A Study In Generic Intertextuality

Generic intertextuality has been discussed a lot and has been defined differently in various perspectives. In critical approach, it"is mainly concerned with current or historical relations between genres or types of discourse, each of which can be seen as presupposing a collective subject or a kind of addressees in the sense that each type of discourse is more or less in the monopoly of a social group, a class or an institution and different social sections are privileged by different discourse types". (Xin Bin, Intertextuality from a Critical Perspective 93) In Generic studies, generic intertextuality refers to the dynamic and mixture of genres, since genres are dynamic and historical, responding to the dynamics of other parts of social systems.Although generic intertextuality has been studied a lot, the studies in generic intertextuality are not satisfactory and obviously have some limitations. First of all, studies in the essential properties of genre in some sense hinder the exploration of generic intertextuality. Generic intertextuality is a type of intertextuality mainly involving genres. The properties of genre are extremely diverse and always concluded from certain perspectives, which determine it is by no means easy to decide all criteria for genre. It often appears to be rather arbitrary to decide what can be involved in generic intertextuality.Secondly, it seems that the previous studies in generic intertextuality prefer to the variations in generic strategies in formal ways. The formal features of generic intertextuality are more concerned and the issues of the cognitive mechanism in generic intertextuality process are less addressed.Thirdly, although the closely relationship between generic intertextuality and ideologies has been well accepted in studies in generic intertextuality in critical approach, no further details about any operable linkage between them are explored. We have not got full ideas about how to realize the association between generic intertextuality and ideologies, or what the carrier of ideologies is and in what way ideologies function in generic intertextuality.Last but not least, the theoretical foundation for generic intertextuality seems not convincing or sensible enough. Studies in generic intertextuality are variously conducted based on different theoretical assumptions. Each rationale used in studies is partly convincing and sensible since it only concerns one perspective or dimension of generic intertextuality. And furthermore, as studies relevant to generic intertextuality such as interdiscursivity more focus on the interdiscursive characters of a text being realized in semantic, grammatical and lexical features of the text, we actually explore generic intertextuality at the level of discourse rather than genre. We can hardly distinguish intertextuality on the genre level from that on the discourse level. After all, every discourse is a configuration of genre.Thus, we may well suggest the necessity of constructing a more macro and powerful or inclusive rationale for studies in generic intertextuality. The rationale we try to construct is a macro social semiotic rationale. It is well known that semiology is first proposed by the great linguist Saussure whose aim is to set up an appropriate position for language study. So, semiology is kind of language oriented and the foundation for interaction, interdependence, and interrelational constraints between linguistics and semiology has been long set. The combination of semiotics and linguistics is not only possible or practical but also sensible. (Wang Mingyu,"Linguistic Semiotics from the Semiotic Perspective"8)Taking Saussure's view of language as semiotic, Peirce's approach to semiotic, and Halliday's view of language as social semiotic, we set up a system for language as well as its environmental semiotics in a macro way. By the system of language and its environmental semiotics, we make clear the positions of discourse, register, genre and ideology as well as the relationships among them. We define the discourse as a whole sign rather than a collection of signs, hence genre as the highest plane in the system of language and its environmental semiotics is in essential a macro social semiosis system. Accordingly, generic intertextuality can be considered as the relations among the components within the semiosis system of genre, which itself can be taken as semiosis system.Based on this view, we try to employ the approach for semiotic studies to our generic intertextuality study. There are at least two dimensions we can take in generic intertextuality study, generic intertextuality system and generic intertextuality process. What's more, according to our global analysis on system of language and its environmental semiotics, we propose the third dimension, generic intertextuality focus.In the dimension of generic intertextuality system, generic intertextuality is a resource system with sets of potentials, including disciplinary potentials, macro-speech act potentials, evaluation potentials, and modality potentials. With the help of genre studies, we accomplish disciplinary potentials, macro-speech act potentials and evaluation potentials; while by referring to studies in multimodalities in semiotics we bring about modality potentials.If generic intertextuality system is to answer what are potentials to choose, generic intertextuality process is to find the cognitive mechanism of generic intertextuality, explaining how the potentials of the resource system can be chosen from to realize the process of generic intertextuality or the configuration of generic intertextuality system. The cognitive mechanism of generic intertextuality embraces two respects. One is about the cognitive models for each set of potentials, and the other one is about conceptual integration in the form of mental models. We employ a space blending theory to explain generic intertextuality process. There are four spaces in blending, specifically two input spaces, one generic space and one blended space. Probably, more than two genre spaces as input spaces are integrated into the blended space through generic space.Generic intertextuality as the relations among the components within the semiosis system of genre must highlight the values of interpretant in its process. The interpretant in generic intertexutality process is the motivation of choice which is the theme of our third dimension for generic intertextuality study. Our discussion of generic intertextuality focus is to answer why this part of input spaces is mapped, not the others, or what the motivation of the blending is. In this sense, the discussion of generic intertextuality focus is a complement to that of generic intertextuality process. It is answered by reference to an action theory. We assume that the key notion of intention in the theory of action controls the focus of generic intertextuality.Furthermore, since we have proven the interdependent relation between ideologies and each plane, we even discuss the role of ideologies functioning on the focus and argue that there is always an interaction between ideologies and generic intertextuality. They are mutually influenced and interdependent.After the three-dimensional theoretical model construction, we further apply our achievements to diverse domains of English teaching, hoping what we have achieved can have some implications for pedagogy.We divide our dissertation into eight chapters. Chapter One is to give an overall introduction of our study. It briefs the origins of our study, illustrates the rationale of our study, make clear the aims and objectives we try to achieve, and skeletons the outline of the dissertation. Chapter Two presents a review of relevant theoretical background of generic intertextuality. In this chapter, conclusive statements of achievements from previous studies in generic intertextuality as well as their deficiencies are given. Chapter Three is to construct a three-dimensional theoretical model for generic intertextuality study with a macro social semiotic rationale. From Chapter Four to Chapter Six, we respectively discuss generic intertextuality system, generic intertextuality process and generic intertextuality focus in detail. Chapter Seven is devoted to the applications in English teaching. Some hints for English teaching we get from generic intertextuality study are stated briefly. The last chapter summarizes the major findings of our study. And meanwhile, some limitations are also present and suggestions for further research are proposed.Our study in generic intertextuality is an attempt to build a comprehensive and multi-dimensional framework for generic intertextuality. We introduce a new macro social semiotic view into our study in generic intertextuality, which successfully broadens the language-as-only-modality approach to study in generic intertextuality into a multimodality approach. And when we employ the blending theory to explain the cognitive mechanism in generic intertextuality process, we manage to extend the horizon for generic intertextuality study. Furthermore, the third dimension we propose for generic intertextuality study is significant for making clear the closely relationship between ideologies and generic intertextuality, as well as realizing the link between them.The aim of our study is to construct a multi-dimensional theoretical model for generic intertextuality study to help more deeply realize its values and understand its cognitive mechanism and get some ideas of its relationship with social construction. Besides, we also hope our study can provide some hints for English practices in any domains and theoretical reference for studies in other fields.