批評(píng)性語篇分析的修辭維度研究

內(nèi)容概要

　　《批評(píng)性語篇分析的修辭維度研究》采用定性的、闡釋性的批評(píng)分析方法，通過汲取古典修辭學(xué)理論、美國新修辭學(xué)、傳播研究和文化研究等相關(guān)學(xué)科的學(xué)術(shù)智慧，對(duì)修辭學(xué)視角對(duì)CDA的補(bǔ)充完善進(jìn)行了嘗試性探討。本研究的理論基礎(chǔ)是將意識(shí)形態(tài)看作是傳播和權(quán)力的概念聯(lián)系，從而確立意識(shí)形態(tài)與意義的社會(huì)建構(gòu)之間的內(nèi)在聯(lián)系：一方面我們引入霍爾的意識(shí)形態(tài)理論，因?yàn)樵摾碚摻?gòu)了語篇與意識(shí)形態(tài)之間的辯證關(guān)系；另一方面，受Bygrave對(duì)修辭與意識(shí)形態(tài)關(guān)系闡述的啟發(fā)，我們將伯克的語言作為象征性行為與主體性概念聯(lián)系起來以克服CDA的解構(gòu)主義取向。通過對(duì)修辭認(rèn)知性的問題化，我們指出權(quán)力是意義建構(gòu)的一個(gè)重要維度。對(duì)修辭、權(quán)力和意識(shí)形態(tài)之間關(guān)系的深刻洞察構(gòu)成本研究的前提。通過對(duì)古典修辭學(xué)和當(dāng)代修辭學(xué)中散見的對(duì)修辭“自我韜晦”的論述，明確了權(quán)力的修辭邏輯。在對(duì)湯普森的意識(shí)形態(tài)運(yùn)作方式進(jìn)行分析的基礎(chǔ)之上，本研究提出修辭既是意識(shí)形態(tài)的載體又是揭露意識(shí)形態(tài)的工具。通過對(duì)修辭人格的解構(gòu)，試圖確立古典修辭學(xué)同批評(píng)性語篇分析的內(nèi)在聯(lián)系。

書籍目錄

AcknowledgementsList of Figures and TablesChapter 1 Introduction1.1 Origin and Rationale for the Present Study1.2 Objectives of the Present Study1.3 Research Methodology1.4 Organization of the DissertationChapter 2 Literature Review2.1 Intellectual Background for CDA2.1.1 Linguistic Turn in Intellectual Climate2.1.2 Rhetorical Turn in Discourse Studies2.1.3 Critical Turn in the Study of Discourse2.2 CDA: An Overview2.2.1 Genesis of Critical Discourse Analysis2.2.2 A Diverse Picture of Research on CDA abroad2.2.3 Research on CDA at Home2.2.4 Research on Metaphor in CDA2.2.5 Critical Response to CDA2.3 Introduction of the Rhetorical Perspective2.3.1 Discourse Analysis and Rhetorical Criticism:Where They Converge and Diverge2.3.2 Shared Focus between CDA and Critical Rhetoric2.4 SummaryChapter 3 the oreticaI Preliminaries3.1 Defining Key Concepts3.1.1 Discourse3.1.2 Power3.1.3 Ideology3.1.4 Being Critical3.2 Ideology and the Seal Construction of Meaning3.2.1 The Critical Turn in the Study of Communication3.2.2 Language as a Site of Social Struggle3.2.3 Ideology as a Conceptual Link betweenCommunication and Power3.3 The Possibility of Rhetorical lntervention3.4 Ideology, Symbolic Action and Agency3.5 SummaryChapter 4 Rhetoric, Power and Ideology4.1 An Evolving Conception of Rhetoric4.1.1 A Glimpse of Classical Rhetoric4.1.2 An Overview of Rhetoric in Contemporary Times4.1.3 Three Perspectives of Rhetorical Studies4.2 Problematning "Rhetoric as Epistemic4.3 From a Pragmatic View of Rhetoric to Rhetorical Materialism4.3.1 A Turn in Rhetorical Paradigm4.3.2 An Anatomy of Rhetorical Materialism4.3.3 Comparing a Pragmatic Theory of Rhetoric andRhetorical Materialism4.4 A Running Theme in Rhetoric4.4.1 The Self-effacement of Rhetoric4.4.2 Rhetoric and Power4.4.2.1 Rhetoric as Power Articulation……Chapter 5Deconstruction and Reconstruction:Kenneth Burke's Implication for CDAChapter 6 Metaphor as Terministic ScreenChapter 7 Theoretical Model in ActionChapter 8 Conclusions and Implications

章節(jié)摘錄

　　6.1 Three Perspectives on the Relationship between Metaphor and "Realitv"　　6.1.1 Description-oriented View of Metaphor　　In Western thought， scrutiny of metaphor goes as far back as the Sophists， Plato and， most notably， Aristotle. Investigations persist today， with metaphor being a popular topic of inquiry in the natural and social sciences，in linguistics， psychology， philosophy and literary theory， amongst others.　　Etymologically， "metaphor" derives from the Greek metaphora （meta - "over"　　and "phora" - "to carry"） and generally denotes a process of creative　　comparisons or tropes of resemblance between different objects， contexts　　and/or experiences. Along these lines， Burke summarizes metaphor as "a　　device of seeing something in terms of something else" （A Grammar ofMotives 503）. Despite the varying emphasis of different theories of metaphor，they all generally consider metaphor to express the unfamiliar （and at times abstract） in terms of the familiar or to create novel expressions and understandings by comparing dissimilar objects and/or phenomena. The terminology may differ-"tenor" and "vehicle：' "focus" and "frame" or "target" and "source" domains-but there appears to be an underlying agreement that metaphors graft together different fields of meaning.　　Despite this general agreement， the theoretical underpinning of major　　strands of thought on metaphor diverge considerably. A useful way to distinguish between them is by examining their views regarding the relationship between metaphor and "reality." This yields three broad， but not mutually exclusive， perspectives： 1） theories that focus on metaphors' power to describe reality; 2） theories that examine metaphors' capaaty to constitute reality; and 3） theories that propose metaphors' potential as a means of criticizing and transforming reality. In this section， we briefly overview these perspectives and the relationships between them in order to lay the groundwork for metaphor's role in establishing， maintaining and modifying ideology which shall be studied　　and explored later.　　……

圖書封面

評(píng)論、評(píng)分、閱讀與下載

---

    批評(píng)性語篇分析的修辭維度研究 PDF格式下載

---