演講話語象征性互動研究

前言

學習外語十幾年，我對語言的認識經(jīng)歷了三個階段：中學時認為它是一種交流工具，為我們的生活和工作服務(wù)；大學時接受了英語專業(yè)的系統(tǒng)教育和訓練將它看作是人類文明的載體，為了解使用相關(guān)語言人民的社會、文化和歷史服務(wù)；研究生時修讀了語言學、語言哲學、應(yīng)用語言學、外語教學法、話語分析、文學批評、符號學、西方修辭學及修辭批評等相關(guān)課程與專著，意識到在某種程度上它是人類社會的創(chuàng)造者，指導人類在交流中不斷發(fā)展。認識的不斷深化使我不僅關(guān)注各種語言現(xiàn)象，而且關(guān)注現(xiàn)象背后的原因，進而探索它引導人們通過交流創(chuàng)造社會的途徑與規(guī)律。正是這種思想引發(fā)我思考生活中廣泛存在的一類話語（例如演講、廣告、新聞報道與社論等）：作為交際事件，這些話語中的交際雙方是如何進行交流、溝通并最終就某一議題或事件取得一致意見、達成臨時協(xié)議的？回答了這個問題將有助于我們揭示人們?yōu)橐龑ёh題（正是不斷解決各類議題才推動社會向前發(fā)展的）朝某一期望的方向發(fā)展而進行交流的某些內(nèi)在規(guī)律，這有利于提高互動雙方的交際能力，從而取得良好的交際效果，并最終促進社會發(fā)展。經(jīng)觀察發(fā)現(xiàn)這類話語與修辭學研究的傳統(tǒng)的公眾演說是一脈相承的，有著內(nèi)在的共性，即交際雙方通過多維度、多層面的象征性互動來取得相互認同、達成暫時性的統(tǒng)一，并最終實現(xiàn)各自的交際目的。據(jù)此，為了方便研究這類話語，本書借用舊的命名法“演講”來統(tǒng)指它們，但賦予它新的內(nèi)涵，將它重新界定為：由各式各樣象征性互動組成的特殊話語，它通過人們在特定情景中就面臨的爭議性問題進行相互致辭、互動來取得對相關(guān)議題的臨時性意見一致。

內(nèi)容概要

本書是筆者在上海外國語大學攻讀博士學位期間所做研究的成果。書中揭示了演講的象征性互動本質(zhì)以及修辭的雙程認同性本質(zhì)，探索了演講者與受眾之間的象征性權(quán)力關(guān)系，并在此基礎(chǔ)上建立了一個系統(tǒng)的、可執(zhí)行的、綜合了修辭學與語言學的三維框架從象征性互動的視角來解讀演講話語。

作者簡介

張玉芳，現(xiàn)就職于上海理工大學外語學院，福建省福州市人。2005年獲得福建師范大學英語語言文學專業(yè)碩士學位，2008年獲得上海外國語大學外國語言學及應(yīng)用語言學專業(yè)西方修辭學研究方向的博士學位。研究方向為：修辭學理論、修辭批評、篇章語言學、文體學及其在外語教學中的應(yīng)用。

