摘 要
欧内斯特·海明威（1899-1961） 是美国二十世纪著名的小说家，本世纪世界公认的优秀作家之一。海明威的作品，具有独特的文风，文字简洁，浓缩洗炼，表达准确、精当，具有貌似单纯，实则蕴涵丰富的特点。《白象似的群山》是海明威短篇小说的经典之作。小说以其独特的视角和艺术手法展示了一个亘古不变的两性话题。小说的主体部分是对话。目前对《白象似的群山》研究可以概括为文学、修辞学两个主研究方向，语言学一个次研究方向。在文学方面，学者们从人物、主题、表达方式进行阐述。“冰山理论”也被结合用于分析此文的深层含义。在修辞方面，学者们探讨了重复、象征、对比和双关手法。在语言学方面，连贯与推理理论、系统功能学被应用分析对话。
但是相比文学和修辞学，《白象似的群山》研究较少涉及语言学方面。文中有些问答是答非所问，有些场景看似独立，其实是有内在联系的。这需要衔接理论来认识这些内在的联系。虽然有作者关注了这点，但她的覆盖面不广，仅分析了其中的一段对话，且其理论体系不够完整。因此，本文拟从衔接的角度分析《白象似的群山》。通过结合于学勇的衔接分析模式的语篇外衔接部分、韩礼德的语篇内衔接部分和张德禄的跨类衔接，对此文进行比较全面的、进一步的研究，挖掘其更多的美学价值。
本文的基本内容包括四个部分：（一）相关文献的综述；（二）结合于学勇的衔接分析模式的语篇外衔接部分、韩礼德的语篇内衔接部分和张德禄的跨类衔接重构语篇衔接的分析模式；（三）应用新的衔接模式来分析小说《白象似的群山》。（四）得出结论，阐明本文的局限性以及未来研究的方向。拟解决的问题是从衔接角度分析《白象似的群山》，并且能对衔接理论有新的认识。
关键词：海明威小说；衔接；解析
ABSTRACT
Ernest Hemingway（1899-1961）was a famous American novelist in 20th century, one of the world-wide renowned writers. His novels feature conciseness and accuracy outwardly, yet richness inwardly. His classic short story Hills like White Elephants, whose dialogues occupy the main body, covers the perpetual love topic through a unique viewpoint and way of expression. At present, most of the former researches on Hills like White Elephants mass in literature, rhetorical perspectives while have little to do with linguistics perspective. In literature view, scholars attach importance to protagonists, themes and ways of expression, in which Hemingway’s famous Iceberg Theory contributes to the story’s profound analysis. Some researchers discuss the rhetorical value of the story in aspects of repetition, symbolism, contrast and puns. Few linguists adopt theories of coherence, deduction and Systemic-Functional linguistics theories to interpret the dialogues.
Overall, the researches of the story are seldom concerning linguistics, compared with literature and rhetoric. After reading the story, readers may get a deep impression of irrelevant answers the two protagonists often give to each other as well as some independent scenes yet with inner relations. To understand those points thoroughly requires cohesion theory. Some writers utilize this theory, however, their papers, taking an incomplete theoretical system, don’t cover all the points. They just touch the theory without going to it deeply. Therefore, by combining the external cohesion part of Yu Xueyong’s cohesion analysis pattern, the internal cohesion part of Halliday’s and the cross-type cohesion part of Zhang Delu’s, this paper tries to carry out a further and comparatively all-round interpretation of Hills like White Elephants from cohesion perspective so as to unearth more aesthetic values of the story.
This paper mainly encompasses four parts: 1. the literature review; 2. combining the external cohesion part of Yu Xueyong’s cohesion analysis pattern, the internal cohesion part of Halliday’s and the cross-type cohesion part of Zhang Delu’s to reconstruct a new cohesive pattern; 3. employing this new pattern to analyze the story; 4. leading to the result, limitation and future direction of the studies. This paper attempts to interpret Hills like White Elephants from cohesion perspective and meanwhile obtain a new knowledge of cohesion theory.
Keywords：Hemingway’ story; cohesion; analysis
Contents
1. Introduction 1
2. Literature review 2
2.1 Literary studies 2
2.1.1 Protagonists 2
2.1.2 Theme 3
2.1.3 Way of expression 3
2.2 Rhetoric studies 4
2.2.1 Repetition 4
2.2.2 Symbols 4
2.2.3 Contrasts 5
2.2.4 Puns 6
2.3 Linguistic studies 6
2.4 Comments on the previous studies 6
3. The reconstruction of the cohesive pattern 8
3.1 The definition of cohesion 8
3.2 The former studies of cohesive pattern abroad and in China 8
3.2.1 Main studies abroad 8
3.2.2 Main studies in China 9
3.3 The reconstruction of a new cohesive pattern 9
4. The analysis of Hemingway’s Hills like White Elephants from cohesion perspective 12
4.1 The external cohesion 12
4.1.1 The ideology of the writer and the context of his writing 12
4.1.2 The typical style of the writer and the features of the genre 13
4.2 The internal cohesion 13
4.2.1 Distribution of information 13
4.2.2 Non-structural cohesion 16
4.2.2.1 Grammatical cohesion 16
4.2.2.2 Lexical cohesion 20
4.2.3 Structural cohesion 25
4.2.3.1 Parallelism 25
4.2.3.2 Thematic-rhematic structure 27
4.2.4 Cross-type cohesion 28
4.2.4.1 Lexical and phrasal cohesion 28
4.2.4.2 Lexical and sentential cohesion 29
5. Conclusion 31
Acknowledgements 33
References 34
