论文标题:南海高级润滑油公司竞争战略
Cohesion in English Legal Documents and Fairy Tales
论文作者 黄新友
论文导师 翁君奕,论文学位 硕士,论文专业 工商管理
论文单位 厦门大学,点击次数 82,论文页数 37页File Size1431k
2001-10-01论文网 http://www.lw23.com/lunwen_651781527/ 南海;高级润滑油;竞争战略
Equity securitization;REITs
中国石化股份有限公司茂名分公司南海高级润滑油公司是华南地区规模最大的润滑油生产、销售企业，“南海”牌是广东省著名商标。通过实施名牌战略把“南海”牌发展成为国内著名品牌是南海高级润滑油公司面临日趋激烈的国内外润滑油品牌竞争的必然选择。 本文在查阅了大量资料，广泛收集数据的基础上，通过应用所学的知识，对南海高级润滑油公司的内外部环境进行了全面深入的分析后，提出了实施名牌战略。基于南海高级润滑油公司所拥有的润滑油生产、营销能力及著名的润滑油区域性品牌—“南海”牌。通过调整产品结构，提高中高档润滑油的比例，并加强对销售网络的建设和管理，根据市场需求组织开发、生产新产品，继续开展有特色的用户服务工作，全面实施CIS体系，加大广告宣传力度等措施，把“南海”牌发展成为国内著名的润滑油品牌。 第一章：全面地分析了南海高级润滑油公司在人员、基础油生产、产品规格品种、区域性品牌及销售网络等方面所具有的优势地位并明确了在润滑油产品档次、销售网络管理及全国性知名品牌等方面处于劣势地位。 第二章：明确了南海高级润滑油公司面临着润滑油市场需求稳定增长、润滑油需求档次不断提高的良好发展机遇及国内外润滑油品牌、假冒伪劣润滑油的威胁。 第三章：在分析了南海高级润滑油公司的主要优劣势，面临的主要机会与威胁的基础上，提出了南海高级润滑油公司的竞争战略及其保证措施。
Cohesion in this thesis is defined as a semantic process. Unlike coherence, cohesion is visible and superficial to us. The notable forms of cohesive links are the conjunctions such as and and but, and the deixes such as the and this. All these lexes help to link the sentences together into a discourse or a text.In analyzing cohesion in English, Halliday and Hasan (1976) look on cohesion as a semantic process in respond to the discourse itself, which is also dynamic. They declare two kinds of cohesive devices梩he grammatical ones and the semantic ones. The grammatical ones refer to the lexes which bring to the discourse the grammatical sense such as the deixes the and that; the semantic sense refers to the vocabularies which really make sense, with the most prominent class of nouns. With this classification as the basis, the two linguists again subdivide the category of semantic sense into three types: reference, conjunction and lexical cohesion. The types belonging to grammatical cohesion are substitution and ellipsis. It is from this point that the thesis starts.With the framework of Halliday and Hasan as the basis, the thesis sets its aim to uncover the relation between the use of cohesion and the genre, and the intralink between two kinds of genres, narratives and non-narratives. In order to fulfill the goal, a corpus is built for analysis. There are two kinds of discourses chosen: fairy tales and legal documents, each having 25 texts. The fairy tales and legal documents, as Figure 1 by Finegan (Cf. Chapter One) shows, situate on two ends of the continuum of genres, the fairy tales embodying the narratives and the legal documents standing for the non-narratives. While analyzing the texts, we find out that references have a highest frequency in fairy tales while in legal documents, lexical cohesions have a highest frequency. So from here it can be concluded that the use and frequency of cohesive devices is genre-related. And furthermore, the thesis looks into the possibility of the intralink of the two genres. Accordingly, the thesis introduces two concepts梘rammaticalization and markedness. From the phenomenon of the high frequency of conjunctions in legal documents, the hypothesis of this thesis is that non-narratives are forms once derived from narratives by grammaticalization, which is the routinization of a grammatical phenomenon, and is the marked form in contrast to narratives. In other words, non-narratives are analogous with narratives. To prove the hypothesis suggested, the author uses the statistical method to analyze thecorpus, making use of a formula:Numbers of tiesDistribution of theDevices=*100%Numbers of the clausesThe result is not beyond expectation. From the analysis, the author found that in the discourses of fairy tales, cohesion reference ranks the first; while in the discourses of legal documents, cohesion lexical cohesion ranks the first. With this discovery, it is safe to say that the distribution of cohesion is genre-related, and further, it supports the hypothesis that there does exist intralink between the discourses of narratives and non-narratives.However, during the analysis, there are some problems exist affecting the result of the analysis. The thorniest one is the counting of ties. To make it clear, the paper goes deeper in this problem, trying to find a satisfying answer. So, the author divides three types of cohesive devices according to their syntactic function. As Halliday and Hasan (1976) argues that being grammatical or lexical is not so clear cut, the author drew the conclusion that every kind of devices has two facets, the grammatical sense, and the lexical sense. When either of the sense is weak, the device can only occur with the others but cannot stand independently. Accordingly, ellipsis and conjunction are classified as the independent types; the reference and substitutions, the semi-independent types (excluding the neutral the); and lexical cohesion and the neutral the, the dependent types for there is no instance to prove that they
|
