1 讽刺与反讽、反语的区分
Irony, as defined in the 2002 supplementary edition of the "Modern Chinese Dictionary," refers to the use of language that expresses a meaning contrary to its surface interpretation, often through sarcasm This definition highlights that irony occurs when the inherent meaning conveyed in a specific context diverges from its literal meaning We adopt this definition for our discussion.
讽刺言语行为的研究概述
1.7.1.中国学者的研究现状
Chinese scholars have made significant contributions to the study of sarcastic discourse, drawing various conclusions; however, previous research has primarily focused on satire within literary and rhetorical contexts Some researchers have combined discourse sarcasm with literary satire, as seen in the works of Liu Yuxia (2004), Zhang Zhengwu (2003), and Zhang Yanhong (2004) Sarcastic discourse is a powerful form of indirect speech act and is a key issue in pragmatics, yet dedicated studies specifically examining sarcasm as a linguistic behavior remain limited Notable research includes Li Keping's (2002) alignment with renowned foreign scholar Grice's theory to analyze irony and its pragmatic characteristics and intentions Additionally, Song Chunfeng (2012) conducted an in-depth pragmatic analysis of sarcastic discourse in "Dream of the Red Chamber," exploring various aspects such as type analysis, strategic use, contextual factors, and pragmatic functions, confirming that different sarcastic expressions serve distinct pragmatic functions, both primary and secondary.
In his 2001 study, Li Jianjun approaches satire primarily from a pragmatic perspective, focusing on its use in literary and rhetorical contexts, yet he overlooks its frequent application in newspapers, online platforms, and everyday life, resulting in a somewhat narrow analysis Meanwhile, Yan Lihong (2007) emphasizes the role of exaggeration, humor, and wit in crafting sharp and lively language that places subjects in a comical light, achieving critical objectives while maintaining a subtle undertone rather than a confrontational edge To encapsulate the essence of irony in writing, one might describe it as an art of restraint.
1.7.2 越南学者的研究现状
在越南目前也有了一些关于讽刺语言的研究，如阮清秀（2005）在
The article "The Unique Art of Satire in Ruan Aiguo's 'Micro Actions'" focuses on the satirical techniques employed by Ruan Aiguo Wu Shijiu's (2005) study, "Humor in Russian Newspapers," restricts itself to analyzing the artistic styles of humor found in Russian press Pan Maojing (2003) discusses the logic and illogic in Vietnamese texts, suggesting that humorous satire is a non-logical linguistic form Ruan Xing (2003) highlights the unique expressions in Vietnamese, noting that Vietnamese speakers often use the phonetic characteristics of their language to convey satire about individuals or phenomena However, these studies have not directly addressed satire as a speech act or thoroughly analyzed the phonetic, lexical, and syntactic features of satirical speech acts, ultimately treating satire merely as an artistic technique.
1.7.3.对比研究现状
Despite the lack of comprehensive research on sarcasm as a linguistic phenomenon, particularly in a comparative context between Chinese and other languages, Huang Wuying's 2009 study is a notable exception Her work focuses on the translation of humorous and sarcastic texts through the lens of relevance theory, utilizing numerous examples to illustrate her points.
The relevance of argumentative and associative translation theory in translating humorous and satirical texts is evident Currently, there is a noticeable gap in comparative studies on sarcastic language behavior between Chinese and Vietnamese.
In summary, while scholars both domestically and internationally have explored satire from various perspectives, most research has primarily focused on its artistic expression in literary works and rhetoric, or has limited discussions to different forms and functions of satire There has been a lack of in-depth analysis regarding how individuals express satire through language in speaking, writing, and communication This article approaches satire as a linguistic behavior, categorizing and analyzing instances from Chinese and Vietnamese newspapers, online reports, and everyday language It identifies the linguistic features through which satire is conveyed in both languages and highlights the similarities and differences in the use of satirical language behavior Therefore, this study addresses certain shortcomings in previous research on satire.
按照奥斯丁(J.L Austin)的观点，说话就是做事。赛尔（Searle）认为
Language communication involves verbal expression, where the fundamental unit is not symbols, words, or sentences as commonly perceived, but rather speech acts.
Trong tiếng Hán-Việt, "讽刺/ châm biếm" là một động từ, thể hiện rõ tính chất hành động Do đó, châm biếm được coi là một hành vi ngôn ngữ.
The concept of sarcasm is interpreted in various ways, but it is generally understood as a form of expression that employs indirect language, subtle hints, and implications rather than straightforward statements This rhetorical device is used to convey negative evaluations or dissatisfaction towards specific behaviors or actions, allowing the speaker to indirectly reveal, critique, or belittle the subject in question.
Satire is not an isolated concept; it is intricately connected to irony, sarcasm, and humor The relationship among satire, irony, and sarcasm is complex Formally, satire encompasses both irony and general satire, with reverse irony serving as a means of expression for satire, while general satire refers to satire that is not expressed through irony Humor and satire often coexist, making it challenging to distinguish between the two It can be said that a speaker frequently infuses humor into satire or incorporates satirical elements into humor.
话语讽刺是我们日常生活交际中随处可见的一种言语行为，语力极强
In contrast to literary satire, discourse satire is significantly more straightforward and impactful Analyzing satire as a form of speech act provides the clearest insight into a nation's mindset and thought processes.