書籍目錄

Chapter One: Introduction  1.1  The Trigger of the Present Study: the Incongruity between Speech Practice and Speech Criticism  　1.1.1  The Wax of Speech Practice　  1.1.2  The Wane of Speech Criticism  1.2  The General Purpose of the Present Research  1.3  Terminology, Theoretical Resources, and Methodology in This Study　  1.3.1  The Terminology in the Study  　1.3.2  The Theoretical Resources for This Study  　1.3.3  The Methodology in This Study  1.4  The Organization of the DissertationChapter Two: Literature Review: Critical Study of the Rhe-torical Criticism and Discourse Analysis of Speech  2.1  Rhetorical Criticism of Speech  　2.1.1  Speaker-centered Criticism　  2.1.2  Ideology-or-motive-fascinated Criticism　  2.1.3  Effect-driven Criticism　  2.1.4  Context-oriented Criticism　  2.1.5  Critic-determined Criticism　  2.1.6  General Summary of Rhetorical Criticism of Speech  2.2  Discourse Analysis of Speech　  2.2.1  Intra-textual Micro-linguistic Analysis  　2.2.2  Extra-textual Macro-linguistic Analysis　  2.2.3  Combination of Intra-textual with Extra-textual Analyses : Critical Linguistic Analysis (CLA) and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)  　2.2.4  General Summary of Discourse Analysis of Speech  2.3  SummaryChapter Three: The Theoretical Justification for the Present Study  3.1  Why Can We Understand Speech through Symbolic Interaction?　  3.1.1  Symbolic Interaction Represented in the Constituents of Speech  　3.1.2  Symbolic Interaction Demonstrated in the Functions of Speech  3.2  The Theoretical Justification for Rhetorical Perspective　  3.2.1  The Relationship between Speech and Rhetoric  　3.2.2  The Study of Symbolic Interactions in Rhetoric  3.3  The Theoretical Justification for Linguistic Perspective　  3.3.1  The Relationship between Speech and Linguistics  　3.3.2  The Study of Symbolic Interactions in Linguistics  3.4  SummaryChapter Four: Symbolic Interaction from Rhetorical Perspective  4.1  Interaction by Means of Identification  4.2  Interaction on Account of Universal Audience and Universal Value  4.3  Interaction as a Result of "Rhetoric of Assent" and Rhetorology　  4.3.1  Booth's Ethical View on Rhetoric  　4.3.2  Rhetoric of Assent　  4.3.3  Listening Rhetoric (LR) and Rhetorology  　4.3.4  Inspiration for Speech Understanding  4.4  Interaction by Virtue of Argument  4.5  SummaryChapter Five: Symbolic Interaction from Linguistic Perspective  5.1  Intra-textual Interaction　  5.1.1  Interaction in the Intentionality  　5.1.2  Interaction in the Acceptability　  5.1.3  General Summary  5.2  Extra-textual Interaction  　5.2.1  Interaction in the Intertextuality　  5.2.2  Interaction in the Inter-contextuality  　5.2.3  General Summary  5.3  SummaryChapter Six: The Integrative Framework of Rhetoric and Linguistics for Understanding Speech as Symbolic Interaction  6.1  The Relationship between Rhetoric and Linguistics in Speech Criticism  6.2  An Integrative Three-dimensional Framework for Speech Understanding　  6.2.1  Recovering the Context  　6.2.2  Uncovering the Symbolic Power Relations between Speaker and Audience　  6.2.3  Deconstructing the Speech-text  6.3  SummaryChapter Seven: Conclusion  7.1  Major Findings  　7.1.1  Four Key Pairs of Relation　  7.1.2  The Nature of Rhetorical Art: A Dual-process Identifying　  7.1.3  Symbolic Power Relations between Speaker and Audience  　7.1.4  Coined Terms : "Superspeaker," "Pre-text" and "Posttext,"  " Inter-contextuality,"  " Discursivity,"  and  " CON- TEXT"   7.2  Theoretical and Practical Contributions　  7.2.1  Theoretical Contribution: The Integrative Three-dimensional Framework of Rhetoric and Linguistics for Understanding Speech as Symbolic Interaction　  7.2.2  Practical Contributions : Speech Criticism, Audience Awareness, and Pedagogy  7.3  Limitations and Suggestions for Further ResearchWorks CitedList of Tables and Figures

章節(jié)摘錄

According to Kenneth Burke, terminology directs our attention anddefines our observation （Language as Symbolic Action 44-52 ）, and thusdetermines our interpretation of this world. Therefore, in order to direct theattention to this ongoing research field and to some channels rather than toothers, it is worthwhile making clear relevant terms, which will just"  themethod and conclusion of this research.1.3.1.1 SpeechFirst and foremost, it is our research object-speech. In this study, it refersto a special kind of discourse that consists of various symbolic interactions,through human beings in a given context,who address to and interact with eachother in order to achieve temporary agreement on the issue under consideration.This working definition needs some clarifications.In this definition, " discourse" refers to any communicative act or itsartifact, concerning process as well as product. The concept " symbolicinteraction" means interacting with symbols. But, what is symbol？ Although inthe field of semiotics there is no consensus about the concept of symbol, fromlinguistics-based Saussure to philosophy-based Peirce, from anthropology-oriented L~vi-Strauss to culture-oriented Barthes, from psychology-drivenFreud and Lacan to philosophy-driven Cassirer, all of these prominentsemioticians have drawn similar conclusion about the characteristics ofsymbol: first, it is the medium between our interior spiritual world and theexterior physical world, through which our invisible and implicit feelings cancome to light; second, the relation between these two worlds, that is, itsmeaning, depends on convention and will be activated by psychologicalanalysis（ Li Youzheng 485-87,514-15,521 -23,525-30）.

編輯推薦

《演講話語象征性互動研究》：演講話語是由一系列象征性互動構(gòu)成的，所以恰當而有效的解讀方式應(yīng)該是綜合考慮其生產(chǎn)與消費，注重演講者與受眾之間的雙向互動。

圖書封面

評論、評分、閱讀與下載

---

    演講話語象征性互動研究 PDF格式下載

